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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: N. G. Holmes, Carl E. Wieman
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