While all quadrants are important in curriculum design, the latter two student‐focused quadrants are often limited and underrepresented in educational undergraduate science programs. This framework expresses two axes, one with the dimensions “teacher‐focused” and “student‐focused,” and the other one with “research content” and “research processes/problems.” The resulting quadrants form four scenarios that describe the relationship between teaching and research: (a) Research‐led: where students learn about research findings and information transmission is the main teaching mode, (b) Research‐oriented: where students learn about research processes, including state‐of‐the‐art technology, (c) Research‐tutored: where students learn to discuss and write research papers, and (d) Research‐based: where students learn as researchers with inquiry‐based activities and the research‐cycle, including doing hands‐on research. Research‐based education is grounded in a widely accepted framework developed by GriffithsĪnd further shaped by Healey (2009). Working with role models further enhances student motivation and inspiration. Students elaborate on real‐world actual research and actively learn the academic skills to facilitate a better transition to master programs and the labor market. This latter pedagogy is generally considered as a research‐minded, student‐centered approach, based on learning by addressing relevant questions and complex authentic research tasks. Among others, these include communication, critical thinking, creative thinking, (interdisciplinary) problem solving, collaboration, project management, and self‐organization skills.Īcademic skills and deep‐learning of many students prosper in a didactic framework of constructivism To prepare students for the demands from the labor market, universities pay much attention to train students the required academic skills. Since topics can change per course edition, we have showcased a widely applicable pedagogy creating synergy between ongoing research and undergraduate education. Faculty valued the didactical experience, research output and scouting opportunities.
The course resulted in a better understanding of what doing research entails. Students appreciated ownership and responsibilities of the research, laboratory teachers as role models, and they were inspired and motivated by doing authentic actual research. According to students, the course enhanced scientific, laboratory, and academic skills. Students propose new research, execute the experiments, and collectively report in a single research article. All groups work on the same research problem, albeit from different (methodological) perspectives, thereby stimulating interdependence between all participants. Four groups of four students work together in a dedicated laboratory on an actual ongoing research problem of faculty. This 10‐week course called Biomedical Research Lab is embedded in the curriculum of the undergraduate program Biomedical Sciences and grounded in the theoretical framework of research‐based learning. Here, we aimed to develop a novel course‐based undergraduate research experience (CURE) in synergy with ongoing faculty research. Optimal integration of education and ongoing faculty research in many undergraduate science programs is limited to the capstone project.
0 kommentar(er)
