Characterisics of Excellence in
Undergraduate Research (COEUR)
Characterisics of Excellence
in
Undergraduate Research
Edited by: Nancy Hensel
The Council on Undergraduate Research
i
Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
All rights reserved. We encourage you to make good use of the material within. Be reminded, however, that
prior written permission from the Council on Undergraduate Research is required before any part of this
publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise. Permission not required for use of the COEUR
survey.
©2012 by the Council on Undergraduate Research
Cover Design: Lindsay Currie
Photo: 09-25-04 © John Weise
ISBN: 0-941933-49-0
Council on Undergraduate Research
734 15th Street NW, Suite 550
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202.783.4810
Fax: 202.783.4811
www.cur.org
cur@cur.org
ii
Contents
Editor’s Note
Nancy Hensel ...............................................................................................................................................................iv
Introducion
MaryAnn Baenninger .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Characterisics of Excellence In Undergraduate Research (COEUR)
Roger S. Rowlett, Linda Blockus, and Susan Larson ................................................................................................. 2
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research at Diferent Insituions
Janet Stocks ................................................................................................................................................................. 20
A Road Map to Iniiaing, Developing and Sustaining High Quality Faculty Undergraduate Collaboraive
Research and Creaive Aciviies
Paula F. Dehn ...................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Use and Uility of the COEUR Characterisics
Andrea Chapdelaine .................................................................................................................................................. 25
COEUR: Advancing Undergraduate Research on Campus and Beyond
Elizabeth L. Paul ........................................................................................................................................................ 27
COEUR: A Comprehensive Framework for Insituional Self-Assessment
Kelly McConnaughay and Charles Maris ................................................................................................................ 29
Pursuing Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
Michael A. Palladino ......................................................................................................................................................... 31
Fostering Undergraduate Research at the University of San Diego Through COEUR
Mary K. Boyd .............................................................................................................................................................. 34
Advancing Undergraduate Research at Community Colleges
Judith Marwick........................................................................................................................................................... 36
Faculty-driven and Student-centered: A Formula for Undergraduate Research during the New Normal
John F. Barthell ........................................................................................................................................................... 38
CSU San Marcos looks at COEUR
Gerardo González....................................................................................................................................................... 41
CUR’s COEUR as a Resource for Insituional Change
Janice DeCosmo.......................................................................................................................................................... 44
Advancing High-Impact Learning Experiences
Elizabeth L. Ambos .................................................................................................................................................... 46
Leveraging Consorium Experise
Bill Spellman .............................................................................................................................................................. 48
Applying COEUR Broadly: Advancing Undergraduate Research Across a Consorium
Simon J. M. Gray ........................................................................................................................................................ 50
COEUR’s Connecion to Undergraduate Research at Zayed University
Maher Khelifa ............................................................................................................................................................. 53
Using COEUR at an Australian University
Angela Brew................................................................................................................................................................ 55
The American Associaion of Physics Teachers’ Support of Undergraduate Research in Physics
Beth A. Cunningham ................................................................................................................................................. 58
A Model for Professional Socieies to Use in Advancing Undergraduate Research
Amy L. Chang............................................................................................................................................................. 60
Biographies ........................................................................................................................................................................... 62
iii
Editor’s Note:
or over 30 years the Council on Undergraduate Research has encouraged faculty to engage undergraduate students in research and has assisted institutions in the development
of undergraduate research programs. Founded by ten chemists in 1978, the organization
has grown to include 645 institutional members including community colleges, public
and private institutions, liberal arts colleges, research universities, and several universities outside the United States. The organization also has well over 7,000 individual members across
all disciplines. CUR has become the national voice and is becoming the international voice for
undergraduate research. Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) is
based on the collective experience, over many years, of CUR members who have engaged undergraduate students in research, developed undergraduate research programs, mentored new faculty to include undergraduate research in their teaching repertoire, and coached universities in
the development of undergraduate research programs. Roger Rowlett, Linda Blockus, and Susan
Larson have drawn on this extensive knowledge base to design an instrument to assist institutions
to self- assess the maturity of their undergraduate research programs. The instrument aspires to
present the best practices in undergraduate research. It can be used as a guide for institutions that
are striving to enhance the learning experiences of students through research program. It can also
be used as a beacon for institutions that are in the beginning stages of developing an undergraduate research program. Several undergraduate research experts have contributed essays to this
monograph that illuminate how COEUR can be used by departments, colleges, and universities
to evaluate undergraduate research programs. CUR believes that undergraduate research is one
of the most powerful learning strategies for undergraduate students. Undergraduate research is
also a signiicant contributor to American innovation and economic development. The skills students can develop through engagement in research will serve them well in their future careers. It
is hoped that Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research will be of value to institutions and will contribute to the development of new programs and the enhancement of existing
programs. CUR is appreciative of the commitment and generosity of its members in making their
expertise available to other faculty and institutions.
F
Nancy Hensel
President of New American Colleges and Universities
CUR Executive Oicer 2004-2011
Nancy Hensel served as Executive Oicer from 2004 until 2011 when she became president of the
New American Colleges and Universities. During her tenure at CUR she was principal investigator for seven National Science Foundation grants to assist faculty and institutions to develop undergraduate research programs. While serving as Provost at the University of Maine at Farmington,
she initiated the undergraduate research program. She also initiated an undergraduate research
program at the University of Maine at Presque Isle where she served as president. She has been
invited to speak at many national conferences, US campuses as well as at international meetings
and campuses.
iv
Introducion
“C
oeur” in French, of course, means “heart,” and the etymology of the word is the
same as the word “core.” Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
(COEUR) represents 30 years of the Council on Undergraduate Research’s
highly successful mission to assist and support faculty and institutions in bringing
undergraduate research, scholarship, and creative activity to the heart —the core—of an excellent
undergraduate education.
My own undergraduate research experience was a turning point for me. For the irst time I
understood that learning could be truly active and transferrable to other situations and that I could
and should take responsibility for creating knowledge and answering real questions. Along with
those realizations came many other habits of mind. Each has served me in all aspects of my life and
career as a student, mentor, teacher, scholar, administrator, and now college president.
Responsibility, persistence, synthesis, analysis, thoroughness, teamwork, leadership, commitment, patience, perspective-taking, and ethical behavior—hallmarks of a quality undergraduate research experience—are essentials that I bring daily to my work leading an institution. Since my irst
experience as an undergraduate researcher, it has been my goal to “pay it forward” to future generations of students and faculty by supporting undergraduate research in every way possible. I began
with the irst classes I taught as a graduate student, with my irst student mentee’s work accepted
for presentation at a Sigma Xi conference. I continued as a faculty mentor and scholar during every
year of my career, mentoring dozens of students in my own lab and in their individual projects. As
an accreditor, and through my work with CUR as a facilitator at the CUR Institutes, I translated
my own research and empirical background into assessment expertise—including the assessment of
undergraduate research. During my presidency, my institution’s support of undergraduate research
and the movement of such activity to the mainstream of student’s education have increased dramatically; undergraduate research is now one key way to fulill a general education requirement.
COEUR is a major step forward in supporting faculty in their endeavors as mentors and
scholars, but it is also a “call to action” for those of us who lead departments, divisions, schools,
colleges, and universities. It represents the culmination of the 30 years of CUR’s work to fulill its
mission, and notably, is a testament to the dedication and love of countless volunteers—individuals and allied organizations—whose tenaciousness has never faltered. It signiies undergraduate
research’s centrality as a well-developed, well-understood, well-integrated, and essential component of a quality college education. In form and substance, it sets forth a comprehensive blueprint
for achieving best practice in faculty development to sustain the highest quality student learning.
As a handbook, primer, and road map, COEUR will serve equally well those of us with experience and longstanding commitment to undergraduate research, and those of us who have high
aspirations to learn about it and to support it. In these pages, readers will ind the personal stories
of individuals and institutions that are leaders on the way to achieving an audacious aspiration. I
invite you to aspire to the same dream.
MaryAnn Baenninger
President of the College of Saint Benedict, a liberal arts college that prides itself on its commitment
to undergraduate research as a model of engaged learning. Baenninger is a career-long volunteer in
and supporter of CUR’s mission.
1
Characterisics of Excellence In
Undergraduate Research (COEUR)
Roger S. Rowlett,
Gordon & Dorothy Kline Professor of Chemistry, Colgate University
Linda Blockus,
Director of Undergraduate Research, University of Missouri
Susan Larson,
Associate Professor of Psychology, Director of Undergraduate Research, Concordia College
Preamble
The mission of the Council on Undergraduate Research (CUR) is to support and promote
high-quality undergraduate student-faculty collaborative research and scholarship. CUR deines
undergraduate research as an inquiry or investigation conducted by an undergraduate student
that makes an original intellectual or creative contribution to the discipline. Undergraduate research—a term that encompasses scholarship and creative activity—is recognized as a high-impact
educational practice that has the ability to capture student interest and create enthusiasm for and
engagement in an area of study.
CUR, as the leading voice in undergraduate research, has more than 30 years of experience working with faculty and institutions to build and sustain undergraduate research and with
evaluating undergraduate research programs. This document represents a compilation of the experience of CUR in building and evaluating undergraduate research programs at all types of institutions, including public and private, primarily undergraduate through research intensive. This
document is intended as a guide for those who oversee undergraduate research and those who
wish to build, evaluate, and maintain robust, productive, meaningful, and sustainable undergraduate research programs. Institutions, programs, academic departments, faculty, and administrators
should ind this document valuable as they work to develop and enhance their undergraduate
research enterprise.
Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) is a summary of best
practices that support and sustain highly efective undergraduate research environments. This
document is organized in sections that correspond to various functions or units of a typical college
or university campus. In CUR’s experience, successful programs exhibit many of the characteristics enumerated in this document. Further, many of the characteristics described in this document
overlap and are important elements in an integrated, synergistic approach to enhancing undergraduate research.
1. Campus mission and culture
Creating a campus culture that values and rewards undergraduate research is essential for
sustaining a robust undergraduate research program. CUR believes that such a culture emerges
when institutions have a scholarly faculty and leaders committed to providing high-quality undergraduate research experiences for students; broad disciplinary participation in undergraduate
research; and opportunities that are accessible to a wide cross section of students.
2
1.1 Institutional commitment
Institutional commitment to undergraduate research as a high-priority activity for its faculty
and students is essential for creating a successful undergraduate research environment. College
administrators must clearly articulate how undergraduate research aligns with the mission and/
or strategic plan of the institution. Providing appropriate resources and recognition to faculty
and students engaged in research will increase the success and sustainability of undergraduate
research initiatives. Involvement of other campus constituents, such as student-afairs personnel
(e.g., in providing on-campus housing for summer undergraduate researchers), facilities/physical
plant staf (e.g., in creating appropriate spaces for research), the oice of human resources (e.g.,
in working with student payroll), the oice of advancement/development (e.g., in fundraising for
undergraduate research) are also necessary in creating a campus climate that efectively promotes
undergraduate research. Speciic ways in which institutions can demonstrate their commitment
to creating a culture that values and encourages undergraduate research are described in subsequent sections of this document.
1.2 Scholarly faculty
A key component to a successful undergraduate research environment is an institutional
commitment to a scholarly faculty. For students to derive the most out of an undergraduate research experience, it is important for faculty to be current and active scholars in their ields. Institutions that adopt a teacher-scholar model, in which faculty are expected to regularly produce
scholarship that is recognized by their peers and in which a premium is placed on teaching, have
in place one critical element of efective undergraduate research mentorship and productivity.
1.3 Faculty commitment
A scholarly faculty is necessary but not suicient to establish and sustain an outstanding
undergraduate research environment. Faculty members also must be committed to undergraduate research as an important part of their roles and responsibilities. Not all faculty scholarship
will involve undergraduates, but it is essential that faculty members value both the contribution
of undergraduates to scholarship and the participation of undergraduates in scholarly activities as
an important part of their education. Such faculty should seek to create opportunities for undergraduates to be involved in research.
1.4 Broad disciplinary participation
Institutions with highly successful undergraduate research environments have faculty and
student involvement across diverse disciplines so that students have research options in as broad
a range of inquiry as possible. Students majoring in all academic areas, including professional
disciplines, should have opportunities to participate in faculty-mentored research, scholarship,
and creative activities.
1.5 Accessible opportunities for undergraduates
The intellectual experience of pursuing research is beneicial to all students. As such, engagement in undergraduate research should not be limited solely to seniors or to honors-level students. Rather, undergraduate research opportunities should be accessible to as broad a range of
students as is practical.
1.6 Integration with other engaging and high-impact opportunities
The undergraduate research enterprise on a campus should be integrated and coordinated,
where possible, with other high-impact practices to maximize student development, leverage
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
3
resources, and incorporate undergraduate research across the institution. While some collaborations will be more obvious (e.g., honors programs; building research awareness in a freshman orientation class; working with service learning initiatives to develop community-based research projects;
helping student researchers apply for national fellowships), other less obvious partnerships can provide another layer of excellence for students. These include study abroad (international research
experiences); leadership programs (enhancing leadership and peer-mentoring skills); career centers
(leveraging research experiences into employment and new career directions); and residential life
(residence halls with research-themed communities). Additionally, leaders of broad learning and
education initiatives (e.g., general education, global citizenship, communication proiciency) should
look to undergraduate research programs to further their goals, and leaders of undergraduate research should look to such initiatives for approaches to maximize student learning.
2. Administrative support
While faculty members are critical in the implementation of undergraduate research, administrative support and commitment are essential to sustain the undergraduate research enterprise.
Support can be construed not only in terms of funding, supplies, and equipment, but also in terms
of time, personnel, recognition and reward models, and administrative lexibility and creativity.
2.1 Internal budgetary support
To build and sustain successful undergraduate research environments, expectations for faculty-student scholarship must be accompanied by appropriate resources. Successful institutions
recognize that undergraduate research is associated with real costs for materials and personnel,
and they use that understanding in allocating resources to academic departments, programs, and
perhaps individuals. Diferent disciplines will have varying needs for internal budgetary support for undergraduate research; however, administrators should recognize that undergraduate research requires inancial and human resources for all disciplines. In addition, institutions should
recognize the need to provide matching funding for research grants from external sources, when
appropriate, and to provide for long-term operational and maintenance costs for acquired research
equipment and/or infrastructure.
2.2 Startup funding
Faculty startup funding to support scholarship should be commensurate with institutional
expectations for scholarship and undergraduate student participation in faculty research. New
faculty should be awarded startup research funding to establish the necessary infrastructure and
research materials to enable them to begin efective and productive research. Startup funding
packages might provide items such as specialized research equipment or research materials (e.g.,
journals, books, databases), funds to travel to research sites or archives, and faculty and/or student
research stipends. Appropriate time for faculty to develop their research space should also be provided. In disciplines in which external funding is available, startup funding should be suicient
to help faculty develop a scholarly track record that will allow them to be competitive for external
research funding.
2.3 Faculty load credit for supervising undergraduate research
If undergraduate research is an institutional priority that fulills a critical role in student
education as well as scholarship, then time for faculty to engage in research and mentor students
must be protected. At institutions where most faculty members have heavy teaching loads, faculty should be appropriately compensated, through appropriate teaching load credit or reassigned
time, for supervising undergraduate research. More research-intensive, doctoral-granting insti4
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
tutions also should recognize the importance and time-consuming nature of faculty work with
undergraduates. There are various models of how to compensate faculty with course-load credit,
including having undergraduate research count as part of the faculty member’s credit-hour load
(as much or more than 10 percent of one’s teaching load credit at predominantly undergraduate
institutions); rotating load credit among faculty within departments; or ofering small-enrollment
courses in which faculty receive credit for teaching their research team.
2.4 Reassigned time for research-related tasks
In addition to receiving workload compensation for supervising undergraduate research,
providing appropriate reassigned time for faculty to engage in research-related tasks is likewise important. Faculty, especially those with relatively heavy teaching loads at primarily undergraduate
institutions, may face diiculty in inding suicient time to write research grant proposals, complete scholarly articles or books, or coordinate and administer such research activities as serving
on research-related committees (Institutional Review Board (IRB), facilities, library acquisitions,
etc.), supervising personnel, or administering multi-faculty research projects. These are essential
activities for maintaining active and robust research programs, however, and many institutions
support these activities through reassigned time for faculty.
2.5 Undergraduate research administrative support
2.5.1 Undergraduate research program oice
Most highly successful undergraduate programs are associated with a central oice of undergraduate research, which oversees campus-wide undergraduate research activities that include
but are not limited to on-campus research symposia, summer research, student workshops, mentorship training, and disbursement of funds for student travel. Some undergraduate research ofices may award internally or externally funded summer research assistantships to students and/
or to faculty. Establishment of a designated position for an undergraduate research program director provides a clear statement of the importance and expected potential of the undergraduate
research enterprise on a campus. The program director’s position (and associated costs) should
be funded through the institutional budget, rather than depending on soft money, even though
new initiatives funded through external grant dollars are often the catalyst for creating a position that evolves into a permanent post on campus. Where the program director is located in an
institution’s organizational structure is critical, but this will likely vary by institutional type and
idiosyncrasies of each campus environment. The director of undergraduate research should have
appropriate professional credentials, such as a master’s degree in an academic discipline or in
student afairs and prior entry-level experience. Additionally, support for continued professional
development for the director is critical to establishing and sustaining a level of excellence for the
undergraduate research environment.
Some institutions do not have the demand or resources for full-time professional staing for
an oice of undergraduate research or for a director of undergraduate research; some may instead
have an appointed coordinator of undergraduate research (often a faculty member committed
to and knowledgeable about undergraduate research issues with reassigned time devoted to this
role). Having a central advocate for undergraduate research on campus is important for publicity, coordinating campus undergraduate research events, maintaining awareness of internal and
external opportunities for enhancing undergraduate research, and conducting assessment. Some
oices/coordinators of undergraduate research work with a campus advisory board, which often
includes student members. These boards are an important element for building advocacy and for
providing direction and guidance.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
5
2.5.1.1 Space
Adequate administrative space should be provided in a location on campus with high student and faculty visibility, possibly near other similar administrative or student services oices
and with easy access to meeting rooms. Afordable, highly visible space also should be easily
available for campus-wide symposia/celebration days. When a faculty member assumes the
role of campus undergraduate research coordinator on a rotating basis, it can be disruptive to
the establishment and long-term growth of the program to rotate the oice to the coordinator’s
departmental oice.
2.5.1.2 Infrastructure Support
Funding should be provided for routine oice expenses (including computer and software
upgrades), the costs of workshops and events, publicity, professional development for the coordinator, and membership dues for the coordinator’s CUR membership. The publicity budget
should include funds for outreach internally to students and faculty, as well as resources to promote the program’s success stories to a broader audience. External publicity may be best done in
partnership with other oices on campus.
2.6 Travel and other student funding
Both faculty and student scholars greatly beneit from presenting research results at professional meetings and conferences. This activity provides faculty and students the opportunities to
build professional networks and generate and discuss research ideas. Institutions with exemplary
undergraduate research programs provide suicient funds for faculty and students to present research results at a minimum of one professional meeting or conference each year. In addition,
exemplary institutions provide funding for faculty to travel with undergraduates to conferences
the individual faculty might not otherwise attend, such as student-centered conferences. Having
faculty at these meetings helps students gain the most from their conference experience. In addition to providing funding for student travel to present their completed research, oices of undergraduate research often support an internal program of small equipment, supply, and travel grants
to help students initiate their research.
2.7 Research grants oice
Institutions should have a research grants office to keep track of and alert faculty to
funding opportunities. An office of sponsored research will also manage the grant-application process, including electronic submissions with the appropriate institutional certifications, and will assist faculty with post-award administration. In cases where establishment
of an independent grants office is not possible, institutions must designate a knowledgeable
person to be responsible for acting as the institutional representative for grant submissions;
this person must be given sufficient reassigned time to perform this job well. Institutions
with established units for administering grants should work to ensure that faculty members
submitting proposals are aware of funding opportunities to involve undergraduates in their
work and that they know about internal resources and programs that could bolster their proposals and help them achieve maximum impact and efficiency. Grants staff should also be
available to assist with student-initiated proposals for external grants or awards that require
institutional consent and support.
3. Research infrastructure
An essential feature of a supportive undergraduate research environment is infrastructure.
Without appropriate space, equipment, and other research resources, even the most talented and
6
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
creative faculty members cannot sustain productive research and scholarship that involves undergraduates.
3.1 Space
Institutions must provide adequate, dedicated space for the undergraduate research enterprise to lourish; this is especially critical in the sciences and creative arts, but it is relevant to all
ields of study because secure, but accessible, space is necessary for faculty and students to gather
for research conversations and activities. Classrooms or teaching laboratories/studios are not typically properly conigured to accommodate research activities, and they may not be available at the
right times or for suicient blocks of time for productive faculty-student collaborative research to
be performed. In the experimental sciences, a typical faculty-student research laboratory is 500
to 600 square feet in size, including dedicated desktop workspace for students. Laboratory and
studio spaces should meet modern lighting, safety, and ventilation requirements and be properly
climate-controlled for use year-round. Private space may be needed for conidential research interviews, focus groups, or observational studies. For all ields of study, comfortable conference
and meeting space is critical; ideally this space would be in locations near faculty oices, studios,
or laboratories. Research data and supplies should be kept in a secure location for reasons of conidentiality and safety.
3.2 Instrumentation and equipment
In the experimental sciences and creative arts, instrumentation and appropriate studio
equipment are critical for efective research and education. Exemplary undergraduate research
programs have on-campus access to the appropriate instrumentation and equipment required for
faculty-student collaborative research, and the institutions have well-deined departmental and
institutional plans for acquisition, maintenance, and periodic replacement of this infrastructure.
At institutions without appropriate on-campus instrumentation, campuses should make arrangements to use equipment housed at nearby facilities (e.g., a relatively small, primarily undergraduate institution might arrange to make use of the core facilities at a nearby research institution).
3.3 Library resources
To sustain a successful undergraduate research program, it is essential to have adequate
library resources so that faculty and students can investigate new research ideas, search for information, prepare competitive research proposals, and write research manuscripts and student
research theses and reports. Inadequate library resources can be a signiicant barrier to the productivity and long-term success of an undergraduate research program. Faculty and students should
have access to primary literature, and institutions should have a strategy for acquiring appropriate
journals, monographs, and books to support undergraduate research. In cases where appropriate
collections are not available on-site, institutions should provide timely interlibrary loans or other
means of acquiring needed documents and/or make funding available for faculty and students
to travel to necessary collections. Faculty and student researchers must have access to appropriate disciplinary tools for searching primary literature and obtaining up-to-date information (e.g.,
SciFinder Scholar, Web of Knowledge, SCOPUS, etc.). Ideally, these resources will be available
to faculty and students electronically, so that the tools can be used anywhere. Support for information-literacy training and development of research skills should be built into the curriculum.
3.4 Computational resources
Faculty should be provided with computer hardware equipped with an operating system
of their choice, suitable for using software and utilities appropriate to research in their discipline.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
7
Similarly, students should be able to access computing equipment appropriate for the research
they are conducting. A high-speed computer network should be available in oices and research
spaces, and this network should support typical protocols that are required for research.
3.5 Other research resources
Faculty and students may also need access to museum collections; local, national or regional
archives; geological samples; historical artifacts; or other specialized research materials germane
to their research. If these are not available on-campus, institutional support to borrow or travel to
these resources is critical.
3.6 Research oversight structures
Any institution conducting research with undergraduates needs to have certain research
oversight structures in place, including an Institutional Review Board (IRB) for research projects
involving human subjects; an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) for research projects involving vertebrate animals; and chemical, environmental, and biological hazard
policies and oversight structures. These and other mechanisms are required to comply with state
and federal regulations for relevant research projects, and they are likely to be a condition for research funding. In the case of ethical review committees, they also provide oversight for training
of undergraduates in research ethics associated with human and animal subjects.
3.7 Support, administrative, and technical staf
Many institutions have discovered that support and technical staf can enhance undergraduate research by allowing faculty and students to focus more efort on research, rather than spending valuable time tending to administration of research and teaching or maintenance and repair of
equipment. For example, laboratory or studio support staf can stock supplies, conigure computer
equipment, and/or prepare materials for teaching laboratories; instrument technicians can install
and provide preventive and unscheduled maintenance for equipment; technicians can order and
maintain supplies, and/or prepare routine research materials; administrative assistants can oversee iscal management of project expenses and coordinate review processes by working with the
IRB and IACUC. Additional support with computer maintenance, curating artifacts and artwork, and library references can make for a more efective research environment.
4. Professional development opportunities
To remain efective scholars throughout their careers, faculty need the opportunity to learn
new research methodologies, obtain recurrent research training, establish external research collaborations and scholarly networks, complete scholarly pursuits, and freshen mentorship skills.
Many of these activities are part of a robust faculty mentoring program. Such professional development opportunities are critical to undergraduate research because faculty members who are
current scholars in their areas of expertise are able to engage students in research that is relevant
and conforming to modern praxis. Other professionals involved in the oversight of undergraduate
research also beneit from professional development, and relevant opportunities should be made
available to them as well.
4.1 Research leaves
Professional leaves are essential for faculty to remain current, knowledgeable, productive
scholars, and by extension efective mentors of undergraduate research. Thus institutions should
promote regular opportunities for research leaves, and if possible, this should include both sabbaticals and leaves for junior faculty. Recurrent training is especially critical in the sciences and
8
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
arts because rapid technological changes require faculty to acquire new competencies to continue
to be productive scholars.
4.2 Research training opportunities
Opportunities to learn new research skills and techniques via workshops, mini-conferences,
short courses, or research training “camps” should be encouraged and supported.
4.3 Non-research-related professional development
It is important to recognize that faculty and administrators may beneit from participating in
workshops, conferences, and communities of practice not directly related to their research. Institutions that support travel to non-research meetings provide career and professional development
that also can enhance undergraduate research. For example, such opportunities may provide faculty with new pedagogical techniques that can be applied to undergraduate research; allow faculty and administrators to experience diversity training, making them more efective at supporting
and mentoring students of a variety of backgrounds; and provide training on how to purposefully
implement and assess undergraduate research programs.
4.4 Mentorship training
4.4.1 Faculty
Ongoing opportunities for faculty to relect on their mentoring skills and discuss mentoring
issues with colleagues are essential to providing a student-centered research experience. Undergraduate research programs are encouraged to ofer orientation sessions for mentors that clearly
outline faculty, student, and program expectations. Faculty should be encouraged to attend professional development meetings on mentoring and leadership development. Faculty should also
be encouraged to draft personal professional development plans. Junior faculty should be mentored by more experienced peers as they begin to juggle the potentially competing demands of
teaching, service, scholarship, and mentoring of undergraduates.
4.4.2 Graduate students and postdoctoral fellows
Recognizing that at some institutions, graduate students and postdoctoral fellows play a signiicant role in mentoring undergraduate researchers, appropriate training opportunities should
be provided to enhance their skills and ensure undergraduates are receiving excellent mentoring.
This is critical because many of these graduate students and postdocs will eventually assume faculty positions and become the next generation of faculty mentors for student researchers.
5. Recognition
An institution that values undergraduate research as a high-priority activity that is integral
to its educational mission will provide clear, tangible forms of recognition for faculty and students
who engage in it.
5.1 Promotion and tenure guidelines
If undergraduate research is an important institutional activity, it should be clearly and
prominently described in promotion and tenure guidelines for faculty. Many institutions speciically identify mentoring, faculty-student collaborative research, and publication of student coauthored peer-reviewed research as especially valued activities for promotion and tenure. To be
efective, promotion and tenure guidelines must be clear and efectively communicated to new
faculty and to new members of tenure and promotion committees or faculty evaluation teams.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
9
5.2 Salary review
Likewise, undergraduate research activity and productivity should be recognized in faculty
salary reviews and decisions on merit pay awards.
5.3 Campus awards
Institutions with exemplary undergraduate research programs recognize and publicize the
importance of undergraduate research through public awards for excellence. Programs and departments that provide outstanding undergraduate research experiences for students should be
recognized. Examples of recognition include but are not limited to awards for excellent faculty
mentoring, outstanding undergraduate research theses, prize-winning student publications, and
outstanding research posters.
5.4 Prominent publicity for research accomplishments
Excellent undergraduate research programs promote their successes by prominently featuring undergraduate research on the institution’s website, in its print and electronic publications,
and in its outreach to public and social media. In addition, students involved in undergraduate
research may be encouraged to apply for prestigious scholarships and graduate fellowships, and
any such awards should be widely publicized. Wide publicity should also be given to any awards
that faculty receive from professional societies and any awards received by students at professional meetings. Appropriate infrastructure and administrative support are required to identify
successes and utilize germane publicity outlets.
6. External funding
External funding is essential for the development of a rich, productive, and cutting-edge faculty-student research environment. Although the availability and importance of external funding
for research varies by discipline and sometimes by state and region, an institutional culture of
supporting and encouraging the acquisition of external research funding is important to sustain
research. Very few institutions have suicient resources to sustain a viable research program with
internal funding alone. Rather, institutions and faculty must partner to leverage internal funding
with external funding to sustain strong undergraduate research programs and infrastructure over
the long term. It should be emphasized that competitiveness in external funding is directly related
to research productivity, that is, the production of peer-reviewed research scholarship. External
funding comes with increased expectations for the dissemination of peer-reviewed projects. To
sustain an excellent undergraduate research program, institutions must provide an environment
in which faculty have the time necessary to meet the increased expectations for publication or
other recognized types of dissemination.
6.1 Faculty research funding
In successful undergraduate research environments, faculty members seek and receive external funding to help support undergraduate research students, research technicians, graduate
students and/or postdoctoral fellows, and also to acquire research equipment and infrastructure.
Although many research grants may be used, in part, to support undergraduate research, there are
grant programs speciically designated for undergraduate research and for predominantly undergraduate institutions. Examples at the federal level include the National Science Foundation’s
Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI) and Research Experiences for Undergraduates
(REU) programs, as well as the National Institutes of Health’s Academic Research Enhancement
Awards (AREA, or R15). Some private foundations (e.g., the Research Corporation for Science
Advancement, the American Chemical Society Petroleum Research Fund, and the Camille and
10
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
Henry Dreyfus Foundation) speciically provide faculty with funding to support research with
undergraduates. Especially in disciplines in which research infrastructure is critical for highquality research, external funding is essential for creating and maintaining a strong teaching and
research environment.
6.2 Institutional funding for research
Colleges and universities that are committed to undergraduate research will also seek and
receive institutional funding in support of undergraduate research. Some of these institutional
awards are by invitation only, and many require a history of faculty research productivity and
external grant-seeking success.
7. Dissemination
An essential element of all research is dissemination. While faculty and students should
strive for peer-reviewed dissemination that contributes to new knowledge within their disciplines,
other forms of research dissemination are also desirable. Students who do disseminate their research, via publications, presentations, exhibitions, or performances, should be celebrated on campus.
7.1 Peer-reviewed publication, exhibition, or performance
CUR deines undergraduate research as scholarship that makes an original contribution to
a discipline or area of study. As such, research results should be disseminated in a form that is
appropriate for a scholar in the research ield, and the highest level of dissemination of undergraduate research is in the form of peer-reviewed publication, exhibition, or performance. In
the physical or social sciences, this would typically mean a published article in a peer-reviewed
journal. In this instance, students should be included as co-authors and should be involved in
the writing and editing of the manuscript. In the arts or humanities, dissemination might be a
juried exhibition, public performance, or publication. It is important that faculty and students
strive for this level of scholarship because it typically provides the greatest intellectual beneits
for students and is essential in faculty reward structures and for faculty seeking external research funding.
7.2 Presentation at professional meetings
Professional research meetings provide excellent opportunities for students to present research to other scholars in the ield, gain feedback on their work, conduct professional networking,
and try out presentation of research results prior to peer-reviewed publication. Institutions should
endeavor to have policies and funding to encourage students’ participation in such activities. Students who attend professional meetings should receive mentoring on how to navigate such opportunities.
7.3 Student research conferences
Not all undergraduates are ready to present research results at national professional meetings, especially early in their academic careers. In addition, some disciplines do not yet welcome
undergraduate students at professional meetings. For such undergraduates, a student research
conference (e.g., the National Conference on Undergraduate Research or the Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students) or a regional disciplinary conference might be
a more appropriate venue to gain valuable experience in presenting and disseminating indings,
connecting with others in the discipline, and gaining feedback on their ideas. Institutions should
encourage and support student participation in these conferences.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
11
7.4 On-campus symposia
Most institutions with successful undergraduate research programs host on-campus research
symposia that bring together the community of undergraduate scholars in events that celebrate
undergraduate research and provide opportunities for peer networking and cross-disciplinary conversation. Outstanding institutions promote broad student attendance so that more undergraduates may beneit from a research-rich environment and the opportunity to learn from their peers.
A campus undergraduate research oice that organizes such events may also ofer other kinds of
support, such as workshops on writing abstracts, on making and presenting a research poster, and
on creating and delivering an oral presentation. This assistance may greatly enhance the quality
of the campus event and provide multiple learning and skill-building opportunities for students.
8. Student-centered issues
It should be recognized that while a deining characteristic of undergraduate research is the
creation and dissemination of new knowledge, undergraduate research also comes with a set of additional student-centered issues and faculty responsibilities that relate to the student experience
and the educational impact of the activity. As a high-impact practice, faculty and administrative
leaders should design undergraduate research experiences that incorporate the best practices in
undergraduate education, such as the Principles of Excellence outlined by Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) and documents produced by disciplinary societies. Relevant issues include, but are not limited to, providing high expectations for the student, including
a broad range of students, outlining paths to progress, assessing student development, and connecting the research topic to societal issues.
8.1 Opportunities for early and sustained involvement
Departments and programs should have mechanisms to identify and recruit undergraduate
researchers early in their careers. Assessment data indicate that undergraduates make the most intellectual gains, and have the greatest opportunity for becoming research partners and co-authors
of peer-reviewed publications, if they are involved in faculty-supervised research early and repeatedly in their academic careers (Lopatto 2009), and if they are invited to make long-term commitments to research. Early involvement also helps students acquire multiple research experiences
during their undergraduate years, and this may help them deine their career interests.
8.2 Establishing and communicating expectations
Faculty mentors should set high, clear, and realistic expectations for students engaged in
undergraduate research. Such expectations might include, but not be limited to, the level of independent work expected, the minimum number of hours per week devoted to research, the minimum length of the research commitment (e.g., one semester or a full academic year), periodic and
inal oral presentations, a inal report in a disciplinary-speciic format, or other evidence of regular
research progress. Such expectations should recognize the many demands on students’ time, but
should nevertheless encourage students to expand their engagement. Faculty should have regular
discussions with students to provide feedback on their progress and revise expectations as needed.
8.3 Developmentally appropriate expectations and intellectual ownership
Excellent undergraduate research environments provide opportunities for students to become involved at diferent points along the developmental pathway. First- and second-years may
begin engagement by performing duties that assist faculty or other members of a research team,
becoming accustomed to the culture of research and learning skills along the way. Students may
also begin by working on a project designed by a faculty mentor or one that is a continuation of
12
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
another student’s project. At the more advanced end of the developmental pathway, students may
conceive their own projects based on the relevant literature and take full ownership of the projects. All points of engagement ofer valuable experiences for students; however, faculty mentors
should encourage students to increase their levels of involvement over time, and programs should
be structured so as to allow students to advance along a developmental continuum. Students
should be informed about difering levels of engagement and development, and, as milestones are
achieved, students should be provided with the knowledge to be able to assess their own progress.
Institutions may wish to clearly label programs, courses, and student outcomes as “beginning, intermediate, and advanced.”
Well-designed undergraduate research experiences allow students to take increasing intellectual ownership of their research projects as they become acquainted with relevant research
methodology. It is not necessary, nor is it always desirable, for students to design their own research
ideas de novo, as such projects may not align well with faculty expertise, institutional research infrastructure, or externally funded research plans. However, students can and should be ofered
choices of appropriate research projects and be allowed to contribute intellectually to the work.
Guidelines and expectations for sharing scholarly credit with students should be available
for students and faculty. Campus policies should establish and clearly articulate how issues such
as authorship and intellectual property rights, as well as ownership of data, will be handled.
8.4 Community of student scholars
Peer-to-peer interaction in the context of a community of undergraduate research scholars
provides opportunity for student learning and for exploration of research and academic disciplines beyond their own experiences. Having a critical mass of students involved in undergraduate research makes it practical to develop opportunities for peer mentoring, regular disciplinary
and interdisciplinary research seminars, research group meetings, and professional development
workshops for students. Broad commitment of faculty at the department or program level is necessary to provide suicient student research opportunities to build such a community of student
scholars. Institutional support, such as through an oice of undergraduate research, facilitates the
development of peer-to-peer interactions.
8.5 Peer mentoring/teamwork opportunities
An important outcome of having a critical mass of undergraduate researchers and of their
early and sustained involvement is the building of research teams with varying levels of experience or diferent disciplinary backgrounds. Such teams allow for peer mentoring opportunities
that are important for the intellectual and professional development of undergraduates. Research
teams also allow multiple students to share a single research project, with each team member being responsible for a speciic part.
8.6 Expanding and integrating student research opportunities with other engaging experiences
Institutions that strive for excellence should recognize and embrace opportunities to combine undergraduate research with other engaging experiences when students have achieved a level of research competence and self-eicacy. Opportunities for students to participate in research
projects with diferent mentors, with an interdisciplinary team, or in projects that draw upon multidisciplinary practices provide expanded learning and experience. Opportunities for students
to conduct research abroad, in a structured program, or as an independent study are increasingly
common. Students and their faculty mentors should be encouraged and supported in inding
ways to apply their research through community-based research with service-learning programs,
in exploring entrepreneurial applications, and in considering policy implications. Students who
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
13
conduct research should be expected to be able to communicate the results of their projects and
the transformational nature of their experiences to citizens and public leaders. Opportunities for
students to articulate their experiences beyond the academic community are the hallmark of a mature undergraduate research culture and can be illustrated with events such as state capitol days,
community presentations (e.g., to chambers of commerce and tourism boards), podcasts, museum
exhibits, and docent-led tours.
8.7 Faculty mentor availability
Faculty need to be directly accessible to students when they are conducting research in collaboration with or under the supervision of the faculty member.
9. Curriculum
Departments and programs should design curricula that expose students to skills necessary
to undertake undergraduate research, and curricula should be designed in ways to facilitate faculty and student involvement in undergraduate research.
9.1 Research-supportive curricula
Institutions that highly value undergraduate research have departments and programs that
are careful to design curricula to be supportive of research. Some basic principles are articulated
here. CUR has compiled many speciic examples of research-supportive practices (Karukstis and
Elgren 2007).
9.1.1 Content
Successful and sustainable disciplinary or interdisciplinary undergraduate research programs are buttressed by a curriculum that provides students with the necessary training and methodology for them to be successful in the research environment. Research-supportive curricula
also build in experiences that provide scafolding for undergraduate research, allowing students to
acquire and practice transferable skills that can be later applied to independent or faculty-student
research. A research-supportive curriculum will expose all students to the importance of research
and result in students gaining an appreciation for research methodology in their area of study,
even if they do not participate in undergraduate research.
9.1.2 Integration of teaching and research
A powerful method of undergraduate education is the integration of teaching and research.
Whenever possible, research training courses should incorporate research-like experiences or actual research itself. For example, in courses teaching laboratory techniques in the sciences, it is
often no more diicult to incorporate real research problems than to use well-known teaching
examples. Typically, students are assigned portions of real research projects in which the requisite coursework and skills will be encountered. Under the right conditions, students in such
courses may become legitimate co-authors of peer-reviewed publications due to their contribution
to the research project. In some disciplines, particularly in the humanities, themed senior seminar
courses provide opportunity for faculty to mentor high-caliber research projects that may be disseminated at professional or undergraduate research meetings.
Integration of teaching and research can increase student engagement, help recruit students
for participation in undergraduate research projects, and allow faculty to build research supervision into their teaching load. In order to achieve these kinds of experiences, departments need to
think creatively about what courses they must ofer and be open to ofering courses on special topics that allow for the integration of research experiences. Administrators should be encouraged
14
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
to support courses that integrate research, even though enrollment is often lower in such courses
than in more traditional oferings.
9.1.3 Course scheduling and managing faculty teaching loads
Undergraduate research requires a signiicant commitment of time by both faculty members
and students. Faculty need to be available during the academic year to mentor undergraduates
and also to conduct research on their own. Toward this end, both the quantity and quality of
faculty members’ teaching loads should be carefully managed to allow suicient time during the
week for faculty-student interaction. Department chairs and program directors should endeavor
to create blocks of time for faculty to devote to supervising undergraduate research, for example
ensuring that one day per week or each afternoon is free of classes. In addition, whenever possible, it is desirable to assign multiple sections of one course rather than multiple courses when
designing a faculty member’s teaching load. Such considerations are important as a CUR survey
revealed that faculty members were decreasingly satisied with their ability to sustain productive
faculty-student research beyond nine contact hours of teaching per week (Wenzel 2001).
9.2 Additional training opportunities and workshops
9.2.1 Training in responsible conduct of research
All undergraduate students should be instructed in the ethics of responsible research. This
can be implemented within individual courses or programs or the training may be conducted
campus-wide. Additional opportunities for training in responsible conduct of research should be
provided for summer research students.
9.2.2 Professional skills workshops
Undergraduate students should receive speciic training in the appropriate oral and written research communication skills, for example, writing research reports and papers; designing
posters; giving an efective oral research presentation; applying for fellowships and graduate programs; applying for juried art competitions; networking at conferences; etc. This training may be
incorporated in gateway courses for disciplinary majors or it may be ofered separately as training
by departments or research programs. Faculty mentors are expected to discuss a variety of professional skills with undergraduates; however, programs of excellence will ensure that students have
multiple opportunities to enhance their professional skills.
9.3 Student course credit for research
Institutions should have a mechanism to award course credit to students for participating
in undergraduate research. In some cases, up to 25 percent of a student’s normal semester course
credit is awarded for research participation. Institutions should deine prerequisites and expectations for awarding academic credit for research and scholarly projects.
9.4 Requiring undergraduate research
Some programs require all graduating majors to be engaged in research, during the senior
year or at some other time. Ideally, these students should have the opportunity to be involved
in long-term research projects with the potential to culminate in a signiicant, written report or
artistic demonstration that draws from the literature and contributes to the ield. Students should
also publicly disseminate this work via presentation or exhibition. Many institutions with strong
undergraduate research programs require all students awarded departmental honors to conduct a
long-term, intensive research project that results in a signiicant thesis and oral defense.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
15
10. Summer research program
A robust summer research program is essential to a vibrant undergraduate research environment. For students, the summer months ofer a time when they can concentrate exclusively on a
research project, without competing interests and responsibilities. For faculty at more teachingintensive institutions, the summer months provide the only time during the calendar year when
faculty can focus their eforts exclusively on research. For faculty at all institutions, this is a time
with fewer external and institutional commitments, and it can aford the opportunity for more
intensive mentoring of undergraduates.
10.1 Research-supportive teaching calendar
In a supportive undergraduate research environment, faculty teaching responsibilities
should not include the summer months. This is especially important at more teaching-intensive
institutions, where the summer months are typically the most productive times for research. It is
also important for institutions to avoid creating imbalanced incentives for summer teaching that
serve as disincentives for involvement in research and scholarship.
10.2 Faculty compensation
Many institutions provide compensation to faculty to conduct summer research with undergraduates. This compensation can take the form of faculty stipends, course credit, and/or credit
toward research leaves; in some instances, funding for research supplies may be provided in lieu
of or in addition to faculty compensation. If institutions value faculty involvement in summer
research with undergraduates, compensation for this activity must be competitive with conlicting
activities, such as summer teaching.
10.3 Student compensation
Students should receive adequate compensation for conducting summer research. Ideally,
compensation should be above the minimum wage. Typical summer stipends for a 10-week, fulltime research assistantship are $3,500 to $5,000. In some cases, students may receive academic
credit for summer research instead of, or in addition to, a summer research stipend.
10.4 Student housing and access to facilities and student services
Attractive, on-campus student housing should be available to summer research students.
Housing students on campus helps create an academic community of scholars during the summer
months and facilitates summer research programming. Many institutions ofer summer housing
at no cost to students. Providing inexpensive, attractive summer housing helps recruit students to
summer research, especially when other job opportunities may be more attractive in terms of salary compensation. Access to facilities and services (library, computer center, student health and
counseling centers, recreation center, food services, etc.), should be provided for summer research
students.
10.5 Student programming
Institutions should devise mechanisms to bring the summer research community together for
common activities, including purposeful interaction between faculty and students. In addition
to social activities, educational activities for students should include professional development
workshops, ethics training, and speakers on research areas and careers. The summer is an ideal
time for training activities that can be done in smaller, focused groups; this may include journal
clubs, training in technical skills or data analysis, and introduction to new research approaches.
16
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
10.6 Summer research symposia
Students should have the opportunity to present the results of summer research to their peers
and to faculty and administrators. Typical venues include poster sessions, oral presentations, performances, or exhibitions. Events can be formal or informal and may be scheduled at the end of
the summer or at the beginning of the fall semester. Summer research symposia provide students
with opportunities to learn discipline-speciic dissemination practices and to receive feedback on
their work, as well as allow the campus to celebrate the students’ work.
10.7 Coordination among multiple programs
When a campus is host to a number of summer programs (multiple NSF REU sites, department programs, McNair programs, etc.), institutions that aspire to excellence will coordinate programs and collaborations on appropriate activities. Not only does such coordination and collaboration result in eicient use of resources and encourage sharing of best practices among programs,
but students also beneit from interaction with peers in other disciplines.
10.8 Hosting visiting students
Many summer programs host undergraduates from other institutions to expand the reach of
their program and diversify their summer research community. When visiting students are part of
the summer undergraduate research program, several types of support should be available:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
An orientation to the campus, community, and program should be held. Information on
safety and security issues and information about student services should be covered in
the orientation (e.g., tornado safety, night-time security, student health center, counseling
center).
Students should have multiple points of contact available to address any concerns about
the program, their housing arrangements, emergency situations and illness, and personal
situations. Contact information for additional faculty or staf beyond their research mentor should be available.
Activities designed to encourage interaction between visiting students and native students should be arranged.
Thought should be given to the student experience “after hours,” on weekends, and during holidays when students are not engaged in their research. This is especially important
for students without their own transportation or who are spending the summer in an unfamiliar environment.
Housing and meal accommodations should be arranged for visiting students, and their
needs for transportation to campus or the research site (if needed) should be addressed.
Students should be made aware that members of the residential-life staf are available to
provide assistance.
Logistical support for registration, housing, payment of stipends, and other iscal administration should be provided so that visiting students and faculty mentors do not need
to navigate the iscal issues without assistance. Insurance and liability issues should be
considered.
Faculty members mentoring guest students should understand their responsibilities and
the program’s goals and have contact information for a program director in the event of
a problem or emergency. Ideally, an orientation for faculty mentors also should be held
each year.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
17
11. Assessment activities
Institutions and programs of excellence will have multiple approaches to assessment to recognize successes, illuminate gaps, and collect benchmarking data. Assessment plans should be
appropriate for the context and purposeful in design.
11.1. Assessment of student learning
Research studies demonstrate the value of the undergraduate research experience on learning and student growth. Undergraduate programs and faculty mentors ought to consider the student learning outcomes of undergraduate research and develop a plan to assess the efectiveness
of their program in meeting these learning outcomes (Lopatto 2009).
11.2 Program assessment and evaluation
Assessment of student learning outcomes is important; however, exemplary undergraduate
research programs will go beyond this and collect assessment and program-evaluation data that
will take into consideration and include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
a mechanism to obtain feedback from students and faculty on their satisfaction with logistical operations and program activities
a sustainable method to collect data on the number of students and demographic variables
of students who participate in undergraduate research, the level of their engagement, and
outcomes resulting from their participation (presentations, attendance at of-campus conferences, publications, etc.)
a sustainable method to collect data on the eforts of faculty mentors and outcomes resulting from their work with undergraduates (co-authored publications)
a mechanism to track external funding that directly or indirectly supports the undergraduate research enterprise
a mechanism and encouragement for students to report on post-graduation educational
and career plans related to their undergraduate research experiences
resources (personnel, creation of databases and surveys, encouragement for students and
faculty to respond to queries, etc.) to develop and sustain assessment and collection of
benchmarking data.
Collection of benchmarking data should be institutionalized, and implementation therefore
will best succeed with broad support from campus leadership and faculty; expert assistance from
the registrar and institutional research; and collaboration with academic, student, and alumni affairs oices. Implementation of an efective assessment and data-collection plan cannot be the
sole responsibility of the designated undergraduate research program coordinator/director. Additionally, collected information must be disseminated to key stakeholders on an annual basis.
12. Strategic Planning
Institutions that aspire to creating and sustaining an excellent undergraduate research environment will have thoughtful and clearly articulated benchmarks and strategic plans. Strategic
plans should address goals for student and faculty participation in research (relating to quality,
quantity, and breadth of disciplines), mechanisms for identifying and scaling up efective programs, and resources to test and implement new programs to provide appropriate opportunities
for diferent levels of students, in or outside of the curriculum. Strategic plans should also recognize the resources needed for expanding and enhancing programs, including faculty contributions, staing needs, space, and iscal resources.
18
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the CUR Councilors for their contributions at the 2011
Business Meeting and comments on subsequent drafts.
References
Karukstis, Kerry K., Timothy E. Elgren, eds. 2007. Developing and Sustaining a Research-Supportive Curriculum: A Compendium of Successful Practices. Washington, DC: Council on
Undergraduate Research.
Lopatto, David. 2009. Science in Solution: the Impact of Undergraduate Research on Student
Learning. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation for Science Advancement.
Wenzel, Thomas J. 2001. “What is an appropriate teaching load for a research-active faculty
member at a predominantly undergraduate institution,” CUR Quarterly 23, 104-107.
*Permission not required for use of the COEUR survey.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
19
Characterisics of Excellence
in Undergraduate Research at
Diferent Insituions
Janet Stocks
Associate Academic Dean
Baldwin-Wallace College
U
ndergraduate research programs come in a lot of diferent shapes and sizes. My involvement with the world of undergraduate research began in 1998 when I became
director of the Undergraduate Research Oice at Carnegie Mellon University. I had
the luxury of being a full-time director with a full-time support staf person, a signiicant annual operating budget, and a good deal of support both from the administration and the
faculty. One of my early challenges in this position, however, was convincing the university’s
development oice of the impact of undergraduate research experiences on students when I
couldn’t answer basic questions such as what percentage of Carnegie Mellon graduates had
participated in UR. (If you talk with most directors of undergraduate research, they’ll tell you
all the reasons why this is not an easy question to answer). I eventually won over the development staf by giving them compelling stories of individual students who were doing amazing
things and who were obviously impacted by the experience. As a result, I was able to substantially increase our endowed funds.
For the past ive years I’ve been at a very diferent institution—Baldwin-Wallace College, a
primarily undergraduate institution with far fewer resources. I currently direct its undergraduate research program, but it is one of several duties I have as the associate academic dean. I have
a part-time support staf person (who supports all the projects in which I am involved), a student
worker, and a fairly small annual operating budget. Yet we have a vibrant undergraduate research
program, with activity in most disciplines on campus and very strong support from both the administration and the faculty.
Making the transition from a resource-rich to a relatively resource-limited institution, from
Carnegie Research I university to a primarily undergraduate institution was a bit of a challenge.
Fortunately for me, I had been very involved in both CUR and NCUR before I made the transition, so I had a large network of colleagues to help me think about how to manage in my new
environment. It also really helped that I didn’t have to convince my new boss, the college’s dean,
of the value of undergraduate research. She was already on board enough to have invested in an
institutional membership in CUR.
The Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) document is an excellent tool for those who ind themselves with responsibilities for undergraduate research, but
who do not yet have experience in the arena or networks to turn to. It is also a great tool for those
of us moving to new environments because it reminds us of the basics and of the range of activities
and opportunities that make up a robust UR program.
In our current economic times, this document can be useful in helping us see all the ways
in which we can build programs even when there aren’t a lot of new resources available. While a
20
“fully developed” UR program requires a substantial operating budget, there is much that can be
done to build capacity that doesn’t cost much at all. For example, a campus can:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Develop a mission statement for UR and make sure it is aligned with the institutional mission statement
Conduct an inventory of the range of UR activities taking place on campus and communicate these activities to the campus community
Proile the work of students and faculty using existing publications such as the alumni
magazine
Ofer workshops to students on a range of topics, such as ethics in research, presenting
research, and inding and applying for UR opportunities external to the campus
Develop course numbers so that UR can be noted on students’ transcripts
Host an annual symposium to celebrate the excellent undergraduate research taking place
on your campus
One needn’t stop there. Getting a campus’s faculty and administrators involved with CUR is
helpful if they are not already engaged. CUR opens the way to involvement with higher education
professionals who are passionate about undergraduate education and who are generous with their
wisdom—a network of people who can help individuals and campuses through any undergraduate research transitions in which they are involved.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
21
A Road Map to Iniiaing,
Developing and Sustaining High
Quality Faculty Undergraduate
Collaboraive Research and
Creaive Aciviies
Paula F. Dehn
Vice President of Academic Afairs and Dean of the College,
Kentucky Wesleyan College
C
UR’s Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) provide a road
map to initiating, developing, and sustaining high quality faculty undergraduate collaborative research and creative activities. While having a scholarly faculty can be a key component to ensuring the success of an institution’s undergraduate research program, it is
not the only element needed. Further, the absence of a strong scholarly faculty does not preclude
institutions from developing undergraduate research as a high-priority pedagogical approach to
educating students, if other institutional support is in place. Two institutions I have served may
illustrate this point and generate ideas about how COEUR’s “best practices” might be realized on
other campuses.
As an incoming department chair, I moved into an institution that was transitioning to a
teacher-scholar model. Institutionally, faculty development, travel, sabbatical, and student-support funds were in place. My department did not have faculty actively engaged in scholarship,
teaching loads were heavy, and the campus ofered minimal space, support staf, and/or instrumentation to support research. However, half of the department’s faculty members were eligible
to retire within ive years, and the departmental budget allowed for the re-allocation of resources
to develop a research-rich curriculum that allowed all students to be engaged in research at some
level and supported research-training for our students based on faculty-student collaborative projects. Additionally, the administration supported change. Through a number of federal and foundation grants, as well as gifts to the college, we were able to hire research–active faculty before
retirements occurred, acquire instrumentation to support those individuals, renovate teaching
spaces to accommodate research activities, and develop a reward system that acknowledged the
accomplishments of both groups of faculty. All of the above are recognized as COEUR’s “best
practices”.
Working with the dean of the College of Arts & Sciences, teaching loads were efectively
reduced by having course-load deinitions changed from credit hours to contact hours and a low
enrollment course in research methods was counted as part of the teaching load for each faculty member actively engaged in research. Likewise, careful course scheduling allowed faculty
to have blocks of time to devote to research with students, which increased productivity. Student
researchers received academic credit for their work through the research methods and/or independent research courses. Many students were funded through external programmatic grants or
22
an institutionally funded program that was part of a students’ inancial aid package. Our initial
dissemination eforts were through primarily local and/or regional conferences, which quickly
changed to national and/or international disciplinary conferences. At the end of my 19-year tenure at this institution, we had a departmental faculty that was actively engaged in research, publishing and presenting their work with student co-authors and seeking external funds for their
scholarly activities.
As the incoming vice president for academic afairs at my current college, I surveyed the
institutional resources and support structures available to help the campus transition from a
teaching-only campus culture to one that recognizes the importance of having a faculty composed
of teacher-scholars who can provide high-quality research and mentoring experiences for undergraduates. Faculty development, travel and sabbatical funds were in place. Many departments
had a “research” requirement built into their degree programs, generally associated with capstone
experiences. Science students participated in undergraduate research of-campus, both locally
and across the nation, through federally-funded programs. A small academic internship program,
which was partially research-based and included most disciplines, had active partners in regional
industries, companies, and non-proit organizations. A nascent on-campus research symposium
was open to all students in all disciplines. Existing infrastructure to support research was limited,
except for library and computational resources, and no research-oversight structures were in place.
Departmental budgets were inadequate to support faculty research, and teaching loads were high.
Over the past three years, several important administrative changes have been made within
academic afairs that closely follow the “best practices” noted in COEUR:
•
•
•
•
•
•
A system for rotating course reassigned time system to allow faculty to complete projects,
write manuscripts or grant proposals, and/or incorporate new “research-like” projects into
curricula has been established.
Small faculty mini-grants to fund new initiatives that promote high-impact teaching pedagogies that will lead to faculty scholarly outcomes have been ofered.
Priorities have been established for faculty travel funds to provide a higher level of support
for faculty travel to conferences, workshops, art shows, etc., to disseminate scholarly work
and/or to secure needed-training/upgrading of skills.
Competency- based outcomes for student learning have been incorporated into assessment plans for academic programs.
Systemic gathering of student-outcomes data that includes information on participation
in high-impact engagement practices has been initiated.
Some research oversight structures have been established.
Working with the Faculty Status and Professional Interests Committees, the faculty promotion and tenure guidelines have been redeined to clearly articulate the importance of scholarly
faculty-student collaborative work, as COEUR recommends. Institutionally, a salary-review process for all employees has been developed that will reward work performance at multiple levels. - For faculty, key components considered for the highest level of recognition in teaching and
scholarship are the development of courses that use approaches requiring a “high-level of student
engagement” and participation in scholarly endeavors producing the “highest levels of outcomes”,
for example, publication or peer-reviewed/juried performances, respectively. An institutional
fund has been created to support student researchers, which is part of a students’ inancial aid
package. Tied to these competitive awards is the requirement that the funded project must be
completed by the end of the academic year and presented at our Celebration of Student Achievement Day. The celebration has grown substantially over the past three years due to: the allocation
of a small amount of funding; the consolidation of the Honor’s Convocation, Student Life Awards,
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
23
student research symposia, and student music performances into a day-long campus-wide event;
and the new salary-review process that recognizes faculty involvement in student research and
creative activity.
The student government association has provided some funding for student travel to conferences and housing costs for have been reduced for summer research students working locally. The
college’s development oice is seeking funds to enhance faculty-student research, instrumentation, and student travel, as well as to renovate space and upgrade technology. We also are seeking external funding for a Center for Engaged Teaching and Learning. It would support faculty
development to enable the creation and teaching of a research- supportive curriculum in all disciplines, service-learning initiatives, and undergraduate research and scholarship.
We still have much to do to transform our campus culture, but some of the needed groundwork has been laid to enable this paradigm shift to occur. Strategic planning is essential to ensure
the success and sustainability of our eforts. For us and other institutions, COEUR provides the
road map to utilizing an array of “best practices” to draw together many units of an institution to
develop “a campus culture that values and rewards undergraduate research” as a central tenet of
its mission.
24
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
Use and Uility of the
COEUR Characterisics
Andrea Chapdelaine
Provost and Vice President for Academic Afairs
Albright College
A
s both a faculty member who has been engaged with undergraduate research throughout my academic career and as an academic administrator, I have continually sought
ways to sustain and strengthen my institution’s commitment to undergraduate research,
as well as to assist other colleges and universities in that efort. A thriving undergraduate research program that is achieving its desired goals of deep student learning and facilitating a
vibrant research enterprise requires multiple sources and methods of support. The primary value
of CUR’s Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) is that it provides a
comprehensive set of guidelines for those seeking to further develop and nurture undergraduate
research at their institutions. COEUR can be used to identify various facets of an undergraduate
research program that are strengths or weaknesses. Use of COEUR in this way enables colleges
and universities to establish goals and benchmarks for their programs against a set of nationally
developed standards.
By presenting these characteristics in distinct categories representing almost every component of an institution of higher education, COEUR can be easily mapped onto college decisionmaking and organizational processes. As I engage in planning, whether through organizational
restructuring, grant writing, budgeting, assessment methods, developing faculty reward models,
engaging in facilities renewal planning, or curriculum revision, constant reference to COEUR will
help ensure that the needs of Albright College’s undergraduate research program are being taken
into account, resulting in a stronger and more institutionally supported endeavor.
By using COEUR in this manner, I quickly identiied several areas in which Albright’s commitment to undergraduate research could be strengthened. For example, there are other campus
programs that could be integrated and leveraged to expand undergraduate research opportunities, as suggested in COEUR characteristic 1.6, “Integration with other engaging and high impact
opportunities.” Despite the fact that undergraduate research is organizationally and physically
attached to these other programs (e.g., internships, service learning), the cross-fertilization has yet
to be fully realized. Similarly, although undergraduate research is deeply embedded in the curriculum in the natural sciences, that is not the case in other divisions of the college (see COEUR
characteristic 9.1, “Research-supportive curriculum”). Finally, like many institutions, we struggle
to adequately assess the direct impact of undergraduate research on student learning, as recommended in COEUR characteristic 11, “Assessment Activities.”
In addition to serving as a set of guidelines by which institutions of higher education can
evaluate the status of undergraduate research, the comprehensiveness and detail of COEUR supply a wealth of new strategies to facilitate undergraduate research, especially for institutions in the
earlier stages of building a campus-wide program or in a particular discipline lacking undergraduate research activity. As a facilitator at the CUR social science and humanities institute, COEUR
will be of assistance as I work with campus teams to identify strategies to initiate new programs or
to further strengthen existing programs at their institutions. For example, one of the areas often
25
needing greater attention at many colleges and universities, even those with very strong programs,
is efective marketing of undergraduate research for recruitment, public relations, and fundraising. In section 7, “Dissemination,” COEUR suggests several ways to promote and publicize one’s
program. Similarly, areas that are often more diicult or slow to change in academe, such as curriculum and faculty reward structures, are discussed in detail in sections 5 and 9, respectively.
This material can be used by chief academic oicers to facilitate those more diicult, but necessary, conversations.
A inal important characteristic of COEUR that adds to its utility is its inclusiveness. Although undergraduate research has been most prominent in the natural sciences and with traditional undergraduates (i.e., 18- to 21-year olds, residential students), COEUR takes a step forward
in the undergraduate research literature by providing both criteria for excellence and examples
that are broader, encompassing nontraditional students, as well as all disciplines. Given the growing body of research demonstrating the signiicant impact of undergraduate research on student
learning, especially for academically at-risk students (Kuh 2008; Lopatto 2010), it is critical that
colleges and universities make every efort to provide these transformational learning experiences
to all of their students. By drawing attention to these underserved groups, COEUR will facilitate
that efort greatly.
As I stated at the outset, a successful undergraduate research program must be embedded
in the culture of an institution and thereby supported through multiple organizational structures,
policies, and programs. By using COEUR to guide eforts aimed at achieving this goal, an institution is much more likely achieve this desired result.
References:
Kuh, George D. 2008. “High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access
to Them, and Why They Matter.” Washington D.C.: Association of American Colleges and
Universities.
Lopatto, David. 2010. “Science in Solution: The Impact of Undergraduate Research on Student
Learning.” Washington, D.C.: Council of Undergraduate Research and Research Corporation for Scientiic Advancement.
26
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
COEUR: Advancing Undergraduate
Research on Campus and Beyond
Elizabeth L. Paul
Provost and Vice President for Academic Afairs
Stetson University
T
he distillation of 30 years of CUR experience and leadership that culminates in the Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) comes at a most important
time in the ever-dynamic ield of higher education. While undergraduate research is recognized widely as a high-impact learning practice, pressures to reduce costs and increase
faculty productivity counter this priority. While colleges and universities celebrate the increasing
original contributions to knowledge generated through undergraduate research, the external press
for accountability prioritizes other output and outcome measures.
Colleges and universities are challenged to reassert the social imperative of post-secondary
education and must plan keenly and deftly so as to achieve maximal efectiveness in student learning and post-graduation success. Careful study of research-based evidence of the most efective
learning experiences can help inform such prioritization and focus.
Undeniable is the mounting evidence of the learning outcomes and personal and professional developmental gains students realize through undergraduate research. Also undeniable are
the signiicant impacts of thousands of undergraduate research veterans, having beneitted from
undergraduate research years or even decades ago, who are now leaders in various industries and
sectors throughout the nation and world. This strong evidence of the transformational power of
undergraduate research implores colleges and universities to move this high-impact practice from
the periphery to the center of students’ learning program.
COEUR therefore provides a rich guide for universities and colleges, and for the ield of
higher education writ large, to be responsible stewards—iscal stewards and stewards of enduring
social progress. COEUR can help each college and university maximize the contributions to its
mission through the high-impact learning practice of undergraduate research.
As provost at Stetson University, I ind COEUR a welcome resource. COEUR can efectively structure a comprehensive institutional self-study, guide strategic planning for concrete advances in mission-driven undergraduate research initiatives, and shape the institution’s story of
the role of undergraduate research in its efectiveness as an institution.
Most impressive is the comprehensiveness of COEUR, guiding colleges and universities in
creating institutional cultures that are maximally supportive of efective undergraduate research.
In the examples below, I draw out four ways in which COEUR is timely in my university’s continual advancement of undergraduate research as a central, mission-based element of students’
learning experience.
Facilitation of cross-disciplinary relection and exchange. COEUR epitomizes “broad disciplinary participation” in undergraduate research. This goal is exciting and challenging for many
colleges and universities, especially institutions that support a broad range of liberal arts and professional disciplines. COEUR will be a very useful tool for facilitating discussion among faculty
and academic leaders from disparate disciplines, helping to create greater mutual understanding of disciplinary similarities and diferences, and encouraging the exchange of ideas from one
27
discipline to another. Indeed, some of the most efective innovations in undergraduate research
can come from sharing practices across disciplines. Such discussion and exchange may also help
facilitate interdisciplinary collaborations.
Supporting faculty engagement in undergraduate research. Prioritizing high-impact learning practices has, to date, more often resulted in adding, rather than replacing, work for faculty.
COEUR will be very helpful in advancing the efort to move undergraduate research and other
high-impact learning practices from the periphery to the center of academic programs. COEUR
enumerates several important elements in this efort, including the integration of high-impact
learning into the curriculum and therefore in faculty workload. Also important is the emphasis in
COEUR on faculty professional development and support initiatives.
Building a comprehensive university culture that supports undergraduate research. A particular strength of COEUR is the recognition that maximally efective undergraduate research
programs are integrated into the campus culture. COEUR provides a fruitful mechanism for
engaging a variety of university units and leaders as partners in maximizing the efectiveness of
undergraduate research. At Stetson University, for example, a focus of our Student Success initiative is strategizing ways to support and maximize student engagement in high-impact practices.
Our librarian faculty members serve as personal librarians for students from initial enrollment
through the completion of the required senior research project. Other important elements explicated by COEUR are the development of a “community of student scholars” and cultivation of
student leadership and support.
“Dare to be signiicantTM” through undergraduate research. COEUR suggests consideration
of “connecting the research topic to societal issues.” At Stetson University, we emphasize signiicance in our educational program, prompting students to be daring and thereby expand themselves
so they may live lives of signiicance. COEUR will help us to explore how we can facilitate students’ broader awareness and understanding of the signiicance of their undergraduate research
project, and the signiicance of their overall engagement in undergraduate research. COEUR will
also help us to continue to advance the development of our university-wide community-based
research program.
These examples of strategic initiatives demonstrate several key strengths of COEUR: 1) the
character and success of undergraduate research eforts are grounded in each unique institutional
mission; 2) characteristics of excellence of undergraduate research are nonetheless ubiquitous,
ofering innumerable opportunities for cross-disciplinary and cross-institutional exchange and
learning; and 3) a universal goal is to continually advance the comprehensiveness of and access
to undergraduate research programs and thereby the transformational power and imperative of
undergraduate education. COEUR builds upon and will surely extend CUR’s long history of
advancing undergraduate research on and across campuses, for the beneit of many generations of
students (our future citizens and leaders) to come.
28
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
COEUR: A Comprehensive
Framework for Insituional
Self-Assessment
Kelly McConnaughay
Associate Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences
Charles Maris
Assistant Dean for Research and Sponsored Programs
Bradley University
M
ore than ever before, institutions of higher learning are embracing undergraduate
research (UR) for its ability to engage students, reinforce critical thinking, promote
problem-solving skills, encourage team work, and develop efective communication
skills. Research experiences help undergraduates connect theory to practice and
also can increase their self-eicacy and motivation, thereby increasing their persistence in the face
of academic challenges (e.g., Seymour et al. 2004, Lopatto 2004). When our institutions work to
build cultures and structures that not only embrace, but also promote and support UR programs
on our campuses, we rely on shared experiences and learn from examples of efective programs.
Practitioners of undergraduate research and the administrators who support it learn from the successes and failures of others, historically through CUR meetings, workshops, and publications,
and increasingly as UR has become more generally accepted as a high-impact practice, through
venues such as academic societies and professional networks that support college administrators
and others in non-faculty roles.
This wealth of shared experience has been largely anecdotal: We share our institutional stories and look for ways to apply new ideas on our own campuses. Fortunately, however, research
on undergraduate research is quickly coming into its own as a scholarly discipline. This, together
with our shared experiences, is allowing us to better understand the types of skills and attributes
UR experiences promote, and what types of UR experiences are particularly efective and for
whom. And now we have a document, CUR’s Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate
Research, that provides a comprehensive framework for the ongoing institutional self-assessment
that is vital if we are to make the most of this emerging body of knowledge.
Even as UR is embraced as a catalytic activity by more and more academic disciplines and
by institutions of all types, we still are just learning what it takes to systemically support UR at
the institutional level. Here again, we have a number of case studies to guide our eforts, primarily stories of varying degrees of success in building institutional cultures and infrastructures to
support UR. CUR’s Institute for Institutionalizing Undergraduate Research and its institutionalreview services have provided dozens, if not hundreds, of institutions with information and expert
consultation regarding efective institutional practices. But those services are designed to catalyze
UR eforts and to provide periodic external feedback on them. It is incumbent on institutions to
engage in authentic, ongoing formative assessment of their own UR programs in order to ensure
continued progress, which the COEUR framework will now facilitate.
29
Our own institution, Bradley University, is a mid-sized comprehensive university with a College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, a College of Communication and Fine Arts, and three professional undergraduate colleges covering engineering, education and health sciences, and business,
plus a graduate school. Undergraduate research is framed broadly as student/faculty collaborative engagement in the discipline. The approach has been a declared focus of emphasis for our
two most recent accreditation cycles (1990-2000 and 2001-2010), and it was a component of
university- and college-level strategic plans over the same time periods. Undergraduate research
continues to be a special focus for our next accreditation cycle and is a component of our newly
adopted ive-year strategic plan.
As we embark on our most recent strategic plan and accreditation cycle, we have new leadership in several key administrative positions, including our provost and vice president for academic
afairs, new deans in three of our six colleges, a newly created position of assistant dean for research and sponsored programs, and are currently searching for a new director for our Oice for
Teaching Excellence and Faculty Development. We have several newly created centers, including the Center for STEM Education, the Center for Collaborative Brain Research, the Institute
for Principled Leadership, and Pre-Law and Pre-Health Professions Advisory Centers. We also
are developing other centers of excellence in collaborative research areas, including an Engineering-Business Convergence Center. Each of these centers supports our institutional mission of promoting and sustaining high quality student/faculty collaborative engagement in the discipline. In
addition, the new university strategic plan calls for a comprehensive review and potential revision
of our core (general education) curriculum.
Bradley has a deep commitment to UR, and we continue to analyze, re-forge, and improve all
of the systems that contribute to a vibrant campus undergraduate research culture. This includes
hiring new, energetic faculty who are gifted researchers, enhancing our sponsored programs oice,
continuing inancial support by university administrators for scholarly collaborations between
students and faculty mentors, improving our infrastructure, and revisiting and potentially revising our general education requirements.
Before we move forward with a collective vision on how to best to achieve our UR goals, we
need to take a step back and assess where we are and where we need to go. We need an institutional self-study centered on our undergraduate research culture, programs, and outcomes. We plan
to use the COEUR document to guide that self-study and to set speciic goals for next ive years.
30
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
Pursuing Characterisics of
Excellence in
Undergraduate Research
Michael A. Palladino
Dean School of Science, Associate Professor of Biology
Monmouth University
A
t Monmouth University (MU), the School of Science places great value on high-quality
undergraduate-faculty collaborative research, believing it to be mutually beneicial for
advancing faculty scholarship and for preparing students as developing scientists, engineers, and mathematicians. COEUR will provide a framework for informing faculty,
administrators, and the School of Science’s community about best practices in undergraduate research; serve to provide suggestions for improving practices already in place; and help us work to
implement new improvements to our undergraduate research culture and programs.
1 Campus Mission and Culture
The recently revised mission statement for the School of Science acknowledges the importance of research experiences for our students. Faculty and students in all departments in the
school (Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science and Software Engineering, and Mathematics)
and two Centers of Distinction (Rapid Response Institute, Urban Coast Institute) are actively
involved in undergraduate research. The school will continue to place great emphasis on hiring
full-time faculty committed to supporting undergraduate research. Since moving from college to
university status in 1995, MU has pursued a teacher-scholar model, but undergraduate research
is not institutionalized on campus. An institutional member of CUR since 2008, the university
became an enhanced institutional member of CUR in 2011. Faculty outside of the School of Science are showing an increasing interest in CUR and in participating in CUR programs. Through
the Honors School and other opportunities, we will seek to promote greater awareness of the value
of undergraduate research and to improve the campus culture for supporting undergraduate research as a high-impact practice.
2 Administrative Support
Generally, administrative and intramural support for undergraduate research at MU is solid
and involves a range of support structures, including start-up budgets for faculty, an instrumentation budget for the School of Science, reduced faculty teaching loads for scholarship, intramural
support from lab fees and other sources to support faculty-student research, an institutional review
board, institutional animal care and use committee, Oice of Grants and Contracts, and budget
support for student travel to present at conferences. Improved support from the grants oice, such
as hiring proposal writers, continued support of University Advancement to cultivate prospective
donors for support of undergraduate research, and recovery of indirect costs are among priorities
for improvement. We also envision seeking greater involvement of postdoctoral teaching fellows,
particularly for faculty supported by external funding.
31
3 Research Infrastructure
Improving the research infrastructure at MU is the most critical need for the School of Science, and the university has made renovation and expansion of science facilities a top capital
priority. Faculty and administrators have participated in Project Kaleidoscope (PKAL) planning
sessions, and over the past year, the School of Science completed a detailed facility planning study
and review with the help of a campus facilities planning team. A phased-in plan for renovation
and expansion of science facilities will be implemented. In the near future, technical support for
instrumentation for departments increasingly may become a challenge that will need to be addressed.
4 Faculty Professional Development Opportunities
The university ofers generous support for sabbaticals and summer mini-sabbaticals, release
time, and travel to conferences (research and non-research meetings). In following the principles
of COEUR, we will seek greater involvement of faculty in CUR training opportunities (e.g., proposal writing institute, institute on developing an undergraduate research program), and professional development of faculty through PKAL, Science Education for New Civic Engagements
and Responsibilities (SENCER), Association of American Colleges and Universities, and other
organizations. In support of faculty professional development and reputation building, we will
continue to encourage greater participation of faculty on grant proposal review panels and in leadership roles in regional and national professional organizations.
5 Recognition
Our deinitions of scholarship for faculty tenure and promotion review value involvement of
undergraduate students in research as appropriate, depending on the type of research being carried out, and the criteria encourage student co-authorship and dissemination of research through
presentations. We will continue to publicize undergraduate research programs through media
and in our print and electronic marketing materials, and recognize student researchers with the
Deans Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Research, awarded at our annual student research
conference. The School of Science Advisory Council is creating a science-student leadership
scholarship for a rising senior and involvement in undergraduate research will be one of the qualifying criteria.
6 External Funding
The university has an Oice of Grants and Contracts to help faculty ind funding opportunities and prepare proposals. Encouraging faculty to be more active in proposal writing and supporting faculty grant development (sending faculty to conferences on proposal preparation, hiring
proposal writers, and seeking external reviews of draft proposals) will continue to be a priority for
the School of Science. The dean’s oice, together with University Advancement, will continue to
seek corporate and individual donor support for student-faculty research.
7 Dissemination
For the past ten years, the School of Science has organized an annual student research conference each spring, and this will continue, as will a poster session colloquium as part of our summer research program. Students increasingly are co-authoring publications with faculty and presenting research at local, regional, national, and international conferences. The school and its
departments provide support for student travel to research conferences.
32
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
8 Student-centered Issues
In the future we plan to pursue greater integration and coordination of our student research
experiences with other ongoing high-impact practices, such as student advising, peer mentoring,
and student career development. In support of improving campus culture and intellectual discourse, we are interested in having more regularly scheduled informal outlets for students and
faculty to discuss research.
9 Curriculum
Monmouth University values research and teaching as complementary activities. Curricular integration of undergraduate research primarily occurs through research courses, independent
study, and experiential education; honors students do an honors proposal and thesis. We will
be placing a greater emphasis on integration of research experiences in the curriculum through
classroom experiences, standardizing lab safety training for students, and improving awareness of
science and research ethics.
10 Summer Research Program
Four years ago we established the School of Science Summer Research Program, a 12-week
program that has involved some 80 students and 13 to 15 faculty members each summer. The
program is supported by internal and external funding. High-school and college students from
Monmouth and other colleges participate. The program also provides opportunities for non-tenure track, full-time faculty (lecturers) to maintain scholarly engagement and mentor students in
undergraduate research. In support of the summer program, we will seek greater involvement of
irst-year students in order to provide them with early and sustained exposure to research experiences, and we will also pursue increased support from individual and industrial donors and help
faculty ind other sources of external grants.
12 Assessment Activities
For the 2011 summer research program, we used the SURE III survey to assess the program,
to inform participating faculty about student perceptions of the experience and to help us with
appropriate improvements to the program. In recognition of COEUR’s guidance, we will improve
systematic assessment of research experiences throughout the year.
13 Strategic Planning
The 2010-15 School of Science Strategic Plan includes many priorities and goals for enhancing the teacher-scholar environment, including support for excellence in undergraduate research. COEUR will serve as a guiding document for considering best practices in undergraduate
research as we review and modify the strategic plan.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
33
Fostering Undergraduate Research
at the University of San Diego
Through COEUR
Mary K. Boyd
Dean, College of Arts and Sciences, Professor of Chemistry
University of San Diego
T
he University of San Diego (USD) is a Roman Catholic institution committed to advancing academic excellence, expanding liberal and professional knowledge, creating a diverse and inclusive community, and preparing leaders dedicated to ethical conduct and
compassionate service. The university enrolls more than 8,200 students, including 5,400
undergraduates with majors in arts and sciences, business, and engineering. Our goal is to provide
opportunities for undergraduate research to all of these students and in all disciplines.
Some disciplines at USD, such as the biological and physical sciences, are quite advanced
in their undergraduate research capacity and experience. Other disciplines, such as the humanities and arts, are at an initial stage. Students in the honors program must complete a senior thesis,
and some majors in the sciences require undergraduate research. COEUR will be an efective
tool in enhancing and broadening undergraduate research at USD, particularly in diferentiating
the needs among diferent disciplines at varying stages of development in their undergraduate
research oferings.
COEUR identiies the need to develop a strategic plan, which will provide a comprehensive
approach to address the various lacunae in our current oferings. COEUR also notes the importance of assessment regarding undergraduate research. Mechanisms for assessment should be in
place at the very beginning of new oferings and should be used to evaluate the success of current
practices. It is key that assessment move beyond collecting data regarding participation toward
collecting direct evidence of the achievement of student goals and learning outcomes.
USD currently has in place many of the components that COEUR identiies as being best
practices that support and sustain undergraduate research. For example, USD recently opened
an Oice of Undergraduate Research, with a full-time director. The oice is responsible for the
coordination of all undergraduate research activities, including an annual campus-wide symposium of student presentations. The unit also is responsible for building a comprehensive, integrated model of undergraduate research. USD also ofers a reduced housing rate for summer undergraduate researchers and engages in fundraising to support undergraduate research. Students
participating in various summer undergraduate research programs, including McNair Scholars
and those supported by internal or external funds, participate in joint professional development
opportunities and other events. We embrace the teacher-scholar model and discuss with faculty
candidates their capacity and interest in mentoring undergraduate researchers.
Much of USD’s current undergraduate research activities are aligned with traditional practices in the sciences, such as summer research opportunities. As we expand our programs to provide all students and all disciplines with opportunities in undergraduate research, COEUR will
help to identify new models for student-faculty engagement, as well as needed institutional sup34
port and infrastructure. COEUR discusses curricular opportunities as a strategy to engage more
undergraduate students in research, through the incorporation of authentic research in a laboratory course or as a module within a lab course. COEUR reminds us that faculty must be compensated for their eforts in mentoring undergraduate researchers, and we are at a preliminary stage of
determining faculty load credit for such mentoring.
As our undergraduate research opportunities continue to expand to new disciplines, we must
consider their speciic needs. The apprenticeship model traditionally practiced in the sciences,
as well as the dominant summer undergraduate research model, does not always align well with
other disciplines, particularly those in the humanities. The Oice of Undergraduate Research
will work with faculty in the arts and humanities to devise support and programs that better meet
their needs. Expansion of our honors program thesis model to other students is one avenue identiied by COEUR that will allow us to respond to these emerging disciplines.
In summary, COEUR provides institutions interested in fostering undergraduate research
with an overview of best practices. Its recommendations are useful to institutions at an early stage
of undergraduate research oferings, as well as to institutions that seek to expand their practices.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
35
Advancing Undergraduate
Research at Community Colleges
Judith Marwick
Provost
Willian Rainey Harper College
T
he national college completion agenda has placed a spotlight on community colleges that
they had not previously enjoyed. The United States is developing a greater awareness
of the important role that community colleges play in our nation’s future. The national
completion agenda grew from the realization that in the 21st century gainful employment
will require a postsecondary credential. It is clear that community colleges are essential to achieving the national goal of ive million more college graduates by 2020.
This greater awareness of the value of community college education is a great opportunity
for this sector of American education, but it is also a tremendous challenge. How will we do our
part to ensure that America has a highly educated workforce able to compete in a global economy?
Many initiatives are under way, data are being collected, and efective practices are being shared
at conferences and in publications. At William Rainey Harper College in Palatine, Illinois, we
know that we must graduate an additional 10,604 graduates in the next ten years to do our part.
We are reviewing all of our practices and processes, and we are piloting many new initiatives to
see what will help students succeed. One initiative that has proven very successful is undergraduate research.
I irst encountered the idea of undergraduate research at community colleges seven years
ago when I attended a workshop sponsored by the Council on Undergraduate Research (CUR).
Since community colleges are teaching rather than research institutions, I had never given research much thought, but I left the workshop intrigued. Chemistry faculty at Harper College
were also intrigued and subsequently joined with other Chicago-area community colleges to carry
out a National Science Foundation grant to support undergraduate research.
The results have been signiicant. Seventy-four Harper students have participated in undergraduate research in chemistry. The average number of credit hours in which these students enroll
is 60 and their average GPA is 3.47. The Harper graduation rate is also nine percentage points
higher for students involved with undergraduate research than it is for non-participants.
The NSF grant ended several years ago, but Harper has continued its undergraduate research program in chemistry at a cost of about $25,000 per year. As a community college provost
managing a tight budget, I ind that this cost is more than justiied by the beneits to the students
and that it is ofset by participants’ likelihood of enrolling in additional courses at the college. In
fact, I am interested in expanding undergraduate research into other disciplines.
CUR has developed the Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR)
document to aid institutions wishing to develop excellent undergraduate research programs. This
document can provide guidance to community college administrators as they consider initiating
an undergraduate research program at their institutions.
First, it is important that undergraduate research be seen as part of the institutional mission.
Students are more likely to persist and achieve their academic goals if they are engaged personally
with someone at the college, whether through a student activity, club, or with a professor. Such a
36
program thus directly its with the mission of student success and completion. It also serves to link
research, information literacy, and both written and oral communication skills into a holistic picture. These are general education skills needed for any career. Further, undergraduate research
can provide a career focus for undecided students and help them see a clear career path for their
academic goals. All of these beneits clearly it with the community college mission.
Administrative support is essential to almost any successful initiative, and undergraduate
research is no diferent. While faculty commitment is paramount, without administrative support
for funding, time, space, and travel for both students and faculty members, an undergraduate research program cannot reach its full potential. Grant funding may be sought to provide dollars for
start-up costs such as needed instrumentation or studio supplies.
Adequate library resources are needed for literature reviews as freshmen and sophomores
undertake all of the components of authentic research. Faculty members need support to travel to
conferences to collaborate with colleagues and engage in scholarly discourse. Students should also
have opportunities to present their research outcomes at poster sessions and conferences. Visiting
with Harper students at one such poster session was an experience that solidiied my support and
commitment to undergraduate research. As I viewed the posters and inquired about the research,
all the students I spoke with eagerly and clearly described their hypotheses, their methods, and the
results of their research. I was impressed by the quality of their work and their ability to explain
what they had accomplished. I walked away knowng that undergraduate research was important
for Harper College’s commitment to help more students achieve their academic goals.
Recognition and compensation for those faculty who spend time and energy to mentor students is necessary, to encourage others and to validate the important outcomes of this work. We
have found that faculty members engaged in undergraduate research often improve the curriculum in their traditional college courses with strategies learned while mentoring research students.
The experience keeps faculty fresh in their disciplines and improves their professional development.
Undergraduate research opportunities can also provide a wonderful marketing opportunity
for community colleges as they highlight the advantages for students able to work one-on-one
with an expert in a ield of study. Students apply to Harper’s research program and are chosen by
professors, based not on their academic accomplishments but rather based on their interest and
willingness to commit 10 hours per week to research for one year. This program is an example of
community colleges truly providing the best in freshman and sophomore education.
Community colleges are teaching institutions. Undergraduate research is teaching, and
teaching is research. Although it may at irst seem non-traditional, an undergraduate research
program can be an important component of the community college mission. It can provide focus
to students’ academic goals and lead to program completion, career opportunities, and advanced
degrees. The COEUR publication provides a roadmap that can be used by community colleges
to create a quality research program that will beneit the institution, the faculty, and most importantly, students.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
37
Faculty-driven and Studentcentered: A Formula for
Undergraduate Research during
the New Normal
John F. Barthell
Dean College of Mathematics and Science, Professor Biology
University of Central Oklahoma
“This New Normal is a reality. And it is a reality that everyone seeking to improve education must
grapple with. Yet, there are productive and unproductive ways to meet this challenge of doing more
with less.”
—Arne Duncan (2010)
I often comment to colleagues that they can count on two phenomena in higher education
today. The irst is that state-appropriated funds devoted to public colleges and universities will decline and, secondly, that accountability for the expenditure of these funds will increase. Any conscientious group of campus administrators therefore recognizes that this trend has the potential to
impact the implementation of high-impact learning practices (Kuh 2008) such as undergraduate
research, even though accreditation bodies may recognize them as being important to advancing
student learning outcomes.
Doing more with less and doing so with increasing scrutiny are the conditions that the U.S.
Secretary of Education has termed the “new normal.” This perfect storm is more evident than
ever from the perspective of a dean whose job it is to facilitate the faculty-student interactions that
drive undergraduate research. How do we best support these important interactions under the
current circumstances? Below I review the ways our institution has used CUR’s Characteristics of
Excellence in Undergraduate Research to encourage this high-impact practice in an era of declining budgets.
Doing More with Less. Thriving under the conditions of the new normal requires greater
focus on limited resources, with a stronger sense of campus mission and culture. My own institution has advanced a six-part initiative (known as Transformative Learning) that has become a
part of our strategic-planning process. As a result, as the COEUR document recommends, our
campus has developed strong administrative support, including an oice of research and grants
that actively supports undergraduate research while performing a role in our assessment activities
as well. Our university also inds ways to recognize faculty members through a generous indirectcost-sharing policy, as well as through merit credit (a peer-approved funding allotment that supports teaching, scholarship and/or service) and awards for excellence in mentoring. In support of
our university’s mission, our college chose to advance research in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM) ields through a center designed to encourage an investment in undergraduate research.
Leveraging Resources for Students. In the fall of 2008 we formally focused on student-centered issues in research with the initiation of the Center for Undergraduate Research and Educa38
tion in STEM. In combination with a new oice of sponsored programs, we have been able to
contribute toward a stronger student-centered research infrastructure in our college. Complementing components of our university mission, the center was structured to directly encourage
faculty to work with students through faculty professional development opportunities, as COEUR
discusses. To this end, the center provides faculty mentors with reassignment time and a modest budget for travel, student salaries, and supplies. Among these beneits, reassignment time is
critical since we are a predominantly undergraduate institution with faculty teaching loads that
commonly involve 12 or more credit hours per semester. The center now provides more adequate
time to plan, write, and submit a minimum of one grant proposal per year for one in ive faculty
members in our college.
Since we developed the center, external grant applications have increased in all seven departments of our college and the level of external funding from grants has more than doubled. At
least three of our current federal grants revolve around a summer research program, creating a synergy of resources. Funds allocated by the university for travel by faculty are now nearly matched
by travel funding produced from external grants, and student wages paid for by grants far exceed
those provided by the university to our college. Concomitantly, and perhaps most importantly,
the number of poster presentations at our state’s annual faculty-student research conference have
nearly doubled since the center was initiated.
Communicating the Change. We have found that it is the integration of student learning
and faculty development that provides the most compelling argument for advancing undergraduate research in an era of declining resources. When faculty members are rewarded for pursuing
research with students, products of their collaboration soon emerge (Elgren 2004). In the new
normal, these products can enhance both the educational and iscal health of an institution. A
thoughtful institutional plan, one that is supportive of both faculty and student interests, is therefore critical for aligning high-impact learning practices such as undergraduate research with the
iscal reality of a modern college or university campus.
Our experience demonstrates the importance of COEUR’s emphasis on the dissemination of
ideas as vital to developing a culture that embraces undergraduate research. Faculty presentation
and publication with students should be commonplace whenever possible, as this type of collaboration helps everyone to recognize that student learning objectives can parallel faculty research
objectives for purposes of tenure and promotion. Our own campus has begun directly addressing
this aspect of its tenure and promotion policy, but the informal process of encouraging research
with students through faculty development practices may be the critical precursor to institutionalizing undergraduate research. In addition, and as described in the COEUR volume, the expansion
of a research-supportive curriculum, including capstone courses, provides an efective and potentially cost-efective avenue to develop research experiences for our students.
Encouraging academic discourse is essential to a transparent and productive discussion of
change that involves student learning objectives. We employ an active college seminar series to
bring in faculty members from other institutions to talk about how institutional change has occurred on their campuses, another strategy identiied in COEUR. Regular in-house discussions
also allow the more detailed deliberations that are often required to achieve faculty consensus
around a common goal. In addition, budgetary discussions should be transparent to faculty in
order to show how investment priorities align with the mission and vision of the institution.
Finally, faculty members who teach, serve, and demonstrate engagement in their disciplines
are critical to the future of undergraduate research in our colleges and universities; invest in faculty and you invest in your students as well. The key to creating a balance between faculty development and student learning is to reward faculty-driven programs that are student-centered
in nature. Keeping COEUR’s principles in mind—despite the modern dynamics of funding and
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
39
assessment practices—can help stimulate excellent undergraduate research programs for your college or university just as they have for other institutions documented in the volume.
References:
Elgren, Tim. 2004. “Successful Collaborative Research with Undergraduates Requires Balancing Objectives.” Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly. 25:52.
Kuh, George D. 2008. “High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access
to Them, and Why They Matter.” Washington D.C.: Association of American Colleges and
Universities.
40
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
CSU San Marcos looks at COEUR
Gerardo González
Dean of Graduate Studies and Associate Vice President for Research
California State University- San Marcos
A
t California State University San Marcos, CUR programs have provided a springboard to crystallize undergraduate research as a campus priority. For example,
a CUR Institute helped our campus to develop an action plan to institutionalize
undergraduate research. The COEUR survey findings offer a roadmap of 12 “best
practices” for supporting and sustaining undergraduate research. As described below, we
look toward the COEUR findings as potential goals and benchmarks for our campus, enabling
us to deepen our commitment to make undergraduate research one of our best-known campus identities.
1. Campus mission and culture
COEUR will help our university broaden access and the participation of faculty and
students in undergraduate research and creative activities. Among our activities will be promoting undergraduate research as one of our campus’s “high impact” practices. In addition,
we intend to utilize our success in undergraduate research to attract and recruit students and
faculty.
2. Administrative support
COEUR recommends that faculty be given suicient credit for undergraduate research activities. For example, consideration must be given to faculty workload for these eforts. Without
these supports, undergraduate research may not be sustainable. Our university administrative
leadership supports faculty for supervising undergraduate research. To elevate our support, our
campus is exploring the establishment of a centralized campus-wide unit for undergraduate research. The unit will have dedicated personnel, space, and resources to support, coordinate, and
sustain undergraduate research activities.
3. Research infrastructure
COEUR reveals that a strong research infrastructure is instrumental in the success of undergraduate research. We agree that a robust research environment promotes high-quality faculty
and student research. Our campus is working toward strengthening our research infrastructure
by pursuing appropriate levels of personnel, space, equipment, and library resources. These goals
are challenging because of signiicant state budget constraints. However, we will explore all avenues of internal and external funding to support our objectives.
4. Faculty professional development opportunities
COEUR suggests that faculty professional development should include opportunities for faculty
members to sharpen their skills in teaching, research, and mentoring. Our campus ofers faculty professional development programs that contribute to the success of our undergraduates, and we.are also pursuing ways to enhance professional development for our graduate students. As a result, more graduate
students can serve as research mentors in our undergraduate research endeavors.
41
5. Recognition
Our university recognizes and rewards faculty for engaging in research. We celebrate faculty scholarship through various venues in which faculty present their research (e.g., an annual celebration event and faculty colloquia). Our current campus promotion and tenure policies do not
explicitly state that faculty must participate in undergraduate research. However, our campus has
initiated a dialogue aimed at clarifying these policies in order to encourage faculty participation
in such research. We have undertaken steps to enhance the proile of faculty and undergraduate
research through publicity on our campus website, publications sent to alumni, and press releases. Faculty research is also prominently displayed on our library’s website (e.g., ResearchForge).
Our campus ofers several awards for faculty excellence in the domains of teaching, research, and
service. As suggested by COEUR, a faculty award for excellence in mentoring undergraduate
research can be considered.
6. External funding
As recommended by COEUR, our campus actively supports faculty and staf who pursue
external funding for undergraduate research. Our faculty also can apply for internal funds to
support their research, as well as for seed money to develop extramural grant applications. We
also commit internal funding to support undergraduate research projects and students’ travel to
present their research. Given limited state budgets, it is increasingly important to secure external
funding in order advance our undergraduate research programs.
7. Dissemination
COEUR reports that dissemination of high-quality undergraduate research is crucial for
students to succeed in pursuing competitive graduate programs and professions. We offer
our undergraduates opportunities to present at on-campus research symposia, exhibitions,
and performances. Most importantly, students are encouraged and supported to present
their work at professional, scientific, and student research conferences. Our campus is participating in efforts to implement an undergraduate student journal for the California State
University System.
8. Student-centered issues
COEUR recommends that students have early and sustained involvement in undergraduate research. Our campus ofers “hands-on learning” opportunities for individual and collaborative undergraduate research. We also provide opportunities for integrating hands-on learning with service-learning activities. Through various programs, we are expanding opportunities
to engage middle-, high-school, and irst-year and second-year community college, and lowerdivision students in research. These experiences provide bridges for young students to the
university.
9. Curriculum
In accord with COEUR, our campus seeks to develop a research-supportive curriculum.
High-quality faculty research can inform teaching and classroom activities. We are building on
our commitment to the teacher-scholar model by ofering workshops and peer mentoring on best
practices to help us develop a curriculum more supportive of research. By and large, research and
teaching are inseparable. However, this is not always clearly outlined in course syllabi or course
expectations. Thus, faculty should provide clear research expectations for students in their syllabi, student learning outcomes, and degree requirements.
42
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
10. Summer research program
As recommended by COEUR, our campus seeks to expand a summer research training program to develop future leaders, faculty, and researchers. Our summer research program will include a student research symposium, and we also will work to better integrate faculty into summer
research and research training activities.
11. Assessment activities
COEUR provides a framework to assess the progress we have made on our undergraduate research initiative. Our campus has gaps in its capacity to evaluate the relationship between undergraduate research and student learning outcomes. We are exploring a system to deine and track
data on student learning outcomes that will help assess the impact of undergraduate research.
Among the outcomes to be tracked are retention and graduation rates, acceptance rates to graduate schools, and the development of skills attractive to prospective employers.
12. Strategic Planning
COEUR ofers an opportunity to more clearly align our action plan for undergraduate research with our campus’s strategic goals. Moreover, COEUR can inform our university’s strategic
planning process, allowing us to formulate a clearer campus identity for undergraduate research.
In sum, COEUR provides guideposts for developing and sustaining “best practices” for undergraduate research. Coeur translates as “heart” in French. COEUR gives us heart that we will
succeed in our undergraduate research endeavors.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
43
CUR’s COEUR as a Resource for
Insituional Change
Janice DeCosmo
Associate Dean, Undergraduate Academic Afairs
University of Washington
D
uring the past decade, undergraduates’ participation in research in the U.S. has grown
dramatically as faculty have recognized the power of such work both as a pedagogical
approach that enhances students’ engagement in learning and as a strategy to increase
their own research productivity and the development of students as scholars. At the
University of Washington (UW), undergraduate research has also emerged as an innovative practice that allows for a more personalized education for students who tackle authentic scholarly
investigations closely guided by faculty who share their interests, efectively complementing the
classroom experience at a large university.
While we are able to observe the positive efect that participation in scholarly work has on
individual students, and the numbers of participating students and faculty are clearly increasing,
we often ind ourselves asking more-nuanced questions about improving our practice, such as:
How can we best ensure that both faculty and students gain the most favorable outcomes from
undergraduate research? What are the most important factors in ensuring the success of mentored
research activities for students? If we have a small amount of new funding to invest in support of
undergraduate research, what is the most efective way of deploying those funds? What tools are
available to assess the learning outcomes, both short term and longer term, for student-researchers? How does the activity at our university compare to that at our peer institutions? How do we
evaluate the quality of our programs?
We see the collective experience of CUR members summarized in the new Characteristics
of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) as a rich resource for the UW as we seek to
assess and improve our practice and develop plans for new initiatives. COEUR ofers tools we can
utilize to answer many of the questions posed above, drawing on the success of undergraduate
research activities nationwide. Rather than viewing COEUR as a checklist for evaluating institutional programs, we see it as providing a set of strategies for the implementation of undergraduate
research in a wide variety of types of campuses and disciplinary contexts. COEUR summarizes
speciic information about approaches that have worked in these diferent settings, essentially
providing advice for programs both new and well-established on topics ranging from support of
faculty engagement in undergraduate research to institutionalizing undergraduate research as an
integral part of the student experience.
For institutions such as the UW, where the Undergraduate Research Program is campuswide, COEUR provides advice and evidence that we can draw upon to support our eforts at
expansion, program evaluation, assessment of student learning, faculty engagement, and increasing institutional investment in our program. Further, COEUR suggests irst steps at developing
new initiatives, as well as conirmation that in some cases our practice is in excellent alignment
with the best practices of our colleagues at other CUR universities and colleges. By placing the
characteristics of excellence that have proven efective at other institutions in the context of the
opportunities and challenges at the UW, we can reference them in grant and institutional propos44
als that extend our current work, as well as in annual reports that put our accomplishments into a
national context.
On our campus, undergraduate research is a pedagogical approach that leverages the university’s research enterprise in the service of student learning, making it a powerful strategy—some
might say a “no brainer”—for a research university to adopt. However, institutionalizing the practice of undergraduate research requires re-evaluating some of the university’s most cherished (and
conservative) institutional processes, such as the orientation, annual review, and promotion and
tenure processes for faculty. COEUR provides a series of recommendations that we may use in
conversations with our administration, department chairs, and faculty-senate colleagues to help
persuade them to adopt changes in these processes that have proven efective at other colleges and
universities and allow us to better serve our students. As we continue to transform the UW undergraduate experience through greater student participation in authentic research and scholarship,
we will draw on COEUR in many ways to assist us in changing the culture of the university to
support this goal.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
45
Advancing High-Impact Learning
Experiences
Elizabeth L. Ambos
Assistant Vice Chancellor for Research Initiatives and Partnerships
California State University
A
s an administrator within the system oice of the 23-campus California State University (CSU), one of the largest comprehensive university systems in the country, I believe
the Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) document can
be very helpful to our institution as we strive to provide high-quality learning experiences to large numbers of students. Over the last decade, various studies of the importance of highimpact educational practices to undergraduates’ success have been published, but few interest
groups or disciplines have synthesized and analyzed groups of studies to provide straightforward,
well-organized manuals of practice. The COEUR document, in contrast, is exactly the type of
document that is most needed. It presents a well-reasoned primer on undergraduate research
practice and institutionalization, without being a checklist of programmatic attributes (and it’s
worthwhile to note that undergraduate research is presented as a general concept that includes all
disciplines’ research, scholarship, and creative endeavors).
COEUR is easy to read, and it presents the topic of undergraduate research from the vantage
points of multiple stakeholder groups and various functional oices within academic institutions,
efectively providing a blueprint for creating and sustaining undergraduate research programs.
The document provides clear explanations as to why speciic core attributes of undergraduate
research programs are necessary, and how they connect to other aspects of institutional missions
and functions. Further, by connecting institutional missions and values with highly speciic recommendations and helpful hints, COEUR could be used in connection with institutional strategic
planning and with program review and accreditation activities.
Several themes throughout the COEUR document particularly resonate with the mission
and practice of institutions such as the CSU. First, the importance of the “whole institution”
commitment to undergraduate research is emphasized in COEUR. This core theme encourages
institutions to take an “ecosystem” approach to understanding all of the components of a successful institutional approach to undergraduate research, which is a vitally important concept
for large institutions, in which operations—and cultures—are too often segregated and reside in
silos. Undergraduate research is presented in the context of a range of high-impact educational
practices, and COEUR maintains that undergraduate research eforts must always connect and
support other high-impact activities. This is all to the good. It is important to foster an ethos of
collaboration and synergy with other eforts that seek to promote and sustain student achievement
within the academy. Too often, various educational approaches are operated as separate oices
within an institution and do not easily connect and support each other.
Second, COEUR emphasizes that undergraduate research should be accessible to all undergraduates, and the document presents very helpful suggestions on how to “ladder” and orchestrate
undergraduate research activities through curricular progressions, thus fostering a developmental
arc for students embarking on their undergraduate research journey. This is an important theme,
and one that is relevant to social justice concerns, particularly for institutions that are under strin46
gent iscal constraints and that have deep concerns as to whether undergraduate research can
be presented as an option for most students, rather than just for a favored few in grant-funded
programs.
Third, the COEUR document takes pains to present deliberate and well-reasoned connections between student achievement in undergraduate research and the need for extensive faculty
research and scholarly practice. This theme—which could be parsed as the belief that investment in faculty research leads to better student success—is often proclaimed. But the COEUR
document provides more-concrete reasons why faculty time for research should be protected and
fostered in teaching institutions than those found many other documents I’ve read (and written!)
over the past few years.
The authors are to be congratulated: They have done a masterful job in assembling so much
information in a compact and readable format. The COEUR document is timely and will likely
prove a durable—and well-used—addition to the canon of literature on undergraduate research.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
47
Leveraging Consorium Experise
Bill Spellman
Director
Council of Public Liberal Arts Colleges
S
ince the adoption of a new strategic plan in 2008, the twenty-six member institutions of
the Council of Public Liberal Arts Colleges (COPLAC) have identiied undergraduate
research as a priority “high impact” educational practice and a distinguishing feature of
campus life. A consortium-wide survey undertaken in the fall of 2010 found that institutional commitment to undergraduate research (Characteristic 1.1) ranks at the top of the high
impact practices recognized by the Association of American Colleges and University’s LEAP initiative. The majority of COPLAC campuses have mature undergraduate research programs in
place, including a designated oice of undergraduate research stafed by a full-time faculty member (Characteristic 2.5.1). Other, newer member institutions are at the capacity building stage
of strengthening undergraduate research opportunities and will ind the administrative support
section of the Characteristics of Excellence document a useful guide. Over the past two years our
consortium has been more intentional about leveraging its collective assets to advance undergraduate research on every campus. In its work COPLAC has endeavored to align itself with many of
the Characteristics of Excellence articulated by CUR.
As a North American consortium with institutions in twenty-four states and one Canadian
province, our small to medium-sized colleges and universities have begun to share best practices
through a dedicated undergraduate research program link on the COPLAC website and more
recently through the development of action plans to “institutionalize undergraduate research”
on every campus. The action plans, drafted at a 2011 CUR-led workshop, are made available to
all member institutions through a password protected link on the COPLAC website. Progress on
the plans is also posted periodically and a follow-up meeting of team leaders will take place in the
summer of 2012.
COPLAC’s most ambitious efort to enhance undergraduate research opportunities involves
a plan to pilot “distance mentoring” using computer mediated technology. With support from the
Teagle Foundation, the goal of the pilot project will be to expand the number and kind of undergraduate research opportunities available to students by leveraging the distributed faculty expertise of the consortium. We believe distance mentoring, both one-on-one and small group, has the
potential to open up multiple areas of disciplinary expertise that are not available to undergraduate researchers on individual COPLAC campuses. Collaboration in this area would provide our
students the range of faculty expertise more commonly associated with a large research university
and deepen the culture of institutional commitment to quality undergraduate research experiences.
Once the pilot is underway, a key part of the overall project will involve a study of the faculty
work dimensions of distance mentoring. We will begin with an inventory of current practice on
COPLAC campuses, including policies regarding startup funding for new faculty, load credit
and-or reassigned time, and the relationship between mentoring and tenure and promotion at
predominantly undergraduate public liberal arts colleges. Sharing this information will enable
member campuses to evaluate their commitment to the culture of undergraduate research in light
of CUR’s “Characteristics of Excellence” and provide an essential starting point for consortium48
wide discussion. A project steering committee composed of chief academic oicers, directors of
undergraduate research and faculty involved in the distance mentoring pilot will meet at sixmonth intervals over two years to develop a COPLAC template for best practices in the area of
administrative support for and recognition of research mentoring. This is where the Characteristics of Excellence guidelines on faculty load credit for supervising undergraduate research (2.3),
reassigned time for research related tasks (2.4), research infrastructure (3), faculty professional
development opportunities (4), and perhaps most importantly, recognition (5) will be essential to
a successful outcome.
In the area of disseminating research results, COPLAC strives to follow the best practices recommended by the Characteristics of Excellence. Member campuses in the northeast and
southeast now host annual student research conferences (7.2), and plans are underway to pilot a
mid-Atlantic regional. A decentralized, campus-based selection process is used, and disciplines
across humanities, social sciences and natural sciences are represented at every conference. In
addition to students and their faculty mentors, key administrators have been attending the regional conferences, airming institutional commitment to undergraduate research while allowing
provosts and deans to meet and plan for collaborations in other areas. COPLAC has inaugurated
a peer-reviewed electronic undergraduate research journal (7.2) and solicits student work from
across the disciplines. Since its founding in 2010, the journal has published an average of 18 papers per semester from approximately half the member campuses. Following the Characteristics
of Excellence, COPLAC hopes to expand participation to every member campus.
As liberal arts colleges in the public sector, COPLAC recognizes that each of its member institutions operate under iscal constraints that demand careful planning to achieve desired student
learning outcomes The Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research, together with
the sharing of best practices consortium-wide and collaborative eforts to disseminate outstanding
student work, helps sustain a campus culture of continuous improvement even in times of economic uncertainty.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
49
Applying COEUR Broadly:
Advancing Undergraduate
Research Across a Consorium
Simon J. M. Gray
Program Oicer
Great Lakes Colleges Association
T
he academic and developmental beneits of a good undergraduate research (UR) experience have long been recognized. With guidance and encouragement from the Council
on Undergraduate Research and other organizations, undergraduate research has moved
from a self-selected educational opportunity at a few institutions to an integral part of an
undergraduate’s experience at many colleges and universities across the U.S. (and increasingly
outside the U.S.).
Based on years of experience, CUR’s Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) provides a composite picture of what successful programs look like. Institutions
in the early stages of developing a UR program will use COEUR to understand the mix of policies, resources, and campus culture that are necessary to efectively support UR. Institutions with
an established UR program will already be familiar with these issues. This is the case among the
thirteen private liberal arts colleges of the Great Lakes Colleges Association (GLCA), where undergraduate research is well-established, particularly within the sciences.
COEUR describes an ideal, which none of our schools fully realize. Rather, our experience is
that UR programs evolve diferently, responding to such institutional inluences as administrator
and faculty buy-in, student response, curricular support, and availability of inancial and material
resources. Thus there are many possible paths and a diversity of successful models. Importantly,
we also understand that not of all our institutions have the resources necessary to pursue all of
COEUR’s best practices.
The question for the GLCA is how we can initiate conversations among colleges with diferent inancial and cultural environments that will help them be more efective with the resources
available to them. In this context, COEUR’s value to the GLCA is as a focal point for generating
conversations about UR that are clarifying and reairming, while identifying opportunities for
improvement. We would approach this by converting each section of the COEUR guide into a set
of prompts to create a UR self-study document that each campus could adapt or adopt according
to its individual needs.
This self-study could be used at the departmental, divisional, and/or institutional levels to articulate what UR means locally, to produce a shared understanding of the educational and developmental beneits of UR and how those connect to departmental and institutional goals, to discuss
how UR is “done” at the institution, including staing and curricular support, and to discuss how
UR is assessed and how that assessment is used to guide change. The responses to these questions
would provide a description of the current state of undergraduate research on each campus, which
could be used to improve or expand UR opportunities.
50
Beyond seeking improvements, it is valuable to have these conversations periodically as
thinking can drift over time with changes in faculty and staf; as programs are added, removed,
or changed; and as availability of resources changes. Such conversations would play a re-centering and a reairming role, and could uncover valuable synergies with other “high impact”
eforts.
A few examples illustrate what such a self-study might include. A natural starting point is
CUR’s deinition of undergraduate research “as an inquiry or investigation conducted by an undergraduate student that makes an original intellectual or creative contribution to the discipline”.
Relevant questions include:
•
•
•
How do our departments deine “undergraduate research”?
Is it important to have a common deinition across departments?
Are “original” and “contribution to the ield” requirements for us?
Discussion based on these questions naturally overlap with a set of questions derived from
Section 1.1 on Institutional Commitment, including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Are students and faculty aware of what the literature has to say on the learning and developmental beneits of UR?
Are we clear on how supporting undergraduate research helps achieve our institutional
mission? Where/how is that articulated?
What kinds of UR opportunities do we provide and do we know what kinds of students
take advantage of them?
What are the key challenges we face in providing UR opportunities among the student
population generally and among underrepresented students in particular? What would
we like to improve?
What are we doing now to address this or other UR-related challenges? How are these
eforts funded?
Are there challenges associated with educating in some disciplines that are unique or in
need of greater attention than others?
Is there a way of thinking about these issues that would result in a distinctly liberal arts
approach to the challenges and opportunities?
In turn, conversations about what UR looks like on each campus necessarily leads to issues in
how it is supported in terms of faculty and curricular resources. Combining portions of Section 1
on Campus Mission and Culture, Section 4 on Faculty Professional Development Opportunities,
and Section 9 on Curriculum, we might ask:
•
•
•
•
•
•
What professional development opportunities do we provide our faculty, especially to
prepare them to mentor undergraduates?
What is the relationship between faculty scholarship/research and the quality of a faculty
member’s teaching and his or her ability to mentor UR?
How do we review or evaluate the quality of faculty mentoring?
How does the institutional reward structure credit professional development, scholarly
activity, and research? How are eforts to improve pedagogy, including incorporating research-based methods into courses rewarded?
What skills do students need to participate in UR? How do these difer by discipline?
Where in the curriculum do students develop these skills?
Assessment is an essential component that can serve as both catalyst and glue for these conversations, requiring clariication of the reasons UR is supported and asking how well it is actually
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
51
done, leading to suggestions for improvements. Thus from Section 11 on Assessment Activities,
we should ask:
•
•
•
•
Do we have clearly stated learning objectives for UR experiences?
How do we assess UR experiences?
How do we make use of the data we collect?
What does this data tell us about the preparation our students receive?
The GLCA has been very successful in bringing together communities of interest to discuss
and act on areas of mutual beneit. In fall 2010, GLCA program oicers visited each GLCA campus to lead a discussion about the challenges to undergraduate STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education (using some of the prompts above). This was followed by
a meeting of STEM faculty from across the consortium to share their experiences and suggestions
for dealing with these challenges. A similar efort focused on STEM undergraduate research led
to a successful proposal to host CUR’s National Science Foundation-funded Workshop Program
on Institutionalizing Undergraduate Research for Consortia. Again, what emerged from these
conversations is that while undergraduate research is highly valued and supported on each of our
campuses, there are important diferences in the programs that relect local culture, leadership,
and availability of resources, leading to a range of challenges and needs. The value of the consortium has been in bringing together faculty, administrators and assessment support to have these
conversations; the value of COEUR is in providing the framework that makes these conversations
fruitful.
52
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
COEUR’s Connecion to
Undergraduate Research at
Zayed University
Maher Khelifa
Associate Professor, Chair of Undergraduate Research Scholars Program
Zayed University, United Arab Emirates
Z
ayed University (ZU) is one of the few higher education institutions in the Arabian Gulf
region that promotes and supports undergraduate student research and scholarship. Some
of ZU’s activities align well with the Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) published by the Council on Undergraduate Research (CUR). The institution, however, still needs to address certain challenges to fully espouse the spirit of the suggested
COEUR guidelines.
Since opening in fall 1998, ZU has lent importance to undergraduate research by requiring
all graduates to produce an original research or creative capstone project. On average, ZU students
enroll in from two to four courses in their majors aimed at forging their research skills. The culture
of celebrating undergraduate research began in May 2002 when ZU graduated its irst cohort
and celebrated its First Annual Capstone Symposium. The symposium was a real showcase of
outstanding student research and creative outcomes and a recognition of undergraduates’ achievements. The symposium is now an institutional tradition staged at the end of every academic year.
In summer 2010, ZU launched a new program known as the Undergraduate Research
Scholars Program (URSP). It is an institutional efort to align ZU with the United Arab Emirates’
national strategic goal of preparing citizens for a competitive knowledge economy through the
promotion of innovation, research, and development. The program was conceived to provide undergraduate students with an opportunity for an early and sustained involvement in research. Essentially the efort aims to develop the research capacity of a select number of students who show
research potential through a carefully designed ive-semester program. The components include
classroom instruction in theoretical and applied research, lectures and seminars by experienced
researchers in various ields, research-related ield trips, work with faculty mentors as research assistants, design and completion of an original research study, and presentation of research indings
at national and international conferences. Students in the program are also encouraged to publish
their original work in undergraduate or peer-reviewed journals.
In April 2011, ZU undergraduate research scholars celebrated CUR’s Undergraduate Research Week by producing research posters and presenting exhibitions of their research work on
campus. They also produced a documentary highlighting the extent of ZU undergraduates’ understanding of research concepts and the importance of research for undergraduates. The scholars
also organized, in conjunction with faculty mentors, a successful session on the value of mentorship for acquiring research skills. In elaborating on their own experiences with their research
mentors, the students provided strong and convincing arguments for the importance of research
mentorship to undergraduates’ growth in research ability and other skills.
The institutional commitment to undergraduate research is clear from the support ZU continues to lend to its young researchers through several initiatives that cannot all be listed in this
53
brief report. However, given the youth of the university, it is not surprising that there are still areas
in need of further development and growth. In reviewing the list of guidelines in Characteristics
of Excellence in Undergraduate Research, areas in need of further development include the establishment of an undergraduate research oice to better promote undergraduate research and to
facilitate better management, support, and oversight of undergraduate research activities and developments. There is also a need for administrative support, including dedicated personnel, space,
funding, and more investment in research infrastructure, equipment, and instrumentation. Further, more investment is needed to increase the library holdings available to students and faculty.
While the institution has adequate computer capability to develop its undergraduate research
programs, it needs to purchase more statistical software licenses, such as SPSS for Macintosh, as
undergraduates increasingly seem to use and favor this platform over PCs, which the university
supports. The university also needs to purchase qualitative-analysis software licenses for faculty
and students and provide more training sessions for their use. Many international workshops are
available to train faculty and student researchers in the use of applications for qualitative research
analysis. ZU could ofer opportunities for faculty and students to attend and learn from these
hands-on workshops.
The university may also need to contemplate the possibility of ofering year-long paid sabbatical leaves for research and scholarly-related purposes for long-serving and junior faculty with
demonstrated history of research accomplishments. Beyond supporting faculty and students to
present at national, regional, and international conferences, the institution may also need to support other professional development opportunities, such as increased attendance at conferences,
workshops, short courses, and research training camps.
As described in COEUR, one way to encourage the institutionalization of undergraduate
research is through university recognition of faculty members’ work in supporting and promoting
undergraduate research, which can be done through promotion guidelines, salary reviews, and
merit pay increases. ZU may need to reconsider its current guidelines and ofer more incentives
for faculty to value and support mentorship and supervision of undergraduates’ research. The creation of an award for faculty members demonstrating exemplary performance and support for undergraduate research may contribute to increased support for undergraduate research and higher
visibility for faculty mentorship eforts.
As ZU engages in renewing its regional accreditation in the U.S., this could be a golden opportunity to re-examine whether the current curriculum is properly aligned with the university’s
desire for a research-supportive curriculum. Embedding the development of research skills as
early as possible into the curriculum may lead to the strengthening of a discovery-based education
and may help support ZU in its quest to popularize undergraduate research among its students
and establish a real undergraduate research culture in the institution.
54
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
Using COEUR at an
Australian University
Angela Brew
Professor
Macquarie University
M
y institution, Macquarie University, is a large research-intensive university in Sydney, Australia, and like many Australian universities it has established some undergraduate research programs over the last ive to eight years. Opportunities for
students to engage in research, develop research skills, and carry out independent
projects exist within many curricula, particularly at the higher levels. While there are a number of private companies that supply funding for research internships, no designated government
funds for undergraduate research exist. However, there is growing acceptance of undergraduate
research as an important contributor to student engagement across the sector, and Characteristics
of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR) can help further the spread of undergraduate
research at Macquarie.
Campus mission and culture At Macquarie there is growing commitment among both faculty members and administrators to providing high-quality research experiences to students. The
Academic Plan 2010-2014 aims to enhance understanding of current practice in equipping students with research skills and critical thinking through exposure to research problems and realistic
environments. Faculty are expected to be active scholars as well as teachers, but there is still work
to be done to explore how best to incorporate undergraduate research into teaching and research.
COEUR is helpful in specifying components of this work.
Administrative support In 2011, an internal Teaching and Learning Priority Grant was
awarded to develop undergraduates’ awareness of, and engagement in, research. This funding
supported investigations of existing practice and implementation of a range of professional development strategies for faculty. A university-wide working group consisting of departmental representatives was established to develop understanding and practice, but thus far administrators have
not yet grappled with the full implications of the administrative support needed for an extensive
undergraduate research program. COEUR provides convincing evidence regarding the support
needed, and discussion of this in the working group should be helpful in developing understanding of what is required.
Research infrastructure
Macquarie aspires to have the highest possible levels of research engagement among its faculty members, and indeed seeks to establish a pervasive research culture at all academic levels.
Macquarie receives signiicant research funding, which places it as a leading research university in
Australia. There are 14 National Research Centres located at Macquarie, with a further 18 Concentrations of Research Excellence (COREs), these are existing and emerging areas of research
strength that can be demonstrated to be world class, and a further 48 university- and school-based
centres. Internal funding available to academics includes provision for research fellowships, research development grants, the Vice Chancellor’s Innovation Fellowships, and a Research Centres Scheme. In recent years new spaces for student research have been created, including new
55
science laboratories and the new university library. COEUR provides a useful checklist of the
necessary infrastructure for an efective undergraduate research program, which will be of use in
discussions of requirements for both undergraduate and graduate research students.
Faculty professional development opportuniies
Numerous opportunities exist within the Macquarie for faculty members to maintain currency and develop their own skills in research, for example through sabbaticals, research workshops, mentoring, and funds for conference attendance. Professional development at central and
departmental levels is viewed as essential if faculty are to gain the skills and knowledge necessary
to implement efectively research within the undergraduate curriculum. The internal Teaching
and Learning Priority Grant mentioned above provides a staf development program comprising
the university-wide working group; paper-based and online resources, video media, and website;
and workshops, discussions, and special events. COEUR draws attention to the importance of
including graduate students and post-docs in professional development, and this is something we
can usefully take on board.
Recogniion
COEUR recommends that faculty involvement in undergraduate research be recognized and
rewarded by the institution. Macquarie rewards excellence in teaching and in research and encourages their integration through its faculty promotions procedures. It also rewards scholarship in teaching and learning through a fund indexed to key performance indicators. In addition there is a series
of awards for outstanding contributions to student learning, excellence in teaching, and in research
supervision. These awards encourage and reward innovation and research-based learning. COEUR
helpfully suggests awards and publicity for student research, which we need to consider.
External funding
COEUR suggests that external funding is essential for the development of a successful undergraduate research environment. A number of Australian businesses and charitable organizations currently fund undergraduate research, and some research is funded from academics’ research
grants. Designated funds from Australian research councils and from government have not been
forthcoming, however. We are drawing faculty attention to existing opportunities for external funding though our website and the working group. COEUR will be helpful when lobbying at a national
level to highlight the importance of undergraduate research and its need for external funding.
Disseminaion
COEUR stresses the importance of providing opportunities for the dissemination of student
research through publication, meetings, and conferences, etc. Some students on our campus are
encouraged to present their work nationally and internationally alongside faculty, and there are
numerous opportunities for presentations of various kinds within departments. Discussions about
the possibility of mounting an Australasian undergraduate research conference have been held
with a colleague in New Zealand, but there currently is no source of funding to support this.
COEUR can usefully be featured in the newsletter Undergraduate Research News Australia,
which is produced twice yearly to alert interested faculty across the country to developments in
undergraduate research.
Student-centered issues
COEUR recommends that attention be paid to a range of issues related to student engagement, participation, and assessment. These issues also are central to our university’s mission. Its
56
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
curriculum-renewal strategy over the past ive years or so has encouraged some radical changes.
These include an emphasis on the irst-year experience, requirements for each student to engage
in a capstone course and to have a community-based learning experience, and the encouragement
of research-based learning across the curriculum. COEUR recommends establishing clear expectations of students in terms of undergraduate research, and this is something our working group
could usefully take forward.
Curriculum
COEUR recommends that the curriculum be designed to expose students to a broad range
of research skills. Many Macquarie students have opportunities within the curriculum to develop
research skills appropriate to the discipline. In addition, faculty are encouraged to consider community-based research as a way of fulilling the university’s requirement that students engage in a
“participation and community engagement” unit, and workshops have been held to encourage the
integration of research within capstones. However, practice appears to be patchy, and more could
be done to introduce students to research earlier in their degree programs. The working group has
been asked to audit units of study (subjects) to explore the extent of students’ exposure to research
within the curriculum. This will provide a baseline for measuring progress.
Summer research program
COEUR advocates the establishment of a summer research program for undergraduates.
While a number of small summer programs exist within departments, a proposal to establish a
university-wide program that gives faculty members the lexibility either to ofer scholarships to
students to engage in research on a part-time basis throughout the academic year or full-time during a vacation period has recently been shelved through lack of funds.. The groundwork has been
laid for this, and COEUR will be useful in ensuring that attention is paid to the idea when funds
become available in the future.
Assessment aciviies
Our working group is using the Theory of Change approach to assessing the efectiveness of
its work. This involves clarifying the outcomes, specifying how they will be addressed in diferent
areas and carrying out research to examine progress. To provide a baseline for measuring change,
audit strategies are determining students’ awareness of faculty research, the visibility of staf and
student research across campus, barriers to implementation, etc. COEUR provides a useful list of
evaluations that need to be carried out as we go forward, and the working group will be well placed
to ensure that these are implemented. We also need to think more about ways in which student
learning from research can be assessed.
Strategic Planning
COEUR draws attention to the need to develop a strategic plan for undergraduate research.
The establishment of the working group is the irst step in this process. The group is well placed to
draft a plan that can be forwarded to the university’s Academic Senate for its approval.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
57
The American Associaion of
Physics Teachers’ Support of
Undergraduate Research in Physics
Beth A. Cunningham
Executive Oicer
American Association of Physics Teachers
O
ne might ask how CUR’s Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
(COEUR) can be used by disciplinary societies in ways that support students, faculty,
and campus administrations. Here I outline the ways in which the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) is supporting undergraduate research in the physics
community. AAPT is a professional disciplinary membership association of scientists dedicated
to enhancing the understanding and appreciation of physics through teaching. As with any disciplinary society, AAPT’s programs and activities are shaped by its members and their needs.
Endorsing statements like COEUR on issues that afect an organization’s members is just
one step in indicating an organization’s commitment to important issues such as undergraduate
research. The Executive Board of AAPT has recognized the value of undergraduate research
in the undergraduate physics curriculum, and it recently approved a statement that “urges that
every physics and astronomy department provide its majors and potential physics majors with the
opportunities and encouragement to engage in a meaningful and appropriate undergraduate research experience.” (See http://www.aapt.org/Resources/policy/ugresearch.cfm for information
about the statement, including a rationale.)
A public statement by a disciplinary society is important, sets the standards for the profession, and creates the appropriate culture among physics faculty. However, it is the responsibility
of any disciplinary society to follow through with opportunities for members to learn how their
colleagues have successfully engaged in undergraduate research. That is, disciplinary societies
must provide a forum for discussing undergraduate research and providing guidance at the departmental level for incorporating undergraduate research into the curriculum. AAPT provides
such a forum for members to discuss undergraduate research in the curriculum through its national meetings, where physics educators and experts in physics education research present their
indings in formal sessions and participants have the opportunity to speak about their experiences
in less formal roundtables (“crackerbarrels”). CUR’s COEUR will certainly be included in future
presentations and crackerbarrels.
In addition, the AAPT tradition is to start each national meeting with a poster session for undergraduates, sponsored by the Society of Physics Students. Located next to the exhibit hall and
occurring during the opening reception, the poster session is one of the highlights of the meeting.
Finally, the national meetings allow physics educators with common interests to connect during
many informal occasions, such as breaks, meals, and in the hallways between sessions.
AAPT sponsors a number of awards relevant to undergraduate research, including the David
Halliday and Robert Resnick Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching. All of the award
recipients are model physics faculty, and most have been honored not only for their achievements
58
in teaching but also for their mentoring of undergraduate researchers. These awards provide a
public opportunity to recognize exemplars in undergraduate research, an important characteristic
of excellence noted in COEUR.
Another way that AAPT provides a venue for disseminating information about undergraduate research in physics is through its two peer-reviewed publications. the American Journal of
Physics (AJP) and The Physics Teacher (TPT). Physicists have been discussing how to involve
undergraduates in research since the early 1960’s, and many articles have been published describing the status of undergraduate research in physics departments, what works, and how to conduct
such research. A number of articles in these journals describe the development of research skills
and content knowledge for speciic projects, thus providing faculty with information necessary to
engage students in research and enabling them to be better mentors. This is particularly critical
given the competing responsibilities that faculty have for their time. COEUR can be used as a
framework for future articles on undergraduate research in physics that appear in AJP and TPT.
AAPT also sponsors studies and provides a number of resources for physics departments that
ofer advice about incorporating undergraduate research into the curriculum. One particularly
important study, “Strategic Programs for Innovations in Undergraduate Physics (SPIN-UP),” was
conducted by the National Task Force on Undergraduate Physics. It found a number of key characteristics of thriving physics departments. Physics departments that had increasing numbers of
bachelor’s degrees awarded in physics or that maintained a number of such degrees much higher
than the national average for their type of institution— that is, “thriving” programs—were found to
have a “challenging, but supportive and encouraging undergraduate program that includes a welldeveloped curriculum, advising and mentoring, an undergraduate research participation program,
and many opportunities for informal student-faculty interactions, enhanced by a strong sense of
community among the students and faculty.” The study provides a number of resources and case
studies that can be used by physics departments and university administrators to improve their
undergraduate programs. See http://www.aapt.org/Programs/projects/spinup/upload/reportsum.pdf for the complete study. The results of this study were developed into a guide for physics
departments to use in reviewing their undergraduate programs (http://www.aapt.org/Resources/
ugguidelines.cfm). Furthermore, a number of departmental reviews have been conducted using
the advice from the SPIN-UP report as a benchmark for undergraduate physics programs. AAPT
will continue to provide leadership in developing resources based on disciplinary standards for
undergraduate research in physics and will draw on the COEUR guidelines.
AAPT also provides a faculty development workshop aimed at new faculty, co-sponsored
by the American Physical Society and the American Astronomical Society, and funded by the
National Science Foundation. This workshop introduces faculty in the irst few years of a tenuretrack position to research-based pedagogies for teaching a wide range of courses. Included in the
workshop is a discussion of undergraduate research, which is focused on diferent institutional
types and led by seasoned faculty. COEUR echoes many of these discussions and can be included
in future workshops. By reaching out to new faculty, this workshop has the potential to facilitate
institutional change as these faculty members implement new teaching practices and incorporate
mentoring skills into a department’s culture.
Finally, AAPT provides a forum where a community of like-minded physics educators can
discuss issues important to enhancing the understanding and teaching of physics. AAPT’s members, many of whom are well-established experts, are critical to the development of physics education programs and projects, including those for undergraduate research. AAPT will continue to
support this community by providing the resources and platform for supporting undergraduate
research. We’ve made a commitment to do this, and it is in our mission statement.
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
59
A Model for Professional Socieies
to Use in Advancing
Undergraduate Research
Amy L. Chang
Education Director
American Society for Microbiology
T
he American Society for Microbiology (ASM) is committed to supporting research experiences for undergraduate students. About 60 percent of the society’s 38,000 members
come from colleges and universities, necessitating close partnerships between ASM and
higher education institutions and policymakers; collaborations with educators spanning
the gamut of elementary, high school, undergraduate, and postgraduate education; and programming that advances excellence in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)
education. These and other activities are sponsored by the ASM Education Board, established in
the mid-1970s to address the educational needs of the society’s members. As ASM’s director of
education, it is my privilege to work closely with the volunteers who make up the board.
ASM has a long history of supporting its members in all facets of their involvement in undergraduate research. The most pertinent programs for CUR readers include our fellowship fund,
undergraduate research fellowship, undergraduate research capstone, and annual conference for
undergraduate students. Speciically:
•
•
•
•
The ASM Fellowship Fund was established in 1993 to support students in research, education, and public policy. Each year, the fund sponsors approximately 70 students, of
whom more than half are undergraduates.
The ASM Undergraduate Research Fellowship Program supports students who conduct
summer research under the tutelage of a research adviser and then present their indings
at the society’s annual meeting.
The ASM Undergraduate Research Capstone focuses on the latter portion of the undergraduate research experience—preparing and submitting abstracts for meeting presentations, presenting research and answering questions, and networking with scientists in the
discipline.
The Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students (ABRCMS) ofers
a venue for undergraduates to develop presentation and networking skills, demonstrate
scientiic expertise, and immerse themselves in the scientiic community.
Thus ASM’s programs for students cover the entire spectrum of scientiic research, from
identifying a research question, designing a research plan, and conducting research, to presenting
indings at large scientiic meetings and networking among members of the scientiic community.
In addition, the programs support faculty advisers by providing increased research productivity
through work conducted by talented, vetted students; visibility and feedback from the scientiic
community; access to potential research collaborations; and opportunities to help mentees acquire
new knowledge and skills.
60
ASM’s success with regard to these programs airms the efectiveness of the guidelines in
CUR’s Characteristics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research (COEUR). COEUR guidelines
describe best practices that anyone committed to sustaining and enhancing undergraduate research will want to consult before implementing new strategies or evaluating existing initiatives
relative to the ield. Although ASM did not have a go-to publication like COEUR during the planning phases for the projects outlined above, we have implemented many of its practices, e.g., providing students with summer research programs, ofering professional development opportunities
to students and faculty, and making available means for recognition, external funding, or venues
to disseminate research indings.
COEUR guidelines will afect how ASM conducts its programs in the future. First, ASM
can encourage members to adopt the guidelines as standards of performance and measures of
quality for undergraduate programs. Second, ASM can be more explicit about the ways its programs currently align with COEUR standards and follow its guidelines. Third, ASM can measure
its programs against the guidelines as an additional benchmark for self-evaluation and a source of
recommendations for program improvement.
By disseminating the guidelines put forth by COEUR, helping our members adopt its standards, and assisting members in adhering to best practices, ASM and other disciplinary societies
can help CUR standardize practices and establish a new benchmark for undergraduate research
across higher education. In turn, we all will become models of excellence in scientiic research,
carving a pathway for the future.
For more information about the relevant ASM programs, visit the following links:
•
•
•
ASM student programs at www.asm.org/students
The ASM Fellowship Report: A Look Back at 30 Years (1980-2010) http://www.asm.org/
images/StudentReports/comprehensive%20fellowship%20report%201980-2010.pdf
The Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students www.abrcms.org
Characterisics of Excellence in Undergraduate Research
61
Biographies
LINDA BLoCkUS, PhD is the director of the Oice of Undergraduate Research at the University
of Missouri. She directs undergraduate research programs funded by NSF, NIH, and the university itself. She served as the chair of the Undergraduate Research Program Directors Division
in CUR (2009-2011) and was a fellow at the Center for Advancing Science and Engineering
Capacity at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (2008-2009). With Joyce
Kinkead (Utah State University), Dr. Blockus is co-editing Undergraduate Research Oices and
Programs: Models and Practices, to be published by CUR in 2012.
SUSAN LARSoN joined the faculty at Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota in 1998. She
is an associate professor of psychology and in 2009 she was appointed the college’s irst director
of Undergraduate Research, Scholarship and National Fellowships. Her work as a councilor in
the Psychology Division of the Council on Undergraduate Research has helped prepare her for
this new role. Larson is currently chair of the Psychology Division of CUR and serves on CUR’s
Executive Board. Larson regularly teaches Research Methods, Learning and Behavior, Drugs and
Behavior, and Senior Capstone in psychology. She is a contributing member of the women’s studies program and teaches a course on the experiences of women in science. She was instrumental
in the development of a neuroscience minor at Concordia. Larson maintains an active research
program with undergraduates as collaborators. Working with three to six students each year, her
laboratory investigates behavioral and cognitive changes associated with immune system activation. She and her collaborator were recently funded by the Lupus Foundation of Minnesota to
evaluate the behavior and gene expression of lupus prone mice.
RogER RowLETT serves as the Gordon & Dorothy Kline Professor of Chemistry at Colgate University. His research, in which undergraduate students are integral, focuses on the structural and
functional characterization of enzymes using a broad array of methods, including X-ray crystallography, stopped-low spectrophotometry isotope exchange kinetics, and site-directed mutagenesis.
In his 30 years at Colgate, Rowlett has supervised the research of over 100 undergraduates in his
laboratory, many of whom have been co-authors of peer-reviewed articles in Biochemistry, the
Journal of Biological Chemistry, and many other scientiic journals. He has been a member of the
Council of Undergraduate Research since 1984, where he has served as chemistry councilor since
2000, and chair of the Division of Chemistry and member of the Executive Board (2009-2011).
62
The Council on Undergraduate Research
734 15th Street NW, Suite 550
Washington, DC 20005
202-783-4810
cur@cur.or
www.cur.org