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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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.

10. 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

11. 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

12. Works Cited
Briggs, Charlotte L., Joan S. Stark, and Jean Rowland-Poplawski “How Do We Know a ‘Continuous Planning’ Academic Program When We See One?” The Journal of Higher Education 74(4): doi: /jhe
Lee, Virginia S., Michael R. Hyman, and Geraldine Luginbuhl “The Concept of Readiness in the Academic Department: A Case Study of Undergraduate Education Reform.” Innovative Higher Education 32(3): doi: /s
Saltmarsh, John and Sherril Gelmon “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, Boston: Anker.
Zimbardi, Kirsten and Paula Myatt “Embedding Undergraduate Research Experiences Within the Curriculum: A Cross-Disciplinary Study of the Key Characteristics Guiding Implementation.” Studies in Higher Education 39(2): doi: /

13. Questions? Contact: Steven Jones, steven.jones@gcsu.edu 478-445-1253
Presentation available at