I am happy to have found the JMBE YouTube playlist I had forgotten about! Tonight I watched the session on “CURES increase students’ scientific self-efficacy, scientific identity, and self-assessed skills.” Grace Borlee and Carolina Mehaffy were the guests, and the session was moderated by Stanley Maloy, JMBE Editor-in-chief. Mehaffy is at Colorado State University along with Grace Borlee. They spoke about the benefits of undergraduate research: engagement, research excitement, graduate education and career progression, and reduction of the attrition gap of women and underrepresented minorities in STEM. Borlee noted that while Vision and Change emphasizes the importance of research experience, not all students can participate in a research experience. There may be financial challenges, other obligations, and awareness barriers. Borlee noted that there is a preference for the “rising star” and bias. Their study was based on a CURE: a course-based undergraduate research experience. Collaboration, discovery, scientific practices, iteration, and relevance are the features of CUREs. Mehaffy spoke about their theoretical framework used in their study. They used the tripartite integration model of social influence (TIMSI). The three constructs of this framework are self-efficacy (rule orientation), sense of belonging (role/identity), and value orientation (internalization). Self-efficacy in this context includes students completing research, data ownership, and scientific skills. Sense of belonging aligns with scientific identity. The goals of the study were to identify if self-efficacy, science identity, and value orientation are positively impacted by participation in this CURE. The research team also wanted to evaluate skills. The CURE was an elective in microbiology and infectious disease (concentration) in a biomedical sciences program. The course was five hours per week. The research team used pre/post surveys including Estrada’s TIMSI, a questionnaire on self-reported skills, and a modified CURE survey from Lopatto. Mehaffy noted that they had five different CUREs in this study. The first one was about non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) and climate change. These bacteria are found in the environment. The number of NTM infections has increased. Students took samples from soil and water and studied their microbiomes. The second CURE was titled “discovery and exploration of microbe-microbe interactions to CURE bacterial infections.” The research project focused on biting midges and their microbiomes. Isolates were obtained and identified by MALDI-TOF. They used Nephele for 16S analysis. The third CURE was about the microbiome of the helminths of red foxes. The fourth CURE was about wastewater samples to detect pathogens by qRT or ddPCR. The fifth CURE was based on the NSF RCN Design2Data. This CURE includes site-directed mutagenesis, cloning, Sanger confirmation, protein extraction, and enzymatic activity. Students in this CURE contribute to a database managed by UC Davis to share data with other classes. Mehaffy shared pre/post data showing increased students’ science efficacy and identity scores. Interestingly, the scientific value orientation did not change, likely because students already appreciated the value of scientific research. Students also noted increased confidence in a variety of competencies. Even with a small sample size, there was an increase in self-efficacy and science identity of underrepresented students. Future studies will explore interventions to increase science-efficacy and identity from participation in a CURE, bridging CURE that unites first year CUREs offered and upper-level CUREs, and community-engaged learning. During the question and answer session, they spoke about maximizing budgets and equipment, collaborating with others, and being creative!
