Factors that predict life sciences student persistence in undergraduate research experiences

Abstract

Undergraduate research experiences (UREs) have the potential to benefit undergraduates and longer UREs have been shown to lead to greater benefits for students. However, no studies have examined what causes students to stay in or consider leaving their UREs. In this study, we examined what factors cause students to stay in their UREs, what factors cause students to consider leaving their UREs, and what factors cause students to leave their UREs. We sampled from 25 research-intensive (R1) public universities across the United States and surveyed 768 life sciences undergraduates who were currently participating in or had previously participated in a URE. Students answered closed-ended and open-ended questions about factors that they perceived influenced their persistence in UREs. We used logistic regression to explore to what extent student demographics predicted what factors influenced students to stay in or consider leaving their UREs. We applied open-coding methods to probe the student-reported reasons why students chose to stay in and leave their UREs. Fifty percent of survey respondents considered leaving their URE, and 53.1% of those students actually left their URE. Students who reported having a positive lab environment and students who indicated enjoying their everyday research tasks were more likely to not consider leaving their UREs. In contrast, students who reported a negative lab environment or that they were not gaining important knowledge or skills were more likely to leave their UREs. Further, we identified that gender, race/ethnicity, college generation status, and GPA predicted which factors influenced students’ decisions to persist in their UREs. This research provides important insight into how research mentors can create UREs that undergraduates are willing and able to participate in for as long as possible.

Early year undergraduate researchers’ reflections on the values and perceived costs of their research experience

“…Seymour and Hewitt (1997) pointed out the crucial role of motivational aspects in STEM retention, stating that losing interest and motivation to engage in STEM-related activities is the most common reason for students' decision to switch away from STEM majors. Although student gains and outcomes of undergraduate research (UR) experience have been well-discussed in the literature, systematic and empirical research to clarify the motivational factors, perceived drivers, and barriers of the processes of the research programs is limited (Adedokun, Bessenbacher, Parker, Kirkham, & Burgess, 2013;Cooper et al, 2019;Gardner, Forrester, Jeffrey, Ferzli, & Shea, 2015;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018). Mostly, evaluation and research studies regarding UR experience focus on reporting program outcomes with less emphasis have been put on exploring contextual factors (e.g., the design of the program and institutional features), sociocultural factors (e.g., socialization, mentor-student relationship), and participants' psychological factors (e.g., motivational beliefs) (Adedokun et al, 2013;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018).…”

“…Much of the literature on STEM persistence, using either concurrent or retrospective reports indicated that students in STEM majors listed interest and enjoyment as the primary reasons for their persistence in STEMrelated activities (Lopatto, 2010;McGee & Keller, 2007;Meaders et al, 2020;Seymour & Hewitt, 1997;Seymour, Hunter, Laursen, & DeAntoni, 2004). For instance, students who indicate having a positive lab environment and enjoying everyday research tasks were more likely to continue their research experience (Cooper et al, 2019;Mabrouk & Peters, 2000;Perez, Cromley, & Kaplan, 2014) and link the perceived value of their experience to their personal and professional gains (Mabrouk & Peters, 2000;Seymour et al, 2004;Thiry, Laursen, & Hunter, 2011). On the other hand, students who leave their UR may not value engaging in research or may perceive high costs on staying in their UR (Cooper et al, 2019;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018).…”

“…For instance, students who indicate having a positive lab environment and enjoying everyday research tasks were more likely to continue their research experience (Cooper et al, 2019;Mabrouk & Peters, 2000;Perez, Cromley, & Kaplan, 2014) and link the perceived value of their experience to their personal and professional gains (Mabrouk & Peters, 2000;Seymour et al, 2004;Thiry, Laursen, & Hunter, 2011). On the other hand, students who leave their UR may not value engaging in research or may perceive high costs on staying in their UR (Cooper et al, 2019;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018). Although engaging in UR during the first year is becoming more common (Lopatto, 2010), annual results of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE, 2018) revealed that students who engage in UR during their first year are 6%, whereas it is 26% for seniors.…”

“…Although engaging in UR during the first year is becoming more common (Lopatto, 2010), annual results of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE, 2018) revealed that students who engage in UR during their first year are 6%, whereas it is 26% for seniors. It is, therefore, no surprise that studies on UR mostly explore the research experiences of students that are later in their undergraduate years or focused on the comparison of the experiences of novice and experienced undergraduate researchers (e.g., Cooper et al, 2019;Hunter et al, 2007;Hernandez, Schultz, Estrada, Woodcock, & Chance, 2013;Maltese et al, 2017;Thiry et al, 2011). Few studies investigated the students' research experience particularly in their first and sophomore years (i.e., early year research experience) (Bowman & Holmes, 2018;Mabrouk & Peters, 2000;Provencher & Kassel, 2017).…”

Reaching a Large Urban Undergraduate Population through Microbial Ecology Course-Based Research Experiences

“…Labs include computer and bench work, with all benchwork following BSL2 Laboratory Safety Guidelines due to the presence of unknown microorganisms. Overall, CUREs improve student access to research opportunities and persistence in STEM; additionally, they incorporate outreach and interdisciplinary studies (10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16). CURE students are motivated to develop novel research questions, conduct basic microbiology lab processes, analyze and interpret data, and communicate scientific findings through written and oral presentations to their peers and the broader university community (17,18).…”