Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

Twenty-first-century professional skills are vital to success in science careers and can be developed through participation in course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). However, CURE research rarely explores outcomes of undergraduates who serve as mentors and their perceptions of their skill development.

Purpose

This study investigated how undergraduate biology students perceived their development of 21st-century professional skills as a result of Inclusive Biologists Engaging in Active Research with Students (iBEARS), a CURE approach to experiential learning that positioned them to serve as research mentors to local classes of K–12 students.

Method

Using a phenomenological case study design, we analyzed pre- and post-CURE reflection data from 24 of the undergraduates and follow-up interview data from four former CURE participants to examine their perceptions of developing the following competencies: communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity.

Findings

Thematic analysis revealed that participants recognized their utilization of skills during CURE participation but also felt that they had strengthened each skill. Communication skills were the most recognized and discussed by participants, while creativity skills were the least discussed.

Implications

Educators should work to broaden access to CURE curricula that offer opportunities for undergraduates to serve as mentors to younger students. Future research should include analyses of CURE components and their resulting development.

Significance of Research Statement

This study shows how CUREs and serving as research mentors can develop college students’ professional skills in science.

Keywords

21st-century skills STEM mentoring undergraduate research experiences qualitative design

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Addy

T. M.

LePrevost

Stevenson

(2014). Thinking critically in undergraduate biology: Flipping the classroom and problem-based learning. Double Helix, 2(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.37514/DBH-J.2014.2.1.09

Adedokun

O. A.

Bessenbacher

A. B.

Parker

L. C.

Kirkham

L. L.

Burgess

W. D.

(2013). Research skills and STEM undergraduate research students’ aspirations for research careers: Mediating effects of research self-efficacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(8), 940–951. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21102

Auchincloss

L. C.

Laursen

S. L.

Branchaw

J. L.

Eagan

Graham

Hanauer

D. I.

Lawrie

McLinn

C. M.

Pelaez

Rowland

Towns

Trautmann

N. M.

Varma-Nelson

Weston

T. J.

Dolan

E. L.

(2014). Assessment of course-based undergraduate research experiences: A meeting report. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-01-0004

Baird

A. M.

Parayitam

(2019). Employers’ ratings of importance of skills and competencies college graduates need to get hired: Evidence from the New England region of USA. Education + Training, 61(5), 622–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-12-2018-0250

Beaulieu

D. F.

(2023). Creativity in science, engineering, and the arts: A study of undergraduate students’ perceptions. Journal of Creativity, 32(3), 100035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2022.100035

Brownell

S. E.

Price

J. V.

Steinman

(2013). Science communication to the general public: Why we need to teach undergraduate and graduate students this skill as part of their formal scientific training. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 12(1), E6–E10. https://pmc-ncbi-nlm-nih.gov/articles/PMC3852879/

Buchanan

A. J.

Fisher

G. R.

(2022). Current status and implementation of science practices in course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs): A systematic literature review. CBE—Life Sciences, 21(4), 1–17.

Carpenter

S. L.

(2015). Undergraduates’ perceived gains and ideas about teaching and learning science from participating in science education outreach programs. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 19(3), 113–146. https://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/jheoe/article/view/1220

Casner-Lotto

Barrington

(2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century US workforce. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. https://files-eric-ed-gov/fulltext/ED519465.pdf.

10.

Chiu

M. M.

(2000). Group problem-solving processes: Social interactions and individual actions. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 30(1), 26–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5914.00118

11.

Corwin

L. A.

Graham

M. J.

Dolan

E. L.

(2015). Modeling course-based undergraduate research experiences: An agenda for future research and evaluation. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-10-0167

12.

Craft

(2005). Creativity in schools: Tensions and dilemmas (1st ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203357965

13.

Creswell

J. W.

Hanson

W. E.

Clark Plano

V. L.

Morales

(2007). Qualitative research designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006287390

14.

Dede

(2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. In Bellanca

J. A.

(Ed.), 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn (pp. 51–76). Solution Tree Press. https://allchildrenlearning.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Dede_2010_Comparing-Frameworks-for-21st-Century-Skills.pdf .

15.

Finch

D. J.

Hamilton

L. K.

Baldwin

Zehner

(2013). An exploratory study of factors affecting undergraduate employability. Education and Training, 55(7), 681–704. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-07-2012-0077

16.

Ford

(2008). Grasp of practice” as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding. Science and Education, 17(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9045-7

17.

Gamage

McCall

Daigle

Miller

(2022). Supporting STEM transfer students through cross-institutional undergraduate research experiences. Journal of Geoscience Education, 70(3), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2021.2005510

18.

Grant

B. L.

Liu

Gardella

J. A.

(2015). Supporting the development of science communication skills in STEM university students: Understanding their learning experiences as they work in middle and high school classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 5(2), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2013.872313

19.

Gray

F. E.

Emerson

MacKay

(2005). Meeting the demands of the workplace: Science students and written skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(4), 425–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-8087-y

20.

Hanauer

D. I.

Graham

M. J.

Hatfull

G. F.

(2016). A measure of college student persistence in the sciences (PITS). CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-09-0185

21.

Hebda

M. R.

Sulak

T. N.

Lutz

L. A.

St. Louis

A. T.

Hall

K. E.

Harvill

M. L.

(2025). A longitudinal phenomenological case study of undergraduate science majors’ motivation to mentor youth in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics research. Science Education.

22.

Hora

M. T.

Benbow

R. J.

Oleson

A. K.

(2016). Beyond the skills gap: Preparing college students for life and work. Harvard Education Press.

23.

Karami

Pakmehr

Aghili

(2012). Another view to importance of teaching methods in curriculum: Collaborative learning and students’ critical thinking disposition. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46(1), 3266–3270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.048

24.

Khwanchai

Tanthip

Toansakul

(2017). An instructional design model with the cultivating research-based learning strategies for fostering teacher students creative thinking abilities. Educational Research and Reviews, 12(15), 712–724. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2017.3239

25.

Lavi

Tal

Dori

Y. J.

(2021). Perceptions of STEM alumni and students on developing 21st century skills through methods of teaching and learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101002

26.

Marbach-Ad

Hunt

Thompson

K. V.

(2019). Exploring the values undergraduate students attribute to cross-disciplinary skills needed for the workplace: An analysis of five STEM disciplines. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 28(5), 452–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09778-8

27.

Mendenhall

Johnson

T. E.

(2010). Fostering the development of critical thinking skills and reading comprehension of undergraduates using a Web 2.0 tool coupled with a learning system. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(3), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2010.500537

28.

National Research Council (NRC) . (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press.

29.

National Science Foundation . (2004). Doctoral scientists and engineers: 2001 profile tables (NSF 04-312). Project Officer, Kelly H. Kang. Arlington, VA: Division of Science Resources Statistics.

30.

Nelson

K. L.

(2018). The impact of mentoring on life science undergraduate mentors. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

31.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J.

(2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1609406917733847. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

32.

Obenchain

Ives

(2006). Experiential education in the classroom and academic outcomes: For those who want it all. Journal of Experiential Education, 29(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/105382590602900106

33.

Osborne

Allchin

(2024). Science literacy in the twenty-first century: Informed trust and the competent outsider. International Journal of Science Education, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2331980

34.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills [P21] . (2009). P21 framework definitions. Retrieved August 31, 2023 from: http://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21.

35.

Pascale

A. B.

Ohlson

(2020). Gendered meanings of leadership: Developing leadership through experiential community-based mentoring in college. Journal of Experiential Education, 43(2), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053825920905122

36.

Pattanpichet

(2011). The effects of using collaborative learning to enhance students English speaking achievement. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(11), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v8i11.6502

37.

Premo

Cavagnetto

Davis

W. B.

(2018). Promoting collaborative classrooms: The impacts of interdependent cooperative learning on undergraduate interactions and achievement. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-08-0176

38.

Redish

E. F.

Cooke

T. J.

(2013). Learning each other's ropes: Negotiating interdisciplinary authenticity. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12(2), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-09-0147

39.

Rios

J. A.

Ling

Pugh

Becker

Bacall

(2020). Identifying critical 21st-century skills for workplace success: A content analysis of job advertisements. Educational Researcher, 49(2), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19890600E

40.

Robnett

R. D.

Chemers

M. M.

Zurbriggen

E. L.

(2015). Longitudinal associations among undergraduates’ research experience, self-efficacy, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(6), 847–867. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21221

41.

Saldana

(2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

42.

Sipayung

D. H.

Sani

R. A.

Bunawan

(2018, December). Collaborative inquiry for 4C skills. In 3rd Annual International Seminar on Transformative Education and Educational Leadership (AISTEEL 2018) (pp. 440–445). Atlantis Press.

43.

Smyrnaiou

Georgakopoulou

Sotiriou

(2020). Promoting a mixed-design model of scientific creativity through digital storytelling—The CCQ model for creativity. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00223-6

44.

Snyder

H. T.

Hammond

J. A.

Groham

M. G.

(2019). Creativity measurement in undergraduate students from 1984–2013: A systematic review. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(2), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000228

45.

St. Louis

A. T.

Thompson

Sulak

T. N.

Harvill

M. L.

Moore

M. E.

(2021). Infusing 21st century skill development into the undergraduate curriculum: The formation of the iBEARS network. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 22(2), 10–1128. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00180-21

46.

Tanner

Chatman

L. S.

Allen

(2003). Approaches to cell biology teaching: Cooperative learning in the science classroom—Beyond students working in groups. Cell Biology Education, 2(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.03-03-0010

47.

Tenenbaum

L. S.

Anderson

M. K.

Jett

Yourick

D. L.

(2014). An innovative near-peer mentoring model for undergraduate and secondary students: STEM focus. Innovative Higher Education, 39(5), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-014-9286-3

48.

The Royal Society . (2006). Science communication: Survey of factors affecting science communication by scientists and engineers. Author.

49.

Tosey

(2006). Interfering with the interference: An emergent perspective on creativity in higher education. In Developing creativity in higher education (pp. 29–42). Routledge.

50.

Turiman

Omar

Daud

A. M.

Osman

(2012). Fostering the 21st century skills through scientific literacy and science process skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59(1), 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.253

51.

Von der Mehden

B. M.

Pennino

E. M.

Fajardo

H. L.

Ishikawa

McDonald

K. K.

(2023). Building authentic science experiences: Students’ perceptions of sequential course-based undergraduate research. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 22(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.23-03-0042

52.

Walton

K. L.

Baker

J. C.

(2009). Group projects as a method of promoting student scientific communication and collaboration in a public health microbiology course. Bioscene: Journal of College Biology Teaching, 35(2), 16–22. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ889701

53.

Wang

(2016). Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration. Research Policy, 45(1), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.09.003

54.

Widjajanti

D. B.

(2013). The communication skills and mathematical connections of prospective mathematics teacher: A case study on mathematics education students, Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia. Sains Humanika, 63(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101002

Student Perceptions of Twenty-First-Century Professional Skills Developed in a Course-Based Research Experience

Abstract

Background

Purpose

Method

Findings

Implications

Significance of Research Statement

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References