Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have been described in a range of educational contexts. Although various anticipated learning outcomes (ALOs) have been proposed, processes for identifying them may not be rigorous or well documented, which can lead to inappropriate assessment and speculation about what students actually learn from CUREs. In this essay, we offer a user-friendly and rigorous approach based on evidence and an easy process to identify ALOs, namely, a five-step Process for Identifying Course-Based Undergraduate Research Abilities (PICURA), consisting of a content analysis, an open-ended survey, an interview, an alignment check, and a two-tiered Likert survey. The development of PICURA was guided by four criteria: 1) the process is iterative, 2) the overall process gives more insight than individual data sources, 3) the steps of the process allow for consensus across the data sources, and 4) the process allows for prioritization of the identified abilities. To address these criteria, we collected data from 10 participants in a multi-institutional biochemistry CURE. In this essay, we use two selected research abilities to illustrate how PICURA was used to identify and prioritize such abilities. PICURA could be applied to other CUREs in other contexts.

There is much agreement among chemical education researchers that expertise in chemistry depends in part on the ability to coordinate understanding of phenomena on three levels: macroscopic (observable), sub-microscopic (atoms, molecules, and ions) and symbolic (chemical equations, graphs, etc.). We hypothesize this “level-coordination ability” is related to the formation and use of principle-based, vs. context-bound, internal representations or schemas. Here we describe the development, initial validation, and use of a card sort task to measure the level-coordinating ability of individuals with varying degrees of preparation in chemistry. We have also developed a novel method for generating two-dimensional sorting coordinates which were used to arrange participants along a hypothetical progression of level-coordination ability. Our findings suggest the card sort task shows promise as a tool to assess level-coordination ability. With the exception of graduate students, participant groups on average progressed from sorting by level of representation toward sorting by underlying principle. Graduate students unexpectedly sorted primarily by level of representation. We use these data to form initial hypotheses about a typical process for the development of level-coordination ability and schema formation. In doing so, we demonstrate the usefulness of our task paired with sorting coordinate analysis as a tool to explore the space between novice and expert behavior. Finally, we suggest potential uses for the task as a formative assessment tool at the classroom and program levels.

Several course‐based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have been published in the literature. However, only limited attempts have been made to rigorously identify the discovery‐type research abilities that students actually develop during such experiences. Instead, there has been a greater focus on technical or procedural‐type knowledge or general CURE skills that are too comprehensive to effectively assess. Before the extent of discovery‐type learning outcomes can be established in students (termed verified learning outcomes or VLOs), it is important to rigorously identify the anticipated learning outcomes (ALOs) and to then develop student assessments that target each ALO to reveal the nature of such student learning. In this article we present a matrix of 43 ALOs, or course‐based undergraduate research abilities (CURAs), that instructors anticipate students will develop during a recently‐developed biochemistry CURE focusing on the prediction of protein function from structure. The CURAs were identified using the process for identifying course‐based undergraduate research abilities (PICURA) and classified into seven distinct themes that enabled the characterization of the CURE and a comparison to other published inventories of research competencies and CURE aspects. These themes and the CURE protocols aligning to the CURAs were used to form the ALO matrix that was, in turn, used to inform the design of an assessment that revealed evidence that a student had developed some of the targeted CURAs. Future research will focus on further assessment development that targets other identified CURAs. This approach has potential applications to other CUREs both in biochemistry and other science disciplines. © 2018 International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 46(5):478–492, 2018.

A course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) is a teaching approach aimed at developing students' ability to conduct novel research. Although students' perceptions of their learning during CUREs may not reflect actual student learning, such surveys provide a convenient and useful metric for course evaluation. Instructors can use survey findings both to improve instruction and to identify areas of student difficulty. Although various reports have presented data on student perceptions of CUREs, these have not delved deeply into students' perceived knowledge, experience, and confidence (KEC) regarding specific research abilities that instructors anticipate students will develop. This study addresses this issue by investigating changes in students' perceived KEC regarding previously identified anticipated learning outcomes (ALOs) for the biochemistry authentic scientific inquiry laboratory (BASIL) CURE. The following research questions were addressed: How do students' perceptions of KEC for specific ALOs change during a BASIL CURE course? How do student perceptions of their KEC regarding specific BASIL ALOs vary across different implementations of BASIL CURE courses? To answer these questions, a participant perception indicator (PPI) survey was used to measure students' KEC for the BASIL ALOs. Participants were students in one of 10 courses implementing the BASIL CURE at seven different academic institutions. Student pooled response data across all implementations showed significant gains in their KEC, with large effect sizes. Furthermore, differences in students' KEC were detected between course implementations. These findings will provide instructors of the BASIL CURE and potentially other CUREs with a useful framework for the focus of assessment design and the consequent identification and remediation of student difficulties related to the various research abilities or ALOs.