Advertisement

News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education

Research for Undergrads, ‘Early and Often’

Improving science education is a goal that has bred a lot of different approaches, many of them cooked up at different colleges or by officials in the federal government’s funding agencies.

What if a major entity tried, instead, to influence the science education curriculum nationally?

The Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a nonprofit organization that funds biomedical research and initiatives to boost science teaching, is taking a step in that direction by introducing a national genomics course directed toward freshmen. In essence, the institute would set up a network of colleges and universities that teach from a centralized set of materials with a common goal: to encourage students to pursue research as early as possible, to immerse them in the tools of basic scientific inquiry and to allow collaborations between the network’s members.

Until now, calls for action to bolster Americans’ science aptitude and increase the number of graduates who move on to scientific research have focused on nurturing individual students, improving teacher education and collaborating with industry, among other approaches. The Hughes initiative, called the Science Education Alliance, is a more coordinated effort aimed at piquing the interest of students who might not otherwise consider science as a career, inculcating skills that can later benefit even those who don’t and supporting a network of institutions that could eventually help professors improve their methods of teaching.

“If there’s one thing that’s emerging from all the work that we do,” said Daryl E. Chubin, director of the Center for Advancing Science and Engineering Capacity at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, it’s that “an undergraduate research experience is the way to hook students into thinking about science as a career.”

Part of the idea is to place students’ research experiences as early as possible in their academic careers, in some cases before they even declare a major. While it is widely accepted that such experiences improve students’ likelihood of pursuing science, the Hughes program’s emphasis on an “earlier the better” approach is unconventional.

“You have to sort of think of undergraduate research the same way you think about voting in Chicago — early and often,” said Peter J. Bruns, the institute’s vice president for grants and science education.

But finding researchers willing to work regularly with undergraduates in the laboratory could be a problem, Chubin suggested. “The biggest hurdle here is getting faculty to entertain the possibility of having an undergraduate join their team,” he said. Some scientists tend to believe — often based on perception rather than experience — that such students aren’t serious enough about scholarship to be anything but an impediment. But after a year in the lab, Chubin says, undergraduates are often “virtually indistinguishable from the graduate students.”

While there is “clearly self-selection going on here ... the approach seems sound,” Chubin said.

The course is really a framework, said Tuajuanda C. Jordan, director of the alliance. The Hughes institute will train faculty, provide tools and support, and prepare a resource guide, allowing professors to tailor the content to their own approach. The two-semester, year-long program would ideally be integrated into an introductory biology course, she said.

Added Jordan: “We are hopeful that the experience is such that some of those kids will realize that science really is a viable option for them.”

Beginning with a pilot at the University of Pittsburgh, where the biologist Graham F. Hatfull first pioneered the approach, the course focuses on genomics, and the isolation of tiny viruses called bacteriophages. The topic wasn’t chosen randomly; the organisms were chosen for the vast number of undiscovered varieties and the relative ease of isolating them.

“There’s a very high probability that by the end of the first year as a freshman, [students will have] identified a bunch of genes that have never been discovered before,” Bruns remarked. “That’s not bad for a freshman. And I think that’ll be a bit of a hook.”

And once students have been involved in the research, both learning its methods and pioneering discoveries of their own, they can connect with students and researchers at other institutions in the alliance to collaborate and gain feedback. But not just the students: Part of the plan is for educators to improve their own methods of teaching undergraduates in the process.

“Where else can faculty from a variety of different schools work together [to create a course,] share the material, and everybody gain from it?” said Bruns.

While the initial launch is limited to the class at Pittsburgh, the alliance plans to add 12 institutions per year with a goal of 36 — or over 700 students nationwide — by 2011.

And until then, educators at the Hughes institute will commute back and forth between its headquarters in Chevy Chase, Md., and Pittsburgh to
do some field research of their own and determine “exactly what’s needed for the whole network,” Bruns explained. Eventually, the alliance’s organizers hope there will be enough colleges involved that the idea will catch on elsewhere, and possibly with other course curricula.

Andy Guess

Got something to say?


Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Advertisement

Comments

On the other hand...

This article should be read in conjunction with two recent Chronicle articles, “What Good is Undergraduate Research Anyway?” and “The Real Science Crisis: Bleak Prospects for Young Researchers.” The first discusses one of the very few efforts to assess whether the enormous amount of time and money spent on encouraging students into science makes any difference; the second discusses the job prospects and early career trajectory of PhD scientists. For historical background, see my article “The Problem of the Gifted Student: National Research Council Efforts to Encourage Undergraduate Talent in a New Era of Mass Education, 1919-1929,” in History of Higher Education Annual 2005. Trying to make students aware of science careers and get them interested in them in the face of some perceived crisis in the number and quality of scientists has been a persistent program, with apparently little effect. And of course, we’ve done just fine in science despite all the hand wringing, thank you very much.Being good at science and having the temperament or inclination for it are completely different things; even enjoying the occasional research project and valuing the methods does not mean that someone will suddenly want to spend their lives in a lab. But the real question here is whether universities should participate in attempts to channel students in one direction or another—and who bears responsibility when there are no jobs, and no career path, or no broadly useful education. Especially if, as when manufacturing moved offshore to be replaced by information as the core of innovation, we are in the midst of a shift away from laboratory science and technology as the basic innovation driver toward something as yet poorly understood, perhaps something more social, networked, and integrative or managed, that will require quite a different, less narrow education. Perhaps, like the part for a car, the science components of future innovations will be readily bought commodities on the market. One can only assume that is the case if a freshman can quickly isolate (and presumably patent for the benefit of the university)a gene.

Jane Robbins, PhD, at 9:55 am EDT on October 3, 2007

Mentoring young undergraduate students

“...finding researchers willing to work regularly with undergraduates in the laboratory could be a problem, Chubin suggested.”

At Indiana University in Bloomington, we have had very successful experiences with placing incoming freshmen into faculty labs through a structured program (IU Science, Technology and Research Scholars). The statement earlier in the article that after about a year, an undergraduate can function as a researcher at the level of a graduate student is proven time and again. Faculty mentors stay with the program for years, accepting new freshmen into their labs year after year, and proselytizing to their younger colleagues to get them to take part as well. An institutional commitment to mentoring undergraduates is key to the success of any program of this nature; the faculty members do nothing but contribute to its success and to the success of their students.

Jocelyn Bowie, Dir of Communications and Recruiting at IU College of Arts and Sciences, at 10:10 am EDT on October 3, 2007

Except for instances in which science is being done in classified programs in the service of the National Security State, I think we can anticpate drastic cuts in funding for independent research. A nation $9 trillion in debt and caught up in endless military expenditures, cannot afford expansive science programs.

There currently is no shortage of science graduates in the US, but there is and has been a shortage of applicable positions, especially positions that remunerate adequately. With ‘offshoring’ of jobs by “America’s finest” corporations, adequate remuneration is beoming more of an issue.

Actually, there is little incentive to go into science. Except for those who have the drive, interest and inclination for science, I think this fact is well appreciated among undergraduates.

Matthew Moriarty, at 10:35 am EDT on October 4, 2007

Another cautionary voice

I would like to add a dimension to the cautionary tone voiced by Drs. Robbins and Moriarty above. There is no doubt that some undergraduates can and do contribute significantly to research; but these students are a minority, even if we limit our consideration to those studying in technical fields. In his “early and often” comment, Dr. Bruns implies that access to research projects should be as widespread as the right to vote. This is wildly overoptimistic, as anyone (like myself) who has taught large classes of science or engineering undergraduates knows, or (also like myself) who has worked with 16- to 22-year-olds in research settings. The percentage of such students with the intellectual maturity to do real research as first-year college students is (I would guess) in the single digits; add the technical knowledge gained in their undergraduate education, and we might have several tens of percent by senior year.

I am not against finding and cultivating that minority; but let us keep in mind that research is a specialization. Throughout history, it has always been a relatively small percentage of the scientifically trained populace whose findings have led to the society-changing technologies that policymakers so avidly seek. Researchers endure the monotony, the frustrations, the painstaking attention to detail that research demands because they have the passion for it; and frankly, that passion is rare. But it is the broader, technically trained infrastructure of society — manufacturers, technicians, clinicians, product engineers — that brings research findings to everyday life, realizing the leverage that research promises.

I am not convinced that funneling huge numbers of undergraduates into research “early and often” is what society needs. I’d rather see more attention directed at the middle of the bell curve: more and better trained technical workers at all skill levels, and a more scientifically literate general public.

Don’t even get me started on how all the cutting-edge research in the world can’t seem to get the simplest necessities of food, health care, and education to the poor of the world. That’s another subject altogether ...

Mark R. De Guire, Ph.D., Associate Professor at Case Western Reserve University, at 4:20 pm EDT on October 5, 2007

Advertisement

 Jobs Related to Research for Undergrads, 'Early and Often'

or search for jobs directly.

Biotechnology Program Director
James Madison University

Join one of the finest regional universities in the nation. James Madison University, home to 18,000 + students, welcomes you ... see job

Research Associate
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Assistant Professor, Tenure-Track — School of Social Sciences
University of California, Irvine

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE. The Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science invites applications for a tenure-track ... see job

Assistant Professor in Civil Engineering
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Adjunct Faculty, Dept. of Biological Sciences (Part-Time)
Bridgewater State College, MA

BSC is one of the largest and most exciting centers for higher education in the commonwealth. Here in our idyllic setting, ... see job

Junior Scientist
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Bioinformatics Adjunct Faculty Pool
Howard Community College

The Business & Computers department at Howard Community College is seeking individuals to be included in a pool to hire ... see job

Lecturer — Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
Princeton University

Position Summary: The Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology has occasional need for part-time ... see job

Tenure-Track Faculty Position in the Center for Imaging Science
Rochester Institute of Technology

CIS is an interdisciplinary university research and education center offering undergraduate and masters and PhD degrees in ... see job

Microbiology, Assistant Professor
Florida Gulf Coast University

FGCU, a member of the State University System of Florida, is a comprehensive university created to address the educational ... see job