Building Research Into Undergraduate Curricula Georgia College & State University Moves Full STEAM Ahead Presenter: Steven Jones, Director, Center for Faculty Development

About Georgia College & State University Georgia’s Designated Public Liberal Arts University Established in 1889 as Georgia Normal and Industrial College for Women Rural, primarily residential 6,600 students 320 faculty members 37 undergraduate programs and 25 graduate programs

About Mentored Undergraduate Research and Creative Endeavors (MURACE) Office created in 2012 as part of the Center for Engaged Learning Became part of the Center for Faculty Development in 2014 One faculty coordinator with a course-release supported by Center director (me) and administrative assistant and MURACE committees Annual budget $95,000

MURACE Programming Department planning and implementation grants Travel support for students presenting at off-campus conferences Summer scholars program Two symposia per year, one for students and one for faculty Annual student research conference Hosting multi-campus undergraduate research conferences

Why a focus on departments? Departments can be drivers of institutional change and curricular reform (Saltmarsh and Gelmon, 2006; Lee, Hyman, and Luginbuhl, 2007) “Readiness” for curricular integration of UR (Lee, et al., 2007) Support a process of “continuous quality improvement” relative to curriculum planning (Briggs, Stark, and Rowland-Poplawski, 2003) Enable scaffolding of UR across department/program curriculum Incorporate multiple models of UR (Zimbardi and Myatt, 2014) Apprentice Industry project Inquiry Methods course Mixed

About the Planning and Implementation Grants Program Planning Grants (1-2 per year) $5,000 Support self-study of opportunities for UR in the curriculum, evaluation of program’s capacity for integrating UR, development of an action plan for curriculum integration Implementation Grants (1 per year) $7,500 Applicants must have received a planning grant or demonstrate capacity for implementing a curriculum integration plan Must demonstrate curriculum revisions across the entire program, not just at a single course level Must incorporate an assessment plan to measure impact of curricular changes on UR opportunities and learning outcomes associated with UR

Case Study 1: The Environmental Science Program Interdisciplinary, natural science focus Includes faculty from Biology, Chemistry, Geography, and Geosciences Received a planning grant in 2014 and an implementation grant in 2015 Planning grant: identified desired UR skills and learning outcomes, evaluated existing curriculum and mapped against desired skills and outcomes, identified curriculum gaps, researched best pedagogical practices, developed action plan and curriculum revisions Implementation grant: Made revisions to introductory and capstone courses and developed three new courses

Results from Environmental Science Successes Eighty percent of 2015 grads reported having at least one course-based URE Sixty percent of 2015 grads reported having at least one out-of-the-classroom URE, e.g., faculty-mentored independent study, summer research internship, etc. Implemented changes to the intro and capstone courses immediately Will implement new courses in Fall 2016 and Spring 2017 Challenges Students enjoyed POGIL approach in intro course, but reported frustration with open-endedness and indeterminate nature of their research projects Finding opportunities for more students to have independent research projects Balancing results from student feedback and desire for quality improvement with need to provide continuity for students—implementing too many changes too quickly is exhausting for faculty and frustrating for students

Case Study 2: Department of Theatre and Dance Received Planning Grant in 2013 and Implementation Grants in 2014 and 2015 Planning Grant focused on identifying research and creative skills needed for each program; aligning research skills with AACU student learning outcomes; identifying courses for integration of UR; developing faculty expertise in effective UR mentoring; identifying opportunities for external presentations and performances to broaden students’ experiences Implementation Grant focused on integrating UR in courses identified in planning period; assessing impact of UREs on SLOS; increasing the number of students presenting/performing at state, local, and national venues; revising coursework and mentoring approaches based on assessments.

Results from Theatre and Dance Successes Creation of an assessment rubric based on AACU VALUE rubrics All department faculty trained on using rubric Assessments based on the rubric led to course revisions which led to improved scores from 2014 to 2015 Increase in number of students making external presentations and performances Identification of cross-disciplinary research and creative projects Challenges Not all students were able to complete research requirements Cross-disciplinary projects sometimes led to student confusion and frustration due to different disciplinary norms and research methods Sustainability of supporting student travel without continuing grant funding Increase in faculty workload

Overall Results of Departmental Grant Initiative To date, six academic programs have received planning or implementation grants: Chemistry, English, Environmental Science, Mathematics, Nursing, and Theatre and Dance Results across programs have been uneven—some programs made only minor changes Overall, significant curriculum integration of UREs Scaffolded approach to developing students UR skills Opportunities for external presentations has increased student enthusiasm for UREs Anecdotal evidence of connection between students’ UREs and post-graduation career or grad school success

Works Cited Briggs, Charlotte L., Joan S. Stark, and Jean Rowland-Poplawski. 2003. “How Do We Know a ‘Continuous Planning’ Academic Program When We See One?” The Journal of Higher Education 74(4): 361-385. doi: 10.1353/jhe.2003.0028. Lee, Virginia S., Michael R. Hyman, and Geraldine Luginbuhl. 2007. “The Concept of Readiness in the Academic Department: A Case Study of Undergraduate Education Reform.” Innovative Higher Education 32(3): 3-18. doi: 10.1007/s10755-006-9032-6. Saltmarsh, John and Sherril Gelmon. 2006. “Characteristics of an Engaged Department: Design and Assessment.” In Engaging Departments: Moving Faculty Cultures from Private to Public, Individual to Collective Focus for the Common Good, edited by Kevin Kecskes, 27-44. Boston: Anker. Zimbardi, Kirsten and Paula Myatt. 2014. “Embedding Undergraduate Research Experiences Within the Curriculum: A Cross-Disciplinary Study of the Key Characteristics Guiding Implementation.” Studies in Higher Education 39(2): 233-250. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.651448.

Questions? Contact: Steven Jones, steven.jones@gcsu.edu 478-445-1253 Presentation available at http://tinyurl.com/zhtx25c