五个CURE网络的特征分类揭示了改进课程设计、教学和公平性的机会。

IF 1.6 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Alita R Burmeister, Melanie Bauer, Mark J Graham
{"title":"五个CURE网络的特征分类揭示了改进课程设计、教学和公平性的机会。","authors":"Alita R Burmeister,&nbsp;Melanie Bauer,&nbsp;Mark J Graham","doi":"10.1128/jmbe.00033-23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are tools used to introduce students to authentic participation in science. Several specific CUREs have been shown to benefit students' interest and retention in the biological sciences. Nevertheless, CUREs vary greatly in terms of their context, methodology, and degree of research authenticity, so different types of CUREs may differently influence student outcomes. This programmatic diversity poses a challenge to educators who want to better understand which course components and features are reliably present in a CURE curriculum. To address these issues, we identified, catalogued, and classified 112 potential features of CUREs across the biosciences. To develop the list, we interviewed instructors experienced with teaching individual and large networked CUREs across a diversity of the biological disciplines, including: Squirrel-Net (field-based animal behavior), SEA-PHAGES (wet lab microbiology and computational microbiology), Tiny Earth (environmental and wet lab microbiology), PARE (environmental microbiology), and the Genomics Education Partnership (eukaryotic computational biology). Twenty-five interviewees contributed expert content in terms of CURE features and classification of those items into an organized list. The resulting list's categories encompasses student experiences with the following: (i) the scientific process; (ii) technical aspects of science; (iii) the professional development associated with research; and (iv) building scientific identity. The most striking insight was that CUREs vary widely in terms of which features they contain, since different CUREs will by necessity have different approaches to science and student involvement. We also identified several features commonly thought to be crucial to CUREs yet have ambiguous definitions. This ambiguity can potentially confound efforts to make CUREs research-authentic and aligned with the central goals of science. We disambiguate these terms and represent their varied meanings throughout the classification. We also provide instructor-friendly supplementary worksheets along with considerations for instructors interested in expanding their CURE course design, instruction, and equity.</p>","PeriodicalId":46416,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a9/f6/jmbe.00033-23.PMC10443406.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classification of Features across Five CURE Networks Reveals Opportunities to Improve Course Design, Instruction, and Equity.\",\"authors\":\"Alita R Burmeister,&nbsp;Melanie Bauer,&nbsp;Mark J Graham\",\"doi\":\"10.1128/jmbe.00033-23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are tools used to introduce students to authentic participation in science. Several specific CUREs have been shown to benefit students' interest and retention in the biological sciences. Nevertheless, CUREs vary greatly in terms of their context, methodology, and degree of research authenticity, so different types of CUREs may differently influence student outcomes. This programmatic diversity poses a challenge to educators who want to better understand which course components and features are reliably present in a CURE curriculum. To address these issues, we identified, catalogued, and classified 112 potential features of CUREs across the biosciences. To develop the list, we interviewed instructors experienced with teaching individual and large networked CUREs across a diversity of the biological disciplines, including: Squirrel-Net (field-based animal behavior), SEA-PHAGES (wet lab microbiology and computational microbiology), Tiny Earth (environmental and wet lab microbiology), PARE (environmental microbiology), and the Genomics Education Partnership (eukaryotic computational biology). Twenty-five interviewees contributed expert content in terms of CURE features and classification of those items into an organized list. The resulting list's categories encompasses student experiences with the following: (i) the scientific process; (ii) technical aspects of science; (iii) the professional development associated with research; and (iv) building scientific identity. The most striking insight was that CUREs vary widely in terms of which features they contain, since different CUREs will by necessity have different approaches to science and student involvement. We also identified several features commonly thought to be crucial to CUREs yet have ambiguous definitions. This ambiguity can potentially confound efforts to make CUREs research-authentic and aligned with the central goals of science. We disambiguate these terms and represent their varied meanings throughout the classification. We also provide instructor-friendly supplementary worksheets along with considerations for instructors interested in expanding their CURE course design, instruction, and equity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a9/f6/jmbe.00033-23.PMC10443406.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00033-23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00033-23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于课程的本科生研究经验(CUREs)是用来向学生介绍真实参与科学的工具。一些具体的治疗方法已被证明有利于学生对生物科学的兴趣和保留。然而,治疗在其背景、方法和研究真实性程度方面差异很大,因此不同类型的治疗可能会对学生的结果产生不同的影响。对于想要更好地理解哪些课程组成部分和特征在CURE课程中可靠呈现的教育者来说,这种编程多样性提出了挑战。为了解决这些问题,我们确定、编目和分类了生物科学领域112种cure的潜在特征。为了编制这份清单,我们采访了在多种生物学科中教授个体和大型网络治疗的经验丰富的教师,包括:Squirrel-Net(野外动物行为学)、SEA-PHAGES(湿实验室微生物学和计算微生物学)、Tiny Earth(环境和湿实验室微生物学)、PARE(环境微生物学)和基因组学教育伙伴关系(真核计算生物学)。25位受访者提供了关于CURE特征的专家内容,并将这些项目分类为一个有组织的列表。结果列表的类别包括以下学生体验:(i)科学过程;(ii)科学的技术方面;(iii)与研究相关的专业发展;(四)建立科学认同。最引人注目的发现是,不同的治疗方法在其包含的特征方面差异很大,因为不同的治疗方法必然有不同的科学方法和学生参与。我们还确定了几个通常被认为对治愈至关重要但定义模糊的特征。这种模糊性可能会使使CUREs具有研究真实性并与科学的中心目标保持一致的努力变得混乱。我们消除这些术语的歧义,并在整个分类中表示它们的不同含义。我们还提供了教师友好的补充工作表以及对扩展他们的CURE课程设计,教学和公平感兴趣的教师的考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Classification of Features across Five CURE Networks Reveals Opportunities to Improve Course Design, Instruction, and Equity.

Classification of Features across Five CURE Networks Reveals Opportunities to Improve Course Design, Instruction, and Equity.

Classification of Features across Five CURE Networks Reveals Opportunities to Improve Course Design, Instruction, and Equity.

Classification of Features across Five CURE Networks Reveals Opportunities to Improve Course Design, Instruction, and Equity.

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are tools used to introduce students to authentic participation in science. Several specific CUREs have been shown to benefit students' interest and retention in the biological sciences. Nevertheless, CUREs vary greatly in terms of their context, methodology, and degree of research authenticity, so different types of CUREs may differently influence student outcomes. This programmatic diversity poses a challenge to educators who want to better understand which course components and features are reliably present in a CURE curriculum. To address these issues, we identified, catalogued, and classified 112 potential features of CUREs across the biosciences. To develop the list, we interviewed instructors experienced with teaching individual and large networked CUREs across a diversity of the biological disciplines, including: Squirrel-Net (field-based animal behavior), SEA-PHAGES (wet lab microbiology and computational microbiology), Tiny Earth (environmental and wet lab microbiology), PARE (environmental microbiology), and the Genomics Education Partnership (eukaryotic computational biology). Twenty-five interviewees contributed expert content in terms of CURE features and classification of those items into an organized list. The resulting list's categories encompasses student experiences with the following: (i) the scientific process; (ii) technical aspects of science; (iii) the professional development associated with research; and (iv) building scientific identity. The most striking insight was that CUREs vary widely in terms of which features they contain, since different CUREs will by necessity have different approaches to science and student involvement. We also identified several features commonly thought to be crucial to CUREs yet have ambiguous definitions. This ambiguity can potentially confound efforts to make CUREs research-authentic and aligned with the central goals of science. We disambiguate these terms and represent their varied meanings throughout the classification. We also provide instructor-friendly supplementary worksheets along with considerations for instructors interested in expanding their CURE course design, instruction, and equity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
26.30%
发文量
95
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信