Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) may be a more inclusive entry point to scientific research than independent research experiences, and the implementation of CUREs at the introductory level may therefore be a way to improve the diversity of the scientific community.

National calls for the transformation of undergraduate biology education have recommended the integration of research experiences into the undergraduate curriculum. Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have emerged as a model by which to offer research experiences to all students. Studies have demonstrated that students benefit in multiple ways from CUREs, but little is known regarding how faculty benefit. This study presents the first qualitative investigation into the perspectives of a diverse group of faculty members who have developed and taught CUREs stemming from their own research interests. The faculty participants reported a number of faculty benefits that can result from a CURE, identified a variety of challenges to implementing CUREs, and speculated about the attributes of a successful CURE instructor. Altogether, our findings could be a way to promote the widespread implementation of CUREs.

Genetic resistance in plants to root diseases is rare, and agriculture depends instead on practices such as crop rotation and soil fumigation to control these diseases. "Induced suppression" is a natural phenomenon whereby a soil due to microbiological changes converts from conducive to suppressive to a soilborne pathogen during prolonged monoculture of the susceptible host. Our studies have focused on the wheat root disease "take-all," caused by the fungus Gaeumannomyces graminis var. tritici, and the role of bacteria in the wheat rhizosphere (rhizobacteria) in a well-documented induced suppression (take-all decline) that occurs in response to the disease and continued monoculture of wheat. The results summarized herein show that antibiotic production plays a significant role in both plant defense by and ecological competence of rhizobacteria. Production of phenazine and phloroglucinol antibiotics, as examples, account for most of the natural defense provided by fluorescent Pseudomonas strains isolated from among the diversity of rhizobacteria associated with take-all decline. There appear to be at least three levels of regulation of genes for antibiotic biosynthesis: environmental sensing, global regulation that ties antibiotic production to cellular metabolism, and regulatory loci linked to genes for pathway enzymes. Plant defense by rhizobacteria producing antibiotics on roots and as cohabitants with pathogens in infected tissues is analogous to defense by the plant's production of phytoalexins, even to the extent that an enzyme of the same chalcone/stilbene synthase family used to produce phytoalexins is used to produce 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol. The defense strategy favored by selection pressure imposed on plants by soilborne pathogens may well be the ability of plants to support and respond to rhizosphere microorganisms antagonistic to these pathogens.

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) meet national recommendations for integrating research experiences into life science curricula. As such, CUREs have grown in popularity and many research studies have focused on student outcomes from CUREs. Institutional change literature highlights that understanding faculty is also key to new pedagogies succeeding. To begin to understand faculty perspectives on CUREs, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 61 faculty who teach CUREs regarding why they teach CUREs, what the outcomes are, and how they would discuss a CURE with a colleague. Using grounded theory, participant responses were coded and categorized as tangible or intangible, related to both student and faculty-centered themes. We found that intangible themes were prevalent, and that there were significant differences in the emphasis on tangible themes for faculty who have developed their own independent CUREs when compared with faculty who implement pre-developed, national CUREs. We focus our results on the similarities and differences among the perspectives of faculty who teach these two different CURE types and explore trends among all participants. The results of this work highlight the need for considering a multi-dimensional framework to understand, promote, and successfully implement CUREs.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine organized a convocation in 2015 to explore and elucidate opportunities, barriers, and realities of course-based undergraduate research experiences, known as CUREs, as a potentially integral component of undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. This paper summarizes the convocation and resulting report.

Just a decade ago Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action was released, catalyzing several initiatives to transform undergraduate life sciences education. Among these was the Partnership for Undergraduate Life Sciences Education (PULSE), a national organization commissioned to increase the adoption of Vision and Change recommendations within academic life sciences departments. PULSE activities have been designed based on the recognition that life sciences departments and faculty are embedded within institutions of higher education which, similar to other large organizations, are complex systems composed of multiple, interconnected subsystems. The organizational change research suggests that effecting large-scale changes (e.g., undergraduate STEM education transformation) may be facilitated by applying systems thinking to change efforts. In this paper we introduce the approach of systems thinking as a professional development tool to empower individual STEM faculty to effect department-level transformation. We briefly describe a professional development experience designed to increase life sciences faculty members’ understanding of systems thinking, present evidence that faculty applied a systems thinking approach to initiate department-level change, and discuss the degree to which transformation efforts were perceived to be successful. Though focused on faculty in the life sciences, our findings are broadly transferable to other efforts seeking to effect change in undergraduate STEM education.

Reviewed by Gita Bangera. Erin L. Dolan (University of Georgia) and Gabriela C. Weaver (University of Massachusetts Amherst) have set out on an ambitious venture to create a comprehensive guide to course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) in the natural sciences. Their goal is to support faculty, and to some extent administrators, who would like to develop and implement CUREs as a pedagogical tool in higher education.

No abstract