Increasing access for biochemistry research in undergraduate education: The malate dehydrogenase CURE community
2022; Elsevier BV; Volume: 298; Issue: 9 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102298
ISSN1083-351X
Autores Tópico(s)Innovative Teaching Methods
ResumoIntegrating research into the classroom environment is an influential pedagogical tool to support student learning, increase retention of STEM students, and help students identify as scientists. The evolution of course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) has grown from individual faculty incorporating their research in the teaching laboratory into well-supported systems to sustain faculty engagement in CUREs. To support the growth of protein-centric biochemistry-related CUREs, we cultivated a community of enthusiastic faculty to develop and adopt malate dehydrogenase (MDH) as a CURE focal point. The MDH CURE Community has grown into a vibrant and exciting group of over 28 faculty from various institutions, including community colleges, minority-serving institutions, undergraduate institutions, and research-intensive institutions in just 4 years. This collective has also addressed important pedagogical questions on the impact of CURE collaboration and the length of the CURE experience in community colleges, undergraduate institutions, and research-intensive institutions. This work provided evidence that modular or partial-semester CUREs also support student outcomes, especially the positive impact it had on underrepresented students. We are currently focused on expanding the MDH CURE Community network by generating more teaching and research materials, creating regional hubs for local interaction and increasing mentoring capacity, and offering mentoring and professional development opportunities for new faculty adopters. Integrating research into the classroom environment is an influential pedagogical tool to support student learning, increase retention of STEM students, and help students identify as scientists. The evolution of course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) has grown from individual faculty incorporating their research in the teaching laboratory into well-supported systems to sustain faculty engagement in CUREs. To support the growth of protein-centric biochemistry-related CUREs, we cultivated a community of enthusiastic faculty to develop and adopt malate dehydrogenase (MDH) as a CURE focal point. The MDH CURE Community has grown into a vibrant and exciting group of over 28 faculty from various institutions, including community colleges, minority-serving institutions, undergraduate institutions, and research-intensive institutions in just 4 years. This collective has also addressed important pedagogical questions on the impact of CURE collaboration and the length of the CURE experience in community colleges, undergraduate institutions, and research-intensive institutions. This work provided evidence that modular or partial-semester CUREs also support student outcomes, especially the positive impact it had on underrepresented students. We are currently focused on expanding the MDH CURE Community network by generating more teaching and research materials, creating regional hubs for local interaction and increasing mentoring capacity, and offering mentoring and professional development opportunities for new faculty adopters. At a scientist's core is the innate drive to understand unknown phenomena. As graduate students and postdoctoral trainees, we have been taught to read literature, look for gaps in knowledge, construct hypotheses, and design exciting and powerful experiments to test the central premise. As faculty, we look for students to have that same passion for working "at the bench." However, reading about science is not the same as doing science. The standard drill and fill laboratory exercises where students perform standard well work experiment and fill in the worksheet no more expose students to the discovery of being a scientist than reading about being a concert pianist enables someone to become a musician. The best way to ignite that drive for discovery is to invest in undergraduates to give them this necessary experience. Traditionally this has been a small group mentored experience in the apprentice model. The undergraduate research experience significantly impacts the motivation and persistence of science students (1Lopatto D. Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2017; 6: 297-306Crossref Scopus (595) Google Scholar, 2Weaver G.C. Russell C.B. Wink D.J. Inquiry-based and research-based laboratory pedagogies in undergraduate science.Nat. Chem. Biol. 2008; 4: 577-580Crossref PubMed Scopus (197) Google Scholar, 3Seymour E. Hunter A.-B. Laursen S.L. DeAntoni T. Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: first findings from a three-year study.Sci. Educ. 2004; 88: 493-534Crossref Scopus (876) Google Scholar, 4Lopatto, D. Undergraduate Research as a High-Impact Student Experience, Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2010) Peer Rev. 12. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Undergraduate Research Experiences for STEM Students: Successes, Challenges, and Opportunities; The National Academies Press: WA, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/24622.Google Scholar, 5Auchincloss L.C. Laursen S.L. Branchaw J.L. Eagan K. Graham M. Hanauer D.I. et al.Assessment of course-based undergraduate research experiences: a meeting report.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014; 13: 29-40Crossref PubMed Scopus (555) Google Scholar) http://rescorp.org/news/2018/06/expanding-the-cure-model-course-based-undergraduate-research-experience (accessed March 11,2022). Providing students with a meaningful and engaging research experience is a high-impact practice. The experience provides an "achievement of deep learning, significant engagement gains, and positive differential impact on historically underserved student populations" (6Kuh G.D. Schneider K.G. High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them, and Why They Matter. Association of American Colleges and University, Washington, DC2008Google Scholar, 7Kuh G.D. O'Donnell K. Reed S. Ensuring Quality and Taking High-Impact Practices to Scale. Association of American Colleges and Universities, WA DC2013Google Scholar). Thus, as many students as possible should be given such a valuable research experience. The logistical strain on large or small schools to provide a research experience to all students is restricting. While research-intensive universities have a deep commitment to advancing science through research, a large student population strains their ability to provide small-group research experiences. Likewise, smaller institutions will have the same issues providing research experiences with fewer faculty and often less resources. At the same time, those institutions whose faculty have a high teaching load restrict the time and resources available to conduct research. Thus, all universities are faced with overwhelming obstacles to creating research opportunities for all students. Summer internships and other research experiences are helpful, but the capacity is limited. Further complicating accessibility is that some students need to work to financially support their families in the summer. In addition, access to research internships often occurs late in a student's college experience, reducing the impact on a student's educational trajectory. Dr Terry Woodin, longtime supporter of education reform and National Science Foundation Program Director, wrote of the importance of widely providing an undergraduate research experience and called to integrate scientific research experiences throughout the curriculum (8Woodin T. Smith D. Allen D. Transforming undergraduate biology education for all students: an action plan for the twenty-first century.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2009; 8: 271-273Crossref PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar, 9Wei C.A. Woodin T. Undergraduate research experiences in biology: alternatives to the apprenticeship model.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2011; 10: 123-131Crossref PubMed Scopus (121) Google Scholar). One of the early approaches to engage students in undergraduate teaching laboratories was inquiry-based science (10Hammerman E. Eight Essentials of Inquiry-Based Science. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA2006Google Scholar, 11Bruner J.S. The act of discovery.Harv. Educ. Rev. 1961; 31: 21-32Google Scholar). Laboratories that utilize known and predictable experimental outcomes provide students with a research-like experience in an inquiry-based laboratory but are limited in the potential impact on student outcomes and do not meet the Council on Undergraduate Research definition of undergraduate research ("A mentored investigation or creative inquiry conducted by undergraduates that seeks to make a scholarly or artistic contribution to knowledge"). Integrating actual research with an unknown experimental outcome is more difficult to achieve in a teaching environment. Inquiry-based science involves an investigative approach to teaching. Students are provided an opportunity to investigate and experiment with a problem where they do not know and are not given a correct answer. Instead of directing students to an established method where students provide a result (think standards and unknowns), instructors challenge students to decide on an experimental design based on observations and open-ended questions. Faculty members are facilitators as students make critical decisions and predictions in the design and execution of their "project." In this case, the instructor knows the assignment's answer, leaving it for the student to find the final results, emphasizing the path of learning over getting a particular value. This approach to integrating a meaningful research experience in the classroom is now labeled a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE). Several extensive reviews of biochemical-related CUREs describe the evolution and many approaches to CUREs in molecular life science (12Provost J.J. Bell J.K. Bell J.E. Development and use of CUREs in biochemistry. Biochemistry education: from theory to practice.ACS Symp. Ser. 2022; 1337 (Chpt 7): 143-171Crossref Scopus (15) Google Scholar, 13Bell J.K. Eckdahl T.T. Hecht D.A. Killion P.J. Latzer J. Mans T.L. et al.CUREs in biochemistry-where we are and where we should go.Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2017; 45: 7-12Crossref PubMed Scopus (40) Google Scholar, 14Dolan E. Weaver G.A. Guide to Course-Based Undergraduate Research. Macmillan Higher Education, New York, NY2021Google Scholar, 15Krim J.S. Cote L.E. Schwartz R.S. Stone E.M. Cleeves J.J. Barry K.J. et al.Models and impacts of science research experiences: a review of the literature of CUREs, UREs, and TREs.CBE Life Sci. Ed. 2019; 18 (No 4)PubMed Google Scholar). The need to support student retention in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) has been a long-standing concern. The National Science Foundation (NSF) reports a 33% retention rate for students in STEM undergraduate degrees, yet predicts a 20.4% increase in employment opportunities in the biological and environmental life sciences and a 12.75% increase in the physical sciences https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/diversity-in-the-stem-workforce-varies-widely-across-jobs/ (accessed March 12, 2022) (16Report of a Workshop on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce Needs for the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base; National Academies Press: WA, DC.Google Scholar). A recent study reports that employers in STEM fields expect to have 3.5 million in STEM jobs in the United States by 2025 with a predicted labor shortage in excess of 2 million workers https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/ (accessed Dec 4, 2020). The US Education Department indicates that, of those who started in a STEM degree program, only 52% earned a STEM degree. Moreover, this attrition was worse for those in community college programs, where only 30% of those starting a STEM major earned a degree in a STEM field https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/ (accessed Dec 4, 2020), https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/ (accessed March 12, 2022). Such analysis leads to a national concern about meeting the demand for trained workers in STEM https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/diversity-in-the-stem-workforce-varies-widely-across-jobs/ (accessed March 12, 2022) (17Vespa J. Armstrong D.M. Medina L. Demographic Turning Points for the United States: Population Projections for 2020 to 2060 Population Estimates and Projections Current Population Reports. U.S. Census Bureau, Suitland-Silver Hill, MD2008Google Scholar). Current estimates of undergraduate majors in the physical and life sciences are that white students make up 67 to 68%, Asian-American students represent 16 to 19%, leaving 13 to 15% from Hispanic, African-American, and all other communities (18Knutson K. Smith J. Wallert M.A. Provost J.J. Bringing the excitement and motivation of research to students; using inquiry and research-based learning in a year-long biochemistry laboratory: part I- guided inquiry-purification and characterization of a fusion protein: histidine tag, malate dehydrogenase, and green fluorescent protein.Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2010; 38: 317-323PubMed Google Scholar). The disparity between demographics and representation is even more significant in STEM employment, where Hispanics and African-Americans account for only 6% and 5%, respectively, of science and engineering occupations https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/diversity-in-the-stem-workforce-varies-widely-across-jobs/ (accessed March 12, 2022) (18Knutson K. Smith J. Wallert M.A. Provost J.J. Bringing the excitement and motivation of research to students; using inquiry and research-based learning in a year-long biochemistry laboratory: part I- guided inquiry-purification and characterization of a fusion protein: histidine tag, malate dehydrogenase, and green fluorescent protein.Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2010; 38: 317-323PubMed Google Scholar). Clearly, there is a need for initiatives that increase the retention of students in STEM fields to support the workforce's needs and help these students achieve their personal goals. Broader access to undergraduate research can help to serve this purpose. In 1997, I began incorporating research into a year-long biochemistry laboratory that evolved into a formalized experience using a His-tagged GFP fusion protein with malate dehydrogenase (NSF DUE 0088654 and DUE 0511629, 23, 24). The first semester was more traditional, easing into an inquiry where students were guided to make their expression, purification, and characterization choices. In the second semester, students used these skills to fully experience a research-like environment. Students were given a list of wildtype and mutant His-tagged malate dehydrogenase clones, guided through a series of bioinformatics and structural biochemistry workshops, and then asked to generate a testable hypothesis using MDH. For the remainder of the semester, student groups designed and worked on their research project. Assessment of traditional learning objectives showed that students certainly learned traditional laboratory skills. What was critical is that the course had a high retention rate (98% over 3 years) of primarily first-generation and low-income students. In addition, assessment of students' interest and future plans helped motivate the students to become a scientist experiencing after research in the classroom versus those in the control group who experienced traditional laboratories (19Knutson K. Smith J. Nichols P. Wallert M.A. Provost J.J. Bringing the excitement and motivation of research to students; using inquiry and research-based learning in a year-long biochemistry laboratory : part II research-based laboratory-a semester-long research approach using malate dehydrogenase as a research model.Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2010; 38: 324-329PubMed Google Scholar). When assessing students' confidence and scientific interest before the course, there was a significant difference in students who had already experienced some level of mentored undergraduate research. However, after a semester of guided inquiry and the second semester of mentored research, this gap significantly decreased (20Eagan Jr., M.K. Hurtado S. Chang M. Garcia G.A. Herrera F.A. Garibay J.C. Making a difference in science education: the impact of undergraduate research programs.Am. Educ. Res. J. 2013; 50: 683-713Crossref PubMed Scopus (304) Google Scholar). Using several assessment tools, students' critical thinking skills were found to have increased over those who did not perform research. Students who continued a traditional research experience were primed and ready to dive deep into the literature, plan experiments, and analyze their data (19Knutson K. Smith J. Nichols P. Wallert M.A. Provost J.J. Bringing the excitement and motivation of research to students; using inquiry and research-based learning in a year-long biochemistry laboratory : part II research-based laboratory-a semester-long research approach using malate dehydrogenase as a research model.Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2010; 38: 324-329PubMed Google Scholar, 20Eagan Jr., M.K. Hurtado S. Chang M. Garcia G.A. Herrera F.A. Garibay J.C. Making a difference in science education: the impact of undergraduate research programs.Am. Educ. Res. J. 2013; 50: 683-713Crossref PubMed Scopus (304) Google Scholar). Anecdotally, teaching a laboratory in this manner was a richer experience, more similar to that of a research laboratory filled with interested students. Overall, the benefits to students were measurable and importantly accessible to any student in a biochemistry major. Several influential faculty, including Drs Erin Dolan, Graham Hatfull, Sarah Elgin, David Lopatto, Sara Brownell, Kim Tanner, and Ellis Bell, have championed the formal integration of research into the classroom environment. Driven to increase access to a critical research experience, faculty have evolved from teaching in an inquiry mode (a project-based course where the outcome is known by the instructor but not the student) to one providing students with a more realistic research opportunity through a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience. The simplest definition of a CURE is integrating research into a course where neither the instructor nor the students know the outcome. Essentially, a CURE creates the excitement of conducting research in a classroom laboratory setting. The critical components of a CURE have evolved in its definition over time: from communication, reading literature, and ownership (21Lopatto D. Undergraduate research as a catalyst for liberal learning.Peer Rev. 2006; 8: 22-25Google Scholar) to design, logistics, motivation and student support (22Lopatto D. Science in Solution: The Impact of Undergraduate Research on Student Learning. Research Corp, Tucson, AZ2009Google Scholar, 23Harrison M. Dunbar D. Ratmansky L. Boyd K. Lopatto D. Classroom-based science research at the introductory level: Changes in career choices and attitude.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2011; 10: 279-286Crossref PubMed Scopus (165) Google Scholar) and now, engaging students; the generation of novel information of significant relevance to students; an engaging in reflection (22Lopatto D. Science in Solution: The Impact of Undergraduate Research on Student Learning. Research Corp, Tucson, AZ2009Google Scholar) and even collaboration; longitudinal focus on one set of questions over the course; and presentations (24Myers M.J. Burgess A.B. Burgess, Inquiry-based laboratory course improves students' ability to design experiments and interpret data.Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2003; 27: 26-33Crossref PubMed Scopus (58) Google Scholar). An early publication by the Dolan group defining the important components of a CURE has been broadly adopted in the biochemistry, molecular biology, and molecular life science community (25Sadler TD B.S. McKinney L. Ponjuan L learning science through research apprenticeships: a critical review of the literature.J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2010; 47: 235-256Google Scholar). The current defining characteristics of a CURE include five key dimensions that form both design features and support the framework for a logic model to measure the mechanism of effective learning and outcomes of a CURE (25Sadler TD B.S. McKinney L. Ponjuan L learning science through research apprenticeships: a critical review of the literature.J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2010; 47: 235-256Google Scholar). These features include the use of science practices (designing experiments, hypothesis creation, analyzing data), discovery (research project that is unknown with ownership of student and instructor), relevance (something that is unknown and is essential to a broader audience), collaboration (both in and outside of the classroom), and iteration (students are allowed to fail and repeat experiments). While the description has changed over time, the pedagogical implementation, the impact of CUREs, and the causal mechanism of learning (establishing the process in which a variable/dimension that gives rise to student learning and outcomes) are still being intensely studied. Implementation of a CURE requires creative and, at times, intensive work. Thus, it is natural to ask why change from a well-established and functional teaching laboratory manual to the unknown of a research project. The simple reason is to increase retention in STEM students as the research experience is expanded beyond the apprentice mode. This creates something exciting and engaging for the students, and in the classroom creates the very reason we have become scientists—an opportunity to do research. The impact of research on student learning reconstitutes in-part the experience of working in a mentored research laboratory as an apprentice, now defined as an undergraduate research experience (URE). The influence on undergraduates involved in UREs has been studied with the most significant impact on student's motivation and persistence (15Krim J.S. Cote L.E. Schwartz R.S. Stone E.M. Cleeves J.J. Barry K.J. et al.Models and impacts of science research experiences: a review of the literature of CUREs, UREs, and TREs.CBE Life Sci. Ed. 2019; 18 (No 4)PubMed Google Scholar, 26Cooper K.M. Gin L.E. Akeeh B. Clark C.E. Hunter J.S. Roderick T.B. et al.Factors that predict life sciences student persitence in undergraduate research experiences.PLoS One. 2019; 14e0220186Crossref Scopus (45) Google Scholar, 27Peteroy-Kelly M.A. Marcello M.R. Crispo E. Buraei Z. Strahs D. Isaacson M. et al.Participation in a year-long CURE embedded into major core genetics and cellular and molecular biology laboratory courses results in gains in foundational biological concepts and experimental design skills by novice undergraduate researchers.J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. 2017; 18: 1-26Crossref Google Scholar) http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_177288.pdf (Accessed March 12, 2022). The benefits of integrating research for undergraduates into courses were similar to those seen with UREs (15Krim J.S. Cote L.E. Schwartz R.S. Stone E.M. Cleeves J.J. Barry K.J. et al.Models and impacts of science research experiences: a review of the literature of CUREs, UREs, and TREs.CBE Life Sci. Ed. 2019; 18 (No 4)PubMed Google Scholar) http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_177288.pdf (Accessed March 12, 2022). More specifically, the involvement of undergraduates in research promotes how students think and act as scientists, bolsters their feelings of belonging, and improves their confidence in being a scientist (1Lopatto D. Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2017; 6: 297-306Crossref Scopus (595) Google Scholar, 2Weaver G.C. Russell C.B. Wink D.J. Inquiry-based and research-based laboratory pedagogies in undergraduate science.Nat. Chem. Biol. 2008; 4: 577-580Crossref PubMed Scopus (197) Google Scholar, 3Seymour E. Hunter A.-B. Laursen S.L. DeAntoni T. Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: first findings from a three-year study.Sci. Educ. 2004; 88: 493-534Crossref Scopus (876) Google Scholar). A longitudinal study of over 2000 students as freshmen and again as seniors show that students involved in a URE are more likely to plan to pursue graduate or professional degrees in STEM by 14 to 17% (27Peteroy-Kelly M.A. Marcello M.R. Crispo E. Buraei Z. Strahs D. Isaacson M. et al.Participation in a year-long CURE embedded into major core genetics and cellular and molecular biology laboratory courses results in gains in foundational biological concepts and experimental design skills by novice undergraduate researchers.J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. 2017; 18: 1-26Crossref Google Scholar). Another reason for using a CURE is that the students learn what we hope they learn about the practice of science. CUREs help a student realize an increased interest in, and motivation for, continued work in science and also an increase in cognitive gains, especially for learning the scientific process (28Jordan T.C. Burnett S.H. Carson S. Caruso S.M. Clase K. DeJong R.J. et al.A broadly implementable research course in phage discovery and genomics for first-year undergraduate students.MBio. 2014; 5e01051–13Crossref PubMed Scopus (329) Google Scholar, 29Shaffer C.D. Alvarez C.J. Bednarski A.E. Dunbar D. Goodman A.L. Reinke C. et al.A course-based research experience: how benefits change with increased investment in instructional time.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014; 13: 111-130Crossref PubMed Scopus (118) Google Scholar). While more work is being done to understand the causal mechanism for CURE and URE outcomes, the investment in creating a CURE has a positive impact on students. There are barriers to creating and implementing a CURE. Several studies point to concerns about the time and effort required to create a new CURE laboratory (29Shaffer C.D. Alvarez C.J. Bednarski A.E. Dunbar D. Goodman A.L. Reinke C. et al.A course-based research experience: how benefits change with increased investment in instructional time.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014; 13: 111-130Crossref PubMed Scopus (118) Google Scholar, 30Lopatto D. Hauser C. Jones C.J. Paetkau D. Chandrasekaran V. Dunbar D. et al.A central support system can facilitate implementation and sustainability of a Classroom-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) in Genomics.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014; 13: 711-723Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar, 31Spell R.M. Guinan J.A. Miller K.R. Beck C.W. Redefining authentic research experiences in introductory biology laboratories and barriers to their implementation.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014; 13: 102-110Crossref PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar, 32Brownell S.E. Tanner K.D. Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: lack of training, time, incentives, and tensions with professional identity?.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2012; 11: 339-346Crossref PubMed Scopus (415) Google Scholar). Others are concerned about the push-back from entrenched faculty and institutions that are slow to adopt change. Students are initially concerned about the level of work, and the uncertainty of an unknown result and complaints can be damaging if faculty are not supported. One way to overcome the effect of single faculty creating and sustaining a CURE is to shift from operating as an individual to becoming part of a mentored and supported community. Larger projects, like SEA-PHAGE and other larger CURE communities, have successfully offset these problems by providing a community to share resources, provide faculty guidance, and enhance communication between adopting instructors. As individual, stand-alone CUREs, faculty are silos working independently of others to create a sustainable collaborative project. Lopatto et al. (30Lopatto D. Hauser C. Jones C.J. Paetkau D. Chandrasekaran V. Dunbar D. et al.A central support system can facilitate implementation and sustainability of a Classroom-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) in Genomics.CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014; 13: 711-723Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar) emphasized there is a real need to create collaborative communities of faculty involved in CURE work. This community can create a sustained, long-term experience for the students and decrease the barriers to start integrating research in the teaching laboratory. A community of faculty can create a culture of collaboration to help foster the success of its members. The most successful and sustained CUREs involve a community of faculty creating, evolving, and collaborating on CUREs. There are several examples of established national-level CUREs that support their adoption at various institutions. Three of the most established programs are the HHMI funded Science Education Alliance–Phage Hunters (SEA-PHAGES; www.seaphages.org) targeting first-year life science students, The Genome Consortium for Active Teaching (GCAT; www.bio.davidson.edu/gcat), and Genomic Education Partnership (GEP; www.gep.wustl.edu). These are highly successful because of the inclusive and rich resources supporting faculty engaging in CUREs. Each has a prescribed approach and a shared scientific theme. Faculty involved in these national-level CUREs engage in training workshops, have access to shared teaching materials, and thus create a clear roadmap to readily adopt and reduce the activation barrier to starting a CURE. While the benefits to these large consortiums are many, the constant challenge such collaborative networks help solve is sustainability. Nevertheless, most CUREs are individual efforts conducted by isolated faculty. Serc.carleton has an established network to share their programs and impressively support their overall efforts (32Brownell S.E. Tanner K.D. Barriers to faculty pedagogical chang
Referência(s)