Shortlidge Erin E, Bangera Gita, Brownell Sara E
School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe AZ, 85281.
WISE Institute, Bellevue College, Bellevue, WA 98007.
J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2017 May 26;18(2). doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v18i2.1260. eCollection 2017 Apr.
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) meet national recommendations for integrating research experiences into life science curricula. As such, CUREs have grown in popularity and many research studies have focused on student outcomes from CUREs. Institutional change literature highlights that understanding faculty is also key to new pedagogies succeeding. To begin to understand faculty perspectives on CUREs, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 61 faculty who teach CUREs regarding why they teach CUREs, what the outcomes are, and how they would discuss a CURE with a colleague. Using grounded theory, participant responses were coded and categorized as tangible or intangible, related to both student and faculty-centered themes. We found that intangible themes were prevalent, and that there were significant differences in the emphasis on tangible themes for faculty who have developed their own independent CUREs when compared with faculty who implement pre-developed, national CUREs. We focus our results on the similarities and differences among the perspectives of faculty who teach these two different CURE types and explore trends among all participants. The results of this work highlight the need for considering a multi-dimensional framework to understand, promote, and successfully implement CUREs.
基于课程的本科研究经历（CUREs）符合将研究经历融入生命科学课程的国家建议。因此，CUREs越来越受欢迎，许多研究都聚焦于CUREs对学生的影响。机构变革文献强调，了解教师对于新教学法的成功也至关重要。为了开始了解教师对CUREs的看法，我们对61位教授CUREs的教师进行了半结构化访谈，询问他们教授CUREs的原因、成果以及他们会如何与同事讨论CUREs。运用扎根理论，将参与者的回答编码并归类为与学生和教师为中心的主题相关的有形或无形主题。我们发现无形主题很普遍，并且与实施预先开发的全国性CUREs的教师相比，开发自己独立CUREs的教师在强调有形主题方面存在显著差异。我们将研究结果聚焦于教授这两种不同类型CUREs的教师观点之间的异同，并探索所有参与者中的趋势。这项工作的结果凸显了需要考虑一个多维框架来理解、推广和成功实施CUREs。
