Problems with CUREs: When numbers don't tell the whole story

Abstract Information: Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) promise to increase equitable access to authentic research opportunities, which have been touted as an effective means of increasing retention, especially for those from underrepresented groups. Assessing CUREs often involves quantitative surveys, but we added qualitative methods, including interviews, observations, and open-ended questions, to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of nine CUREs offered in various disciplines. We found that gathering stories from CURE instructors, rather than relying on numbers alone, revealed unexpected issues with CUREs. The instructors found that developing and teaching a CURE is difficult and requires an immense amount of work and assistance. Likewise, the instructors noticed that students do not always enjoy or engage with CUREs, which often elicited uncertainty and anxiety for many students and instructors. In addition, instructors pointed out that CUREs cannot substitute for a methods course and only provided a limited research experience. One professor pointed out that graduate schools do not view letters of recommendations from CURE instructors as equivalent to those from lab mentors. Several instructors reported that it was difficult to implement all the critical elements of a CURE, with several instructors reporting dysfunctional student groups and problems working with community partners. Although CUREs are supposed to increase equitable access to research experiences, almost all the instructors reported small class sizes and said it would be hard or even impossible to include more students. In addition, reviewing the counter-narratives of student responses reveals additional problems. CUREs often result in positive student outcomes, but instructors must consider these challenges to make them a feasible and effective approach. We conclude with suggestions for improving CUREs.

Relevance Statement: Quantitative methods are often considered superior research methods (National Research Council, 2002), but this study demonstrates the importance of gathering qualitative data to more fully capture the merit and worth of a program or initiative. In addition, implementing CUREs is a trend among colleges and universities and much funding has been committed to increasing the number of CUREs. Although many articles have shown the effectiveness of CUREs, primarily using surveys, we found that interviewing CURE instructors reveals problems with CUREs as a feasible and effective means of increasing retention. We seek to demonstrate that evaluators need to be able to stand outside trends and accurately and truthfully present results with stakeholders. Finally, this research displays important issues often experienced by faculty and students with CUREs, which will hopefully enable instructors to create more effective and feasible research experiences for students. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. National Academies Press