- Students are involved in multiple scientific practices (some might refer to this as "authentic research experiences"). For example, it isn't enough just to perform the hands-on work of a scientist. When I think about a CURE, I want to involve students in the entire scientific method, from background reading and hypothesis development through conducting experiments, collecting and analyzing data, and then interpreting and sharing the data with others
- Similarly, it is critical that discovery be at the heart of the course design: practicing research scientists do not know whether a hypothesis is supported until it is tested. There is no "right answer" - and students should be exposed to that aspect of the nature of scientific exploration
- Research is often collaborative, and so should be the research projects that students develop
- The topic of the research project that students develop should matter to somebody other than the students. If students are involved in a meaningful, useful project, they might be more engaged and more wholly develop an identity as a scientist
- The project, and particularly the time allotted, should allow for iteration. Research experiments never work the first time and they build on prior findings. I see this facet also as an opportunity for supporting a growth mindset and confidence in having the identity of a scientist. It is valuable for students to understand that persistence is a useful characteristic in science, and that, like evolution, research usually comprises cycles of performance, feedback, and revision (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROgR3nK6ayk).
After attending a CURE workshop led by Erin Dolan, and after co-hosting a CURE workshop at the 2019 International C. elegans Meeting, it became clear to me that there are a few other aspects of a lab course that could build an even more effective student experience. So, let's add three more components:
- Related to discovery, student groups should also have some creative input in the design of the experiment they want to conduct. Not only is it potentially more intellectually stimulating and engaging for students to develop some autonomy, but science is also based in discovery, and your students might make some fantastic discoveries if they're not explicitly and unnecessarily* limited by the instructor.
- It helps to scaffold the process of science, and because CUREs can span a large block of time, students can benefit from having milestones established in advance, so that they can more explicitly understand the progress they're making as they move through an academic term. A future post will explore issues with how to create a course schedule while maintaining flexibility for different student groups to develop different projects that will probably have different timelines
- Finally, to complete the scientific method journey that incorporates multiple scientific practices, it would be fantastic to ensure that students are assessed as practicing research scientists are: consider not just grading lab notebooks and a lab report. Maybe the students will give oral presentations, or poster presentations, or submit journal-formatted lab reports that could be submitted to journals for consideration for publication?
* with due understanding that there will be operational limitations that must be made, e.g. by course budget, available equipment and supplies
Next, we'll explore one case study (mine) of integrating these components into a CURE. After that, we'll get to the real story: how to overcome conflicts and constraints! Like most things that are worth doing, it is really and truly difficult to create an effective CURE, and it definitely won't be as good as you'd want it the first time you run the course. Maybe the next posts will help you get a little experience (Experience: what you get after you needed it!)
No comments:
Post a Comment