Hensel, Nancy, ed. 2024. Course-Based Undergraduate Research: Educational Equity and High-Impact Practice. Routledge.

Coleman,  Jennifer, Nancy Hensel, and William E. Campbell, eds. 2024. Undergraduate Research in Online, Virtual, and Hybrid Courses. Routledge.

---

Undergraduate research has long been recognized as a high-impact educational practice and one that offers numerous benefits for students, faculty, and institutions (Campbell 2022). In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in embedding research in curricula to enhance the scalability of this practice to reach more students. In addition to scalability, one of the  often touted benefits of integrating research into curricula is its potential to make these practices more inclusive and equitable for all students. Another advantage often mentioned with research experience embedded in coursework is that it might help identify students who will continue on in undergraduate research through more individualistic projects with faculty research mentors.

Overview of Two Key Books on Undergraduate Research

For faculty members looking to embed research in their courses, or for institutions aiming to increase undergraduate research on their campuses, two valuable books published by Routledge can offer practical guidance and inspiration. One is Course-Based Undergraduate Research: Educational Equity and High-Impact Practice (2018), edited by Nancy H. Hensel. The other is Undergraduate Research in Online, Virtual, and Hybrid Courses: Proactive Practices for Distant Students (2022), coedited by Jennifer C. Coleman, Nancy H. Hensel, and William E. Campbell. 

Both books open with chapters discussing the opportunities for students partaking in undergraduate research. In the opening chapter of Course-Based Undergraduate Research: Educational Equity and High-Impact Practice, Hensel identifies criteria for course-based research, including:

• Research is embedded into the course curriculum.
• All students engage in the research project.
• Students work collaboratively on the project.
• Research projects introduce students to the research methodology of the discipline.
• Outcomes of the research are unknown.
• Student outcomes of the research are communicated in some manner.

These criteria are helpful when thinking about planning the implementation of course-based research, but it should be noted that these criteria differ from previous work on Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CURE) which are commonly used in the sciences (Auchincloss et al. 2014). Hensel highlights the importance of course-based research in the first two years of college, as this approach has been shown to improve retention of students in STEM majors and careers. Embedding these opportunities into the curriculum is the only way to ensure an undergraduate research experience for all students.

Similarly, in Undergraduate Research in Online, Virtual, and Hybrid Courses (Coleman, Hensel, and Campbell 2022), the opening chapter discusses essential features of undergraduate research, scholarship, and creative activities (mentorship, originality, acceptability, and dissemination) along with the benefits of undergraduate research. The second chapter explains why undergraduate research is a good fit for the online education format, addressing how undergraduate research enriches and validates online education, offers strong pedagogical alignment with the needs of online learners, generates future scholars, and addresses a call to action for social justice in higher education.

Case Studies Across Disciplines: From STEM to the Humanities

Following these opening chapters, each book presents a series of case studies demonstrating how course-based undergraduate research was implemented across a wide variety of disciplines and institutions. This is of great use because there is a long history of STEM fields using CUREs to embed research; therefore, providing such examples across a wide variety of disciplines is helpful to build research experiences into courses more widely. Hensel’s (2018) book is heavily focused on STEM disciplines, while the book by Coleman, Hensel, and Campbell (2022) showcases a broader range of disciplines including humanities, social sciences, and professional schools. For a brief summary of case studies in the first book, see Table 1, and for the second book, see Table 2.

Emerging Themes in Course-Based Undergraduate Research

A couple of themes emerged from both books that should be considered when integrating course-based undergraduate research opportunities into curriculum. First, while course-based research is thought to help increase inclusivity and equity, issues around connection and belonging remain important, especially when conducted in an online or hybrid format. It’s important to explore ways to enhance these aspects to ensure that all students get the desired benefits. Second, advancements in technology—such as the digitalization of primary artifacts and increased accessibility to data sets—have significantly expanded access to research and reduced costs for doing research, given that students no longer need to travel to archives, museums, and other sites. Third, both books discuss mentoring in course-based research contexts at various points. However, it is unclear whether the interactions between the instructor and students should be considered mentoring or teaching.

The Role of Mentorship in Course-Based Research

Mentoring has been identified as central to the benefits that students realize from CUREs, and some authors have argued that students can gain similar benefits from course-based research to those gained during field-based research and other models of independent undergraduate research (Vandermaas-Peeler, Miller, and Moore 2018; Bangera and Brownell; Graves 2021). Understanding the nature of the relationships that develop during course-based research can help us know if these gains are truly comparable.

The Council for Undergraduate Research has recently changed their definition of undergraduate research to emphasize its mentoring aspect, which raises the need for course-based research to align with this updated definition. Can mentoring frameworks such as the salient practices for undergraduate research mentoring, be adapted for the classroom (Shanahan et al. 2015; Walkington et al. 2022)?

Finally, while assessment is mentioned in several chapters, how to effectively assess course-based research remains a question. Are traditional methods of classroom assessment appropriate for this? Or is there a need for creating specialized assessment tools tailored to these courses? There are some measures for traditional CUREs, but other assessment tools may need to be developed for other versions of course based undergraduate research (Lopatto et al. 2022).

Conclusion

Overall, we found these two books helpful as our institution considers formalizing and expanding course-based research across our curriculum. We recognize the potential benefits of  course-based research in enhancing our intellectual climate and helping our students gain skills that will prepare them for successful careers, no matter what they plan on pursuing.

---

References

Auchincloss, Lisa Corwin, Sandra L. Laursen, Janet L. Branchaw, Kevin Eagan, Mark Graham, David I. Hanauer, Gwendolyn Lawrie, et al. 2014. “Assessment of Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences: A Meeting Report.” CBE—Life Sciences Education 13 (1): 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-01-0004.

Bangera, Gita, and Sara E. Brownell. 2014. “Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Can Make Scientific Research More Inclusive.” CBE Life Sciences Education 13 (4): 602–6. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-06-0099.

Coleman, Jennifer G., Nancy H. Hensel, and William E. Campbell, eds. 2022. Undergraduate Research in Online, Virtual, and Hybrid Courses: Proactive Practices for Distant Students. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. https://www.routledge.com/Undergraduate-Research-in-Online-Virtual-and-Hybrid-Courses-Proactive-Practices-for-Distant-Students/Coleman-Hensel-Campbell/p/book/9781642674132.

Graves, Jonathan. 2021. “Course-Based Versus Field Undergraduate Research Experiences.” Teaching and Learning Inquiry 9 (2). https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.2.17.

Hensel, Nancy H., ed. 2018. Course-Based Undergraduate Research: Educational Equity and High-Impac. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. https://www.routledge.com/Course-Based-Undergraduate-Research-Educational-Equity-and-High-Impact-Practice/Hensel/p/book/9781620367803.

Lopatto, David, Anne G. Rosenwald, Rebecca C. Burgess, Catherine Silver Key, Melanie Van Stry, Matthew Wawersik, Justin R. DiAngelo, et al. 2022. “Student Attitudes Contribute to the Effectiveness of a Genomics CURE.” Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education 23 (2): e00208-21. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00208-21.

Shanahan, Jenny Olin, Elizabeth Ackley-Holbrook, Eric Hall, Kearsley Stewart, and Helen Walkington. 2015. “Ten Salient Practices of Undergraduate Research Mentors: A Review of the Literature.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 23 (5): 359–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2015.1126162.

Vandermaas-Peeler, Maureen, Paul C. Miller, and Jessie L. Moore, eds. 2018. Excellence in Mentoring Undergraduate Research. Washington, D.C.: Council on Undergraduate Research.

Walkington, Helen, Eric E. Hall, and Caroline J. Ketcham. 2022. “Mentoring in Undergraduate Research: The Teacher’s Role.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Undergraduate Research, edited by Harald A. Mieg, Elizabeth Ambos, Angela Brew, Dominique Galli, and Judith Lehmann, 1st ed., 133–48. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108869508.019.

How to Cite this Post

Hall, Eric, Qian Xu, and Jen Hamel. 2024. “Integrating Research into Undergraduate Courses: A Review of Two Essential Books.” Center for Engaged Learning (blog), Elon University. November 19, 2024. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/integrating-research-into-undergraduate-courses-a-review-of-two-essential-books/.