Student Development in Undergraduate Research Programs in China: From the Perspective of Self-Authorship

Abstract

Abstract

This qualitative study investigates college student development in the epistemological, intrapersonal, and interpersonal dimensions through participating in co-curricular undergraduate research programs. The student interview data reported in this paper comes from a larger study on college experiences and student learning. It is found that student development in the three dimensions are intertwined in undergraduate research programs, and internal voices begin to emerge in college. Despite the research- and innovation- orientation of undergraduate research programs, they serve as vehicles for students to explore answers to three driving questions in young adulthood: “How do I know?,” “Who am I?,” “How do I want to construct relationships with others?” Limitations and implications are also discussed.

Introduction

Research-based learning is an integral component of undergraduate education, and it has become an initiative for higher education reform in China. Research-intensive universities in mainland China started to implement university-wide undergraduate research programs at the end of last century. Tsinghua University launched its Student Research Training (srt) in 1996, followed by Zhejiang University (1998) and University of Science and Technology of China (1999). Meanwhile, private foundations have joined to promote research training among undergraduates in China. One of the most influential foundations is Hui-Chun Chin and Tsung-Dao Lee Chinese Undergraduate Research Endowment (cure) established by Dr. Tsung-Dao Lee in 1998. So far, it has sponsored over 2,000 undergraduates in five universities, including one in Taiwan, and gathered cure Scholars annually for academic forums.

Higher education scholars in China have published articles to introduce international experiences, theoretical frameworks and implementation practices on undergraduate research, but few empirical studies have been done that systematically investigate student learning in undergraduate research programs. This study attempts to examine student change in research programs outside the class “in their own words” through the theoretical lens of self-authorship in student holistic development.

Literature Review

The Boyer Commission report Reinventing Undergraduate Education: a Blueprint for America’s Research Universities clearly articulates the need for research-based learning as an integral component of undergraduate education. 1 In the United States, research-based learning is found not only in research universities but also liberal arts colleges. As a matter of fact, the Council on Undergraduate Research (cur) was founded in 1978 by a group of chemists from private liberal arts colleges who wanted to share information about faculty-guided undergraduate research. cur becomes a national organization that promotes undergraduate student-faculty collaborative research and scholarship, and it has grown to include all disciplines and all types of institutions. Prior studies have shown that students who are involved in undergraduate research: 1) are more likely to complete their undergraduate education, 2) are more likely to go onto and to succeed in graduate school, and 3) gain self-confidence and motivation for learning, compared with students who do not have a research experience. 2

Literature on undergraduate research by Chinese education scholars fall into three types. The first type is on the development of undergraduate research in the United States, including historical contexts, policy mechanisms, and operation modes. 3 These articles tend to inform policy making on research-based learning in Chinese undergraduate education by referring to “what others have done.” The second type consists of conceptual articles that discuss theoretical foundations of undergraduate research and propose pathways to promoting research capability among undergraduate students in China. 4 These articles respond to the question of “what we should do,” offering conceptual frameworks to guide the formulation and implementation of policies on undergraduate research in Chinese higher education institutions. Mostly written by education practitioners (e.g. in academic affairs office) from leading research universities in China, the third type of articles share institutional experiences in the implementation and effect of undergraduate research programs. 5 Responding to the question of “what we have done,” these articles are of practical significance to intercollegiate exchange.

Among the articles that share institutional experiences, a few discuss the program effect, and the outcomes of involvement in undergraduate research among Chinese students are presented in two ways. The first is to count student research outputs that can be quantified, including publications, awards, and patents generated as a result of undergraduate research. 6 The second describes student learning as reported by the program participants. For example, a study in Peking University summarized student benefits through data collected from those who participated in undergraduate research programs, and the benefits included: (1) understanding and applying research methods, (2) accumulating experience on research and innovation, (3) learning to communicate and collaborate, and (4) being inspired by the spirit and charisma of advisors. 7 A study at Shanghai Jiao Tong University surveyed participants in undergraduate research programs. Sixty-two percent of the respondents reported that involvement in research outside the class contributed to academic learning “to a great extent”; about 60% believed that it promoted student-faculty interaction and enhanced interpersonal and teamwork skills; and 58.7% reported increased research capability in library search and academic writing. 8 However, since the learning outcomes constituted a small section of the articles, the research methods were not clearly stated and data were not adequately presented to support the claims. More systematic research has to be done on the personal benefits of completing an undergraduate research project in the context of Chinese higher education, especially “in the voice” of participants themselves.

Theoretical Perspective

Baxter Magolda’s theory of self-authorship is one of the integrative theories in student holistic development. 9 The concept and term holistic development was introduced by Kegan to illustrate the interconnectivity between cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal development. 10 In her longitudinal study that has followed 30 participants for over twenty years since their first year in college, Baxter Magolda furthered Kegan’s concept of self-authorship emphasizing the intertwining of the cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal developmental dimensions. The participants in Baxter Magolda’s study demonstrated three phases of the journey toward self-authorship as they moved from externally to internally defined definitions of self: following external formulas, at a crossroads, and self-authorship. 11 A self-authored person trusts the internal voice to decide what to believe, develop identity, and manage relationships with others. Individuals in the phase of self-authorship use internal voice in the foreground to coordinate information from external influences rather than being controlled by them.

The central concerns of Baxter Magolda’s participants in their young adulthood were three questions: “How do I know?”; “Who am I?”; and “What relationships do I want?” 12 These questions illustrate the intertwining of multiple dimensions of self-authorship. “How do I know?” addresses the epistemological dimension, that is, an individual’s understanding of the nature, limitations and uncertainties of knowledge and how such understanding affects the individual’s construction of knowledge. “Who am I?” represents the intrapersonal dimension in how one thinks about his/her identity and sense of self. “What relationships do I want?” refers to the interpersonal dimension, or how one makes sense of and constructs his/her relationships with others. College students who always “follow external recipes” might successfully graduate by listening to advice from external authorities such as professors and parents, but they tend to get lost in the complex real-world life after graduation that requires individuals to develop an internal foundation to make life decisions.

Self-authorship on all three dimensions (Figure 1) reflects the integrated developmental capacities that are inherent in the cognitive, identity, and relational maturity required for college graduates to be effective workers, parents, family members, and citizens. The journey towards self-authorship is a relatively smooth process for some and a rocky one for others, depending in large part on the quality of company available for the journey. 13 In her longitudinal study, 80% of the group in their senior year of college still relied heavily on external authorities to decide what to believe, and in their thirties they are still in the process of testing their internal voices and establishing foundations to withstand the uncertainties and complexities of life. 14

figure 1

Three dimensions in self-authorship

The holistic development model, generated from interviews with Caucasian students at a Midwestern public university in the United States, has been applied to students of color and across cultures. 15 It has been introduced to Chinese readers among other integrative theories in student development, yet few studies have applied the model in research on Chinese college student development. 16

The following research question guides the study: what developmental changes Chinese college students have experienced, in the epistemological, intrapersonal and interpersonal dimensions, through participating in undergraduate research programs outside the class?

table 1

Universities included for student interviews

* Project 211 was a national higher education development project initiated in 1995 by the Ministry of Education. The project aimed at cultivating approximately 100 high-level universities in China in the 21st century.

Methodology

The data for this paper came from a larger qualitative study in which college seniors at five universities across China were interviewed in 2010.

Data

Maximal variation sampling was employed to sample research participants. Five universities were selected as the interview sites, and they varied in their geographic location, selectivity, disciplinary focus, and size (Table 1).

Students in their last year (often the fourth year) in college were recruited for interviews, through a combination of open advertisement and personal invitation. A small amount of money was offered as a token for participation. In all, forty-nine individual interviews and five focus group discussions were conducted with 64 seniors: 31 men, 33 women; 35 science or engineering majors, and 29 arts, humanities, or social science majors; all of traditional age (18-23). Regarding post-college plans, 45 wanted to work after graduation, and 19 students wanted to pursue graduate study immediately after college, among whom three had been admitted to graduate programs exempted from entrance examinations and one was applying overseas.

Even though this investigation was not structured around case studies of institutions or individuals, the institutional and student characteristics of the interview sample were presented above, for the readers to judge the transferability of the findings.

table 2

Number of interview participants in undergraduate research by university

Interviews were conducted on the campus of the participants. Individual interviews last one hour, and group interviews last about one and a half hours. Semi-structured interview protocol was used to elicit information about college experience and student learning. Activities students engaged in in college, including co-curricular research, were brought up by the interview participants, with no prompting questions or hints from the interviewer. The interviews were transcribed verbatim. Sections involving student experiences in research programs were selected for analysis, and data were coded with the theoretical perspective in mind.

Table 2 shows the number of interviewees and that of students participating in co-curricular research programs by institution. Fifteen out of all reported involvement in academic research or contests outside of class, among whom nine were male and eleven were science, engineering, or agriculture majors. University C, D, and E had a higher proportion of research program participants, compared to A (0 out of 13) and B (2 out of 12). This result is consistent with the general perception of the comprehensive strength of the five institutions. Located in cosmopolitan mega-cities on the east coast, both C and D are city-level institutions financed by the municipal governments, while E is a national Project 211 institution with funding from the central government. Among the five institutions, C, D, and E are more competitive in terms of teaching and learning resources and faculty and student recruitment.

Trustworthiness

Several means were used to enhance the trustworthiness of the study. The researcher kept logs, interview notes, and developing coding schemes for audit trail. In addition, the interview transcripts and a summary of findings were shared with interview participants for member-checking. Finally, in the peer debriefing process, I discussed with one of my colleagues whose expertise was in qualitative research on data interpretation and presentation.

Findings

The findings of the study indicate that Chinese college students involving in co-curricular research display developmental characteristics in three dimensions as described in Baxter Magolda. 17 As senior students recounted their research experiences, they were able to put it into perspective and reflect on their growth in the process. Student development in the epistemological, intrapersonal and interpersonal dimensions came to the forefront in the reflection. This section presents three stories that are representative among the 15 students involving in co-curricular research projects or contests. Because student narratives in three dimensions are intertwined in holistic development, the results are presented and analyzed as three stories in a whole, instead of separated by dimension.

Hui’s Story

Hui, a human resource management major at university C joined in an evaluation project, only for “killing time and earning pocket money” at the beginning, but it turned out to be “the most beneficial experience” in her four years in college:

It was hard when we did the evaluation for the second time, because the teacher let us do it all by ourselves. He gave us a mind map at the beginning, suggesting what we should do. Then we had to think hard on our own, and he gave us very little advice. It seemed such a trivial project, but we had so many things to consider. And problems still occurred in the implementation stage. . . . Sometimes he reminded us, sometimes he didn’t. You wasted a lot of time and energy. You were so tired. But he later told you a simple method. “Yeah, it could be done this way!” Firstly, I think this type of learning is very impressive. Second, this is a practicum process. You understand the problems only after completing the project by yourself. We were thinking very hard on a solution, before we got another solution from him. We reflected on the solutions and compared two of them, and reached our conclusions on which was superior. Without comparison, you would’ve just followed the teacher’s line of thinking. It’s his thinking but not yours. Looking back, I feel he did it on purpose. If I were a teacher, I would also prefer this advising style.

The advising style that “the teacher let us do it all by ourselves” brought challenges in the cognitive dimension to the students. Hui was propelled to think hard and create a solution, when there was no expertise opinion to fall back on. Significant input from the research advisor could have accelerated the project and made the life easy for undergraduate researchers, but it would squeeze the space for students to develop their own thinking and thus to make the transition from following external formulas. Even though Hui eventually agreed with the advisor’s solution, she did not resort to blind obedience to authority. Rather, her informed judgment made through evaluation of the context and comparison of the alternatives indicated her own knowledge construction. Meanwhile, the developmental process in the epistemological dimension was accompanied by Hui’s reevaluation of herself:

I had thought too much of myself before, yan gao shou di (with high aspirations but low abilities). But through this project I found I was not what I’d thought of myself in many, many aspects. I had always thought that I’m capable enough, but when it comes to real-world practice, I found many things unfamiliar. For example, you think the current plan is perfect, it’s quite easy to count what we need, people, pens, questionnaires, etc. But it took me three hours! And every time I went to the advisor, he asked me to “be careful and calculate again,” as it’s very easy to make mistakes. But I kept making mistakes. Actually, I was not as capable as I had thought of myself. I should start from the basic and keep learning.

Hui described herself as yan gao shou di, and this understanding came from the her repetitive mistakes in the seemingly easy project. A good companion who gave learners chances to fall and to figure out why they fell played an important role in student development. If the external authority (the research adviser) had criticized her from the very beginning, Hui might have been reluctant to internalize the criticism. Yet the advisor’s reminder that asked her to “be careful and calculate again” pushed her to constantly examine herself and adjust her understanding of self while amending the project. In addition, her critique of herself came together with an internal voice that advised her to “start from the basic and keep learning.” Through this project, Hui’s perception of college teachers and student-faculty relationship had also changed:

Before, my only interaction with teachers was in class, and at times I was absent-minded. After class, teachers are really busy and I have few chances to talk with them. But this project advisor was always available in the lab. He not only talked about this project, but shared with us many other things, like college learning, his worldviews, perception of women, and advice on career development . . . This teacher looks very serious on the platform, and he is tough and demanding. But when you chat with him, you will find him very easy-going. He expects you to challenge him and ask him questions. He is very happy to discuss with you. In fact, college teachers like us to ask questions. Before, I thought college teachers were so serious that I was scared of interacting with them, but now I find that they love to interact with students.

Having worked on the project, Hui’s perception of college teachers changed from serious figures to easygoing companions, and she felt welcomed and no longer scared when interacting with professors. The development in the interpersonal dimension also indicates an identity change in her intrapersonal dimension: she had been a passive knowledge recipient listening to authoritative figures in class, whereas in the lab she grew into a conversational partner that regarded professors as her equals.

Xu’s Story

Xu, a computer science major at university D, joined a research group of Creative Soft Team (cst) in his second year. Since then, Xu and his team members have completed many projects under the advisor’s guidance:

I have done so many projects in cst, and I’ve got a strong sense that technology was nothing (laugh). If management is good, it can make up for bugs in technology. If a technology is expected to push a project forward, it hinges on management. Technology plays an important role in early stages determining the production cycle and plan making. It becomes mature as the project develops, and then management becomes crucial. Problems will arise if management is poor. I have learned the concept of management in software engineering from this group, how to communicate, how to collaborate, this is what we’ve learned most here.

Xu’s recount reflected a cognitive shift from a belief in technology emphasized in class to an understanding of the relative importance of management versus technology. His knowledge system in software engineering extended from technology development to project management. His understanding of learning expanded from learning in its narrow sense (computer science) to learning in its broad sense (management and communication skills). He reflected on his change in the intrapersonal dimension on the team:

In fact, I had rarely communicated with others, and I didn’t know how to express myself. At first, I rarely spoke when we had a problem. But now, I actively communicate with my colleagues whenever a problem occurs. I suspect some problems, I gather the group, we list the problems and discuss the solutions. (Q: How did you make the change?) What should I say? Because I suffered from losses. When I joined the team, we had a test project by group. I sensed a problem but didn’t say anything. This project failed as a result. For me, it was such a stroke. If I had proposed and talked, we could have made a success. You learn from your failure.

Xu’s emphasis on communication in project management was associated with how he had changed as a person, indicating that his epistemological dimension developed simultaneously with his intrapersonal dimension. Having suffered from “a loss and a stroke,” Xu reflected on his performance and learned to have his voice heard. Recognizing the importance of expressing one’s perspective without fear of external dissent was among the attempts to cultivate and trust one’s internal voice. Meanwhile, the development in the two dimensions was also attached to Xu’s understanding of student-advisor relationship:

Our teacher is more like a project manager than an advisor. He focuses on management instead of technology. In the lab, he only tells us something instructional and we can only see him at group meetings. As a project reaches a milestone, we have a group meeting and evaluate each other’s work. He comes to the meetings, listens to our discussions, and gives advice occasionally. Through mutual evaluation, we detect bugs and seek directions for improvement.

The advisor played the role of a coordinator, instead of a leader, who shared his authority with research team members. The milestone meetings provided a space for team members to comment on each other’s work and, more importantly, to explore potentials for growing expertise on a research project. In this process, students came to recognize and appreciate their own capacity for knowledge construction without dependence on an external authority. The student growth on the epistemological dimension would have been postponed without the professor’s shifting his role in undergraduate research advising.

Feng’s Story

Feng, an educational psychology major at university E, recounted her experience in a psychology case competition. “Four of us came from different class levels and worked together to analyze a case and give a solution, and I have learned a lot in the process.” She said:

Discussion was essential. Every one of us formed an opinion, and we put them on the table at the meeting. Discussion requires communication skills. When there’s disagreement, you need to argue and defend yourself. You should also learn to be inclusive and tolerant. You have to listen attentively when someone holds opinions different from yours, especially when s/he is against you, you have to pay attention and listen. For example, I think it is reason A, but he thinks reason A is less important but B is primary. Then we debate with each other with evidence. I was thinking hard in my mind: how did he come up with this point, why didn’t I? Why did he think B was primary instead of A? There was a lot of thinking, and everything was expanding and hovering in my mind.

Feng’s narrative tapped both the interpersonal dimension and the epistemological dimension that were intertwined in most participants’ research experiences involving teamwork. When dissidence arose in the group, Feng on the one hand defended for herself, and on the other hand listened attentively to others’ perspectives. Mature interpersonal relationship means respect for others and respect for one’s own identity and viewpoints, rather than blindly yielding to others or stubbornly sticking to one’s own position. While she was integrating herself in the group, Feng was enlarging her perspective in the cognitive domain with the inputs from her group members, with “everything expanding and hovering” in her mind. In the debate, Feng proposed an approach of knowledge construction based on evidence:

If you argue A is the primary reason, you must give evidence. The opposite side also has to present evidence to support his claim. Then the group will evaluate the evidence from both sides, who got more evidence, which evidence was more convincing and which claim was more valid. We based our discussion on evidence. I agree with the group if they all reach an agreement, since I can’t insist if everyone else agrees. I am convinced if their argumentation is solid. Occasionally, I would say one way but think another way. Yet I feel I should be consistent with the majority, and I don’t want to look extreme and stubborn.

The mature stage of cognitive development includes the contextual construction of knowledge, in which an individual acknowledges the existence of multiple perspectives and evaluates various viewpoints through measuring relevant evidence. The evidence-based group discussion on Feng’s team illustrates the above point. In the meantime, Feng’s positioning in the interpersonal relationship affected her performance on the team. Although at times she was not convinced cognitively, her perception of self in peer relationship persuaded her to compromise, since she did not want to “look extreme and stubborn.” Negotiation was taking place between her epistemological and interpersonal dimensions, as an individual grows simultaneously in multiple dimensions rather pursuing maturity in one aspect.

Discussion

The purpose of this article was to understand Chinese college student development in undergraduate research programs through the holistic development model. Student development in the three dimensions was intertwined and could not be separated from one another. In the epistemological dimension, students began to form their own perspectives, construct knowledge frameworks different from those taught in class, and evaluate relevant evidence in context to draw conclusions. Most importantly, they began to validate their own capacity for knowledge creation in research activities where multiple solutions were possible. In the intrapersonal dimension, students came to realize and reshape their identities that reflected the internal voices emerging from aspirations and failures. In the interpersonal dimension, students involving in research programs had extra growth opportunities to make sense of student-faculty relationship, collaboration and leadership, and began to speak out their mind without neglecting others’ viewpoints.

With good company on the development journey, mostly faculty advisors in the co-curricular research programs, undergraduate researchers were able to enter the crossroads earlier compared with students who did not have a research experience. One possible reason was that, unlike in undergraduate classroom teaching where the set learning objectives had to be achieved at each stage, college professors in research advising were released from a strictly set timeline due to the explorative nature of research and thus were more likely to withdraw expert opinions in exchange for students’ internal voices. A good learning partner that promotes self-authorship validates learner’s capacity to know, situates learning in learner’s experience, and defines learning as mutually constructing meaning. 18 From the recount of 15 students involved in co-curricular research programs in this study, we constantly heard of examples of good learning partners who challenged students to go through the research process on their own yet supported them to develop on the journey towards self-authorship.

The primary objective of most undergraduate research programs in Chinese universities is to improve research capability and cultivate creativity among undergraduate students, which, however, was little said among participants in this study. For example, Tsinghua states that its srt helps its participants to “experience a complete research process, master basic research skills and cultivate interest in academic research.” 19 The objective of Student Research Training Program at Zhejiang University is to “stimulate creative thinking, enhance sense of innovation, and improve innovation capacity among its students.” 20 It was true that interview participants in this study also reported gains in academic disciplines. For example, a female chemistry student at university E reflected that “through the research project, I was able to connect knowledge points in different core courses, and develop a new understanding of why we took these courses in the first two years.” However, among 15 students, only one referred to the sense of innovation in relation to undergraduate research. A male student in physics education at university C told me, “I try to do something different, something original.” Compared with the institution-set objective of undergraduate research, a more revealing outcome of involving in research activities, from the students’ perspective, was growth in the three dimensions of holistic development. It indicates that young adults in their twenties are constantly seeking answers to three driving questions in life: “How do I know?” “Who am I?” and “What relationship do I want to construct with others?” The majority of undergraduate students in China, even those in research universities, may neither go on further schooling in their undergraduate fields nor pursue careers in academic research. Yet every young man and woman is eager to seek answers to the life important questions, intentionally or unintentionally, in college and after. Doing research with faculty advisors and peer learners offers one of the platforms in college for undergraduate students to explore answers to these questions and cultivate internal voices.

College life is transformative for young adults, and the arenas for transformation are beyond undergraduate research programs. Research has shown that undergraduate students develop towards self-authorship in the three dimensions in curricular study, service learning, internship programs, and campus housing. 21 The traits of co-curricular research programs that stimulate student development, such as student-faculty partnership, peer collaboration, provoking feedback, experiential learning and problem-based learning, can be implemented in curricular programs and course design. However, in-class experiences with the above traits were rarely heard from the interview participants, who instead complained about lecturing as the primary mode of instruction and rote learning as the focus of assessment. If classroom teaching and learning in Chinese universities resort to the above practices found in out-of-class research programs, or more specifically Chickering’s principles of effective educational practices, the developmental benefits shared by those voluntarily participating in undergraduate research programs will be expanded and enjoyed by all the students in college education. 22

Implications and Limitations

This study has several implications to Chinese higher education. Firstly, undergraduate research programs are not exclusively for students in research-intensive universities. It is true that research universities tend to cultivate more graduates aspired and capable to conduct academic research. Yet non-research universities can also use undergraduate research as a drive to promote student learning and development. As mentioned earlier, the founders of the Council on Undergraduate Research in the United States were teaching-oriented liberal arts colleges with the goal of promoting student learning through participation in research. To promote student learning, it is worthwhile encouraging and supporting faculty in non-research institutions in China to launch research projects and collaborate with undergraduate researchers. Secondly, in undergraduate research programs, the advising style and teaching philosophy of faculty advisors have significant impact on student development. A good company challenges as well as supports learners, as reflected in students’ comment that a good advisor trusts the students’ ability while offers advice occasionally. The Learning Partnership Model, developed based on the self-authorship theory, offers instruction to college educators on how to challenge and support learners in the three dimensions to grow self-authorship. 23 The model has been applied by many educational practitioners abroad in curricular learning and student affairs, and Chinese educators may find it helpful in promoting student learning in undergraduate education. Thirdly, more empirical studies need to be done in China on student learning and development in co-curricular research and in undergraduate education in general. Qualitative studies that elicit students’ own voices may bring new perspectives to our understanding of student learning and college experiences as well as our exploration of effective educational practices in college.

This study also has several limitations. Firstly, since the data come from a large research project on college student learning and development, the findings on undergraduate research could be limited in breadth and depth. A study design that focuses on student experiences in co-curricular research would generate more rich and informative data. Secondly, this study did not cover any Project 985 university in institutional sampling. 24 In top-notch research-intensive institutions, undergraduates completing research projects may contribute new perspectives not revealed in this study. For example, inspiration for research careers and for knowledge advancement may be intense among undergraduate researchers in Project 985 institutions. Thirdly, this study uses the holistic development model of self-authorship to understand student change in co-curricular research, with a focus on the three dimensions in epistemological, intrapersonal, and interpersonal development. Without a longitudinal research design, it is difficult to investigate the developmental phases of the model. Longitudinally following Chinese students through college and into their post-college years will enable researchers to better engage in dialogues with international student development theorists, and it also has the potential of generating local theories in Chinese college student development.