Research Experiences Yield Positive Psychosocial Outcomes for Transfer Students
Authors: Beckham Josh T. , Metola Pedro , Strong Lisa , Engelman Shelly , Rodenbusch Stacia 
Published: June 2021

Conceptual understanding of biochemistry and success in science can be challenging for transfer students when transitioning into a degree plan from another institution. These goals may be more readily achieved through a curriculum tied to research. We have begun to test this hypothesis by establishing pilot CUREs (course‐based undergraduate research experience) called the Accelerated Research Initiative (ARI) built upon the successful framework of the Freshman Research Initiative (FRI) in the College of Natural Sciences at The University of Texas at Austin. The ARI caters to upper‐division undergraduates science majors (juniors and seniors).

There have now been two iterations of these courses where about 46 students each year engage in project‐based learning in the context of research. About 30–50% are transfer students from other 4‐year institutions or from community colleges. These student‐researchers are guided by a non‐tenure track professor, several undergraduate TAs, and peers who have prior research experience. For one of the courses, the overall goal is to identify small molecule inhibitors of an enzyme from an infectious disease organism (bacterial or protozoan). Computational molecular docking software is used to make predictions about which compounds may bind. They then seek to test these in biochemical assays against the enzyme they have made through recombinant DNA cloning and protein expression. In the other course offering, students focus on the implementation of several sensing protocols using organic chemistry techniques in existing analytical devices to further their potential, as well as explore a new approach to selective molecular recognition. At the end of the first iteration of the course, an open‐ended survey was administered to gain insight into students' perceptions of the experience. Specifically, the survey assessed the contexts, activities, and outcomes cited in other CUREs (Corwin et. al. 2015), such as: content and skills, self‐efficacy, persistence in science, ownership, grit, communication, science identity, and mentoring. Preliminary findings suggest that the most frequently mentioned aspects of the ARI course that the students valued were: mentoring, sense of belonging to a larger community, increased tolerance for obstacles, and faculty interaction. A more formalized survey using empirically‐validated items with Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was also administered at the end of the second iteration of the course. This survey is part of a study involving both ARI and FRI students. The data from this instrument helps elucidate the differential perceived benefits between the upper division students of the ARI and the lower division students of the FRI. These responses may help identify which areas transfer students have shown the most growth in as a result of participating in the ARI.

Support or Funding Information

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)

This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.