Perceptions and Applications of Honors Contracts in Developing an Undergraduate Engineering Research Experience

At the University of Colorado Boulder (CU), a research-based undergraduate mentoring program is now in its second year of implementation. The program, Your Own Undergraduate Research Experience (YOU’RE@CU) has three main goals: improve the retention rate of diverse groups in undergraduate engineering, build undergraduate interest in engineering research, and prepare graduate students to take on leadership roles in either academia or industry-based research careers. In YOU’RE@CU, undergraduate students are paired with a graduate mentor and work in the graduate student’s lab several hours a week. Undergraduate mentees enroll in a one-credit seminar course focusing on research and graduate school opportunities, and are assessed via pre- and post-surveys to gauge their excitement and interest in engineering. The undergraduates also respond to biweekly qualitative reflective questions while participating in the program. Graduate mentors complete several reflective questions about their experiences and are required to complete pre- and post-assessments. Adopting a person-centered, case study approach, this paper focuses on two telling examples of research-based mentoring relationships in the YOU’RE@CU program. Given identical mentor training through YOU’RE@CU, two graduate students start the Spring 2012 semester by meeting with their mentees to launch a research project. By examining application, pre-survey, reflective questions, and post-survey responses from these four participants, the differences in the trajectory of the two paired mentoring relationships can be clearly seen over the course of one semester. This close examination of two disparate mentoring relationships is instructive in understanding the subtle details that create either a positive learning environment or an uncomfortable lab situation for young engineers, and assists program administrators in making improvements in subsequent years.

Download Full-text

Student-supervisor-university expectation alignment in the undergraduate engineering thesis

Journal of Technology and Science Education ◽

10.3926/jotse.482 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

pp. 199

Author(s):

Brad Stappenbelt ◽

Abheek Basu

Keyword(s):

Rating Scale ◽

Research Output ◽

Academic Staff ◽

Research Process ◽

Pedagogical Practice ◽

Research Experience ◽

Doctoral Research ◽

Undergraduate Engineering ◽

Research Supervision ◽

Undergraduate Thesis

Given the lack of student research experience, the undergraduate thesis is necessarily focussed primarily on development of research skills (i.e. it is process oriented). Since postgraduate supervision is research output focussed, the lessons learnt from this field are not always directly transferable. In contrast to the vast body of work in the field of doctoral research supervision, there exists a dearth of literature on undergraduate dissertation supervision. To address this shortcoming, the present study examined the alignment of university, supervisor and student expectations regarding responsibilities in the undergraduate engineering thesis. University expectations, having undergone rigorous review, outline the sound pedagogical practice that should be applied to undergraduate supervision. Expectations of academic staff supervisors and thesis students were obtained through the use of survey tools and post-survey discussions. The surveys used in the present study were adapted from the Role Perceptions Rating Scale (RPRS). Alignment between student and university expectations regarding undergraduate thesis responsibilities in the present study was generally poor. The discrepancy between supervisor and university expectations was even greater, with academic staff generally assuming the bulk of the responsibility for many core thesis tasks. Post-survey discussion indicated that the driver for this behaviour were supervisor expectations that that undergraduate thesis research would contribute to publications. Taking primary responsibility for core thesis tasks away from the student, although improving the likelihood of successful research output, diminishes the ability for an accurate assessment of adequate academic performance. The learning that is intended to result from the undergraduate thesis is devalued when research outcomes are prioritised over research process.

Download Full-text