ArticleCBE life sciences education2022
External Collaboration Results in Student Learning Gains and Positive STEM Attitudes in CUREs.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- An interdisciplinary, collaborative CURE to investigate mutagen-sensitive alleles inJournal of microbiology & biology education · 2025Article
- Exploring Student Sensemaking When Engaging with Anomalous Data.CBE life sciences education · 2024Article
- Course-based undergraduate research experience impacts on student outcomes at minority-serving community colleges.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The implementation of course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) has made it possible to expose large undergraduate populations to research experiences. For these research experiences to be authentic, they should reflect the increasingly collaborative nature of research. While some CUREs have expanded, involving multiple schools across the nation, it is still unclear how a structured extramural collaboration between students and faculty from an outside institution affects student outcomes. In this study, we established three cohorts of students: 1) no-CURE, 2) single-institution CURE (CURE), and 3) external collaborative CURE (ec-CURE), and assessed academic and attitudinal outcomes. The ec-CURE differs from a regular CURE in that students work with faculty member from an external institution to refine their hypotheses and discuss their data. The sharing of ideas, data, and materials with an external faculty member allowed students to experience a level of collaboration not typically found in an undergraduate setting. Students in the ec-CURE had the greatest gains in experimental design; self-reported course benefits; scientific skills; and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) importance. Importantly this study occurred in a diverse community of STEM disciplinary faculty from 2- and 4-year institutions, illustrating that exposing students to structured external collaboration is both feasible and beneficial to student learning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.