Search

Broadening access to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) professions through the provision of early-career research experiences for a wide range of demographic groups is important for the diversification of the STEM workforce. The size and diversity of the community college system make it a prime educational site for achieving this aim. However, some evidence shows that women and Black, Latinx, and Native American student groups have been hindered in STEM at the community college level. One option for enhancing persistence in STEM is to incorporate the course-based research experiences (CREs) into the curriculum as a replacement for the prevalent traditional laboratory. This can be achieved through the integration of community colleges within extant, multi-institutional CREs such as the SEA-PHAGES program. Using a propensity score-matching technique, students in a CRE and traditional laboratory were compared on a range of psychosocial variables (project ownership, self-efficacy, science identity, scientific community values, and networking). Results revealed higher ratings for women and persons excluded because of their ethnicity or race (PEERs) in the SEA-PHAGES program on important predictors of persistence such as project ownership and science identity. This suggests that the usage of CREs at community colleges could have positive effects in addressing the gender gap for women and enhance inclusiveness for PEER students in STEM.

The course-based research experience (CRE) with its documented educational benefits is increasingly being implemented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. This article reports on a study that was done over a period of 3 years to explicate the instructional processes involved in teaching an undergraduate CRE. One hundred and two instructors from the established and large multi-institutional SEA-PHAGES program were surveyed for their understanding of the aims and practices of CRE teaching. This was followed by large-scale feedback sessions with the cohort of instructors at the annual SEA Faculty Meeting and subsequently with a small focus group of expert CRE instructors. Using a qualitative content analysis approach, the survey data were analyzed for the aims of inquiry instruction and pedagogical practices used to achieve these goals. The results characterize CRE inquiry teaching as involving three instructional models: 1) being a scientist and generating data; 2) teaching procedural knowledge; and 3) fostering project ownership. Each of these models is explicated and visualized in terms of the specific pedagogical practices and their relationships. The models present a complex picture of the ways in which CRE instruction is conducted on a daily basis and can inform instructors and institutions new to CRE teaching.