Comparison of KSU STEM Student Reflections on their Undergraduate Research Experiences: CUREs vs. The Apprentice Model
Disciplines
Biology | Chemistry | Computer Sciences | Engineering | Mathematics | Physics | Psychology | Statistics and Probability
Abstract (300 words maximum)
Undergraduate research (UR) is recognized as a high-impact practice that enhances student engagement, academic success, and professional preparedness (Council on Undergraduate Research, 2024). It allows students to develop essential skills, including critical thinking, problem-solving, and communication, while gaining hands-on experience in scientific inquiry (Linn et al., 2015). Numerous studies highlight the benefits of undergraduate research, but few have compared Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs), a classroom-integrated research model, with the traditional apprentice model, a traditional mentorship-based research approach. Additionally, limited research has examined students’ perceptions of their experiences in these research models. Using a qualitative, phenomenological approach, we analyzed N=850 reflections from STEM students who participated in research between Fall 2022 and Spring 2024. Data was coded using NVivo software based on four key themes: Educational Value, Connectedness Insights, Integrated Problem-Solving, and Values Growth (Kennesaw State University, n.d.). To ensure inter-rater reliability, two trained coders reviewed a subset of reflections, achieving 90% agreement. Findings reveal distinct benefits associated with each research model. Students in CUREs reported higher levels of interpersonal development and a greater ability to relate research to broader scientific objectives. In contrast, the apprentice model, which follows a traditional mentor-student structure, provided students with in-depth technical training, opportunities for independent inquiry, and stronger personal growth. Demographic analysis highlights the potential of CUREs to promote inclusivity in STEM education, as they were found to engage a higher proportion of underrepresented and first-generation students compared to the apprentice model. These findings suggest that both models play complementary roles in undergraduate education, addressing different aspects of student development.Future research will enable a longitudinal assessment of trends in UR experiences and their broader impact on student success and diversity in STEM.
Academic department under which the project should be listed
CSM - Molecular and Cellular Biology
Primary Investigator (PI) Name
Kimberly Cortes
Comparison of KSU STEM Student Reflections on their Undergraduate Research Experiences: CUREs vs. The Apprentice Model
Undergraduate research (UR) is recognized as a high-impact practice that enhances student engagement, academic success, and professional preparedness (Council on Undergraduate Research, 2024). It allows students to develop essential skills, including critical thinking, problem-solving, and communication, while gaining hands-on experience in scientific inquiry (Linn et al., 2015). Numerous studies highlight the benefits of undergraduate research, but few have compared Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs), a classroom-integrated research model, with the traditional apprentice model, a traditional mentorship-based research approach. Additionally, limited research has examined students’ perceptions of their experiences in these research models. Using a qualitative, phenomenological approach, we analyzed N=850 reflections from STEM students who participated in research between Fall 2022 and Spring 2024. Data was coded using NVivo software based on four key themes: Educational Value, Connectedness Insights, Integrated Problem-Solving, and Values Growth (Kennesaw State University, n.d.). To ensure inter-rater reliability, two trained coders reviewed a subset of reflections, achieving 90% agreement. Findings reveal distinct benefits associated with each research model. Students in CUREs reported higher levels of interpersonal development and a greater ability to relate research to broader scientific objectives. In contrast, the apprentice model, which follows a traditional mentor-student structure, provided students with in-depth technical training, opportunities for independent inquiry, and stronger personal growth. Demographic analysis highlights the potential of CUREs to promote inclusivity in STEM education, as they were found to engage a higher proportion of underrepresented and first-generation students compared to the apprentice model. These findings suggest that both models play complementary roles in undergraduate education, addressing different aspects of student development.Future research will enable a longitudinal assessment of trends in UR experiences and their broader impact on student success and diversity in STEM.