Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses
While the positive outcomes of undergraduate research experiences (UREs) have been extensively categorized, the mechanisms for those outcomes are less understood. Through lightly structured focus group interviews, we have extracted the cognitive tasks that students identify as engaging in during the...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
American Physical Society
2016-07-01
|
Series: | Physical Review Physics Education Research |
Online Access: | http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020103 |
id |
doaj-a8ea8bac0024491389be04c7e851d6e6 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a8ea8bac0024491389be04c7e851d6e62020-11-25T01:26:00ZengAmerican Physical SocietyPhysical Review Physics Education Research2469-98962016-07-0112202010310.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020103Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab coursesN. G. HolmesCarl E. WiemanWhile the positive outcomes of undergraduate research experiences (UREs) have been extensively categorized, the mechanisms for those outcomes are less understood. Through lightly structured focus group interviews, we have extracted the cognitive tasks that students identify as engaging in during their UREs. We also use their many comparative statements about their coursework, especially lab courses, to evaluate their experimental physics-related cognitive tasks in those environments. We find there are a number of cognitive tasks consistently encountered in physics UREs that are present in most experimental research. These are seldom encountered in lab or lecture courses, with some notable exceptions. Having time to reflect and fix or revise, and having a sense of autonomy, were both repeatedly cited as key enablers of the benefits of UREs. We also identify tasks encountered in actual experimental research that are not encountered in UREs. We use these findings to identify opportunities for better integration of the cognitive tasks in UREs and lab courses, as well as discussing the barriers that exist. This work responds to extensive calls for science education to better develop students’ scientific skills and practices, as well as calls to expose more students to scientific research.http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020103 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
N. G. Holmes Carl E. Wieman |
spellingShingle |
N. G. Holmes Carl E. Wieman Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses Physical Review Physics Education Research |
author_facet |
N. G. Holmes Carl E. Wieman |
author_sort |
N. G. Holmes |
title |
Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses |
title_short |
Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses |
title_full |
Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses |
title_fullStr |
Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses |
title_full_unstemmed |
Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses |
title_sort |
examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses |
publisher |
American Physical Society |
series |
Physical Review Physics Education Research |
issn |
2469-9896 |
publishDate |
2016-07-01 |
description |
While the positive outcomes of undergraduate research experiences (UREs) have been extensively categorized, the mechanisms for those outcomes are less understood. Through lightly structured focus group interviews, we have extracted the cognitive tasks that students identify as engaging in during their UREs. We also use their many comparative statements about their coursework, especially lab courses, to evaluate their experimental physics-related cognitive tasks in those environments. We find there are a number of cognitive tasks consistently encountered in physics UREs that are present in most experimental research. These are seldom encountered in lab or lecture courses, with some notable exceptions. Having time to reflect and fix or revise, and having a sense of autonomy, were both repeatedly cited as key enablers of the benefits of UREs. We also identify tasks encountered in actual experimental research that are not encountered in UREs. We use these findings to identify opportunities for better integration of the cognitive tasks in UREs and lab courses, as well as discussing the barriers that exist. This work responds to extensive calls for science education to better develop students’ scientific skills and practices, as well as calls to expose more students to scientific research. |
url |
http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020103 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT ngholmes examiningandcontrastingthecognitiveactivitiesengagedinundergraduateresearchexperiencesandlabcourses AT carlewieman examiningandcontrastingthecognitiveactivitiesengagedinundergraduateresearchexperiencesandlabcourses |
_version_ |
1715771904761004032 |