Descriptions of student-identified benefits of undergraduate research experiences are drawn from analysis of 76 first-round student interviews gathered at the end of summer 2000 at four participating liberal arts colleges (Grinnell, Harvey Mudd, Hope, and Wellesley). As part of the interview protocol, students commented on a checklist of possible benefits derived from the literature. They also added gains that were not on this list. Students were overwhelmingly positive: 91% of all statements referenced gains from their experiences. Few negative, ambivalent, or qualified assessments of their research experiences were offered. The benefits described were of seven different kinds. Expressed as percentages of all reported gains, they were personal/professional gains (28%); "thinking and working like a scientist" (28%); gains in various skills (19%); clarification/confirmation of career plans (including graduate school) (12%); enhanced career/graduate school preparation (9%); shifts in attitudes to learning and working as a researcher (4%); and other benefits (1%).

ABSTRACT:In this ethnographic study of summer undergraduate research (UR) experiences at four liberal arts colleges, where faculty and students work collaboratively on a project of mutual interest in an apprenticeship of authentic science research work, analysis of the accounts of faculty and student participants yields comparative insights into the structural elements of this form of UR program and its benefits for students. Comparison of the perspectives of faculty and their students revealed considerable agreement on the nature, range, and extent of students' UR gains. Specific student gains relating to the process of "becoming a scientist" were described and illustrated by both groups. Faculty framed these gains as part of professional socialization into the sciences. In contrast, students emphasized their personal and intellectual development, with little awareness of their socialization into professional practice. Viewing study findings through the lens of social constructivist learning theories demonstrates that the characteristics of these UR programs, how faculty practice UR in these colleges, and students' outcomes-including cognitive and personal growth and the development of a professional identity-strongly exemplify many facets of these theories, particularly, student-centered and situated learning as part of cognitive apprenticeship in a community of practice.

The reasons for the loss of high ability women from science, mathematics, and engineering undergraduate majors are not well understood. However, investigators have, consistently, found an early loss of confidence in their ability to “do science” among such women. In seeking to explain why the vulnerability of women to leaving science majors greatly exceeds that of men, the author draws upon the findings of a 3‐year, ethnographic study of factors contributing to high undergraduate attrition rates among men and women of different ethnicities on seven campuses of different type. The explanatory focus is upon the consequences of a misfit between the learned expectations of women entering college mathematics and science classes, and those of faculty and male peers, about the purpose and nature of the undergraduate experience in these majors. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

This paper describes some features in the changing landscape of activities intended to improve both quality and access in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) undergraduate education. Observations are offered from the viewpoint afforded by my work-broadly over the last 10 years-both as a researcher, and as an evaluator for projects related to the improvement of undergraduate SMET education. Over that period, I have watched the landscape change-some issues, at first prominent, have diminished in importance; some are emergent; and yet others lie on the horizon. I have also observed that actions in pursuit of various reform goals reflect a variety of theories about how change can be accomplished that are not necessarily complementary. This short history of shifts in the focus of our efforts, and in our beliefs about how they may be achieved, is offered as a framework for discussion of these nationwide endeavors and as an aid in considering next steps. SHIFTS IN THE LOCUS OF CONCERNOver the last decade, the concerns that have driven efforts to improve the quality of SMET higher education in the United States have undergone a series of shifts. The first half of this paper reviews these transitions and some of the research that has informed them.

No abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

No abstract

No abstract