Building Back More Equitable STEM Education: Teach Science by Engaging Students in Doing Science

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is a national tragedy, one that has focused our attention on both the need to improve science education and the need to confront systemic racism in our country. We know that active learning strategies, in particular research experiences, can engage and empower STEM undergraduates, effectively closing the achievement gap for historically excluded persons. The apprenticeship model for STEM training - supervised research under a dedicated mentor - is highly effective, but out of reach for most students. Recent efforts have demonstrated that Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) can be an effective approach for making STEM research accessible for all. Our meta-analysis of CUREs finds that published examples now cover the breadth of the typical undergraduate biology curriculum. A thoughtfully designed CURE can go beyond foundational knowledge and analytical thinking to include career-related skills, e.g., teamwork and communication. Similarly, it can be designed with equity as a foundational principle, taking into account the unique contributions of all students and their varying needs. We provide here an example framework (The "Do Science Framework") for making STEM training more effective and inclusive using CUREs. While CUREs do not inherently address equity, there can be no equity in STEM education without equal access to research participation, and progress toward this goal can be achieved using CUREs. However, implementing new CUREs is not a trivial undertaking, particularly at schools with high teaching loads and little or no research infrastructure, including many community colleges. We therefore propose a National Center for Science Engagement to support this transition, building on experiences of current nationally established CUREs as well as the work of many individual faculty. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, academia has a renewed responsibility to dismantle structural inequities in education; engaging all STEM students in research can be a key step.

Auditing the impact of artificial intelligence on the ability to have a good life: using well-being measures as a tool to investigate the views of undergraduate STEM students

“…The National Science Foundation (USA) acknowledges that "scientific merit is intertwined with broader impacts" and that "educational reforms must now center inclusion and equity" Elgin et al (2021, p. 7). It is argued that the COVID-19 pandemic showed that academia has a responsibility to decrease structural inequities in education whereby one strategy could be to engage STEM students in research (Elgin et al 2021). At the same time, it is noted that problems exist in STEM education (Garibay 2015;Josa and Aguado 2021).…”

Diversifying the genomic data science research community

“…Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) bring students directly to authentic research with their peers in a classroom setting and are defined by use of scientific practices, discovery, relevant and/or important work, collaboration, and iteration ( Auchincloss et al 2014 ). Whereas government-focused programs (such as the NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates [REU] program) traditionally offer limited laboratory space to a small number of students, CUREs expose a larger group of students in tandem ( Elgin et al 2021 ). CUREs break down student financial and personal barriers and can minimize faculty members’ unconscious bias ( Bangera and Brownell 2014 ).…”

“…Though CUREs have many benefits ( Elgin et al 2021 ), UI faculty sometimes receive pushback for implementing CUREs or requesting research classroom hours within established curricula. One solution is creating a variety of CUREs with flexible length/timing (weeks or semester long) in mind.…”

“…Faculty can also consider incorporating CUREs within a senior capstone course. It is essential that faculty collectively maintain a support system for sustainable CURE implementation ( Lopatto et al 2014 ; Elgin et al 2021 ). Research faculty at R1 institutions can contribute to this support system by helping develop CUREs, making them more accessible, and/or providing “train the trainer” resources to UI faculty colleagues.…”

“…Similarly, the successful NSF REU program ( National Science Foundation 2019b ) also supports relatively few students, typically only about 10 students per site, which is orders of magnitude smaller than is necessary to give all students an opportunity. Funding programs that sponsor scalable and accessible CUREs can likely provide greater collective impact ( Elgin et al 2021 ). Philanthropies and private companies could also consider partnering with UI faculty to fund CURE modules in specific topic areas.…”