Assessment of CUREs

In this article, Velasco and colleagues (2016) adapt the Course Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM to fit the lab course environment. It would be interesting to examine whether CUREs and traditional courses can be distinguished using the LOPUS, and how teaching behaviors revealed by the LOPUS relate to student outcomes from lab courses.

This paper from Hanauer and Hatfull published in CBE - Life Sciences Education reports the development and validation of a new tool for measuring the extent to which undergraduates engage in conversation with others about their research. The tool can be used to distinguish research experiences with low and high networking designs, and could be useful in future research aimed at determine which designs relate to the other outcomes students realize from participating in research.

This paper from Corwin and colleagues published in CBE - Life Sciences Education reported the development and validation of the Laboratory Course Assessment Survey (LCAS), a measure of three laboratory course design features: collaboration, discovery and relevance, and iteration. Results from analysis of LCAS data indicate that it is useful for distinguishing between research courses and traditional lab courses.

Weston and Laursen present the results of a validity study of the Undergraduate Research Student Self-Assessment (URSSA), a survey tool for studying undergraduate research programs. To access the full text of the article published in CBE - Life Sciences Education, click here.

In this paper, Brownell and Kloser synthesize previous literature on CUREs and propose a framework for aligning the goals of CUREs with evaluation.