How Does Institution Type Impact Students’ Experiences in Undergraduate Research?

Participating in research as an undergraduate is known to be a highly influential experience that can increase student motivation and persistence in science. In a typical undergraduate research experience, a student joins a faculty member’s research lab, and is mentored by a senior member of the lab as the student contributes to research projects. Research experience provides students an opportunity to learn if scientific research is a career they would like to pursue, and ultimately has been linked to increased graduation rates and career success. 

However, not all research experiences are positive, and occasionally students end up leaving their research experiences before they graduate. Understanding why students leave can help institutions better support their student researchers, address equity and inclusion issues, and ultimately maximize student benefits from these experiences.

Why does institution type matter?

    While students from universities worldwide are often able to participate in research at their institutions, it is likely that institutional characteristics of different institutions will impact the experiences of student researchers. For example, an undergraduate at a large, research-intensive institution is more likely to be directly mentored by a graduate student in a larger lab, alongside several lab members whose primary focus is conducting research. In contrast, an undergraduate at a primarily undergraduate institution (PUI) is more likely to be mentored directly by a faculty member who may run a smaller research lab, where undergraduates are the primary researchers.
    In a recent study published in CBE - Life Sciences Education, a team of 18 student researchers at Arizona State University set out to address the question of how student research experiences may be impacted by the type of institution that students attend. This study is notable because the work itself was conducted by undergraduate student researchers who participated in a course-based undergraduate research experience: Alongside two instructors who served as senior research mentors, these student researchers designed the study, collected and analyzed data, and contributed to writing the research manuscript during the year-long course.
    This research builds off work by a previous cohort of student researchers, who designed a survey to explore the reasons students choose to stay in or leave their research experience. These researchers found that the lab environment was a critical factor in a student’s decision to persist in research. However, the first study was only conducted with students at public research-intensive institutions, and we do not know if the same factors will influence students to persist in research at other institution types. This second student-driven study aimed to address this knowledge gap. 

    The research team recruited undergraduate student researchers to participate in their study from universities nationwide, including private research-intensive institutions, master’s granting (comprehensive) institutions, and PUIs. Participants took the same survey used in the previous research study, and the research team compared their findings to the previous cohort’s findings from public research-intensive institutions.

Students at research-intensive institutions are more likely to leave their research experiences

    Researchers found that institution type did impact students’ experiences in research: students at master’s granting institutions and PUIs more frequently listed the faculty researcher, rather than a graduate student, postdoctoral scholar, or other staff member, as their primary research mentor. These students also less frequently reported that they were “volunteering” in the research experience and may have instead been compensated for their time through course credit or money. Notably, students at master’s granting institutions and PUIs were significantly less likely to consider leaving or to actually leave their URE, compared to students at public or private research-intensive institutions.

Why do students stay in or leave their research experiences? 

    When researchers considered why students chose to stay or leave their research experience, they found few differences between institution types. Across all institution types, students tend to report leaving their research experience because: they did not enjoy their research tasks (42.5%); they were interested in other research opportunities (39.7%); they did not have enough time (38.8%); they did not receive sufficient guidance (38.8%); or because of their research mentors (29.0%). Students reported staying in their research experiences because: it was important for their careers (84.0%); they felt they were gaining important skills and knowledge (83.8%); their labs were flexible with their schedules (79.1%); their research mentors (77.8%); and because they were interested in the research topic (74.8%).

How can we better support undergraduate researchers?

    Informed by their work, the authors provide five recommendations for research mentors to support their undergraduate researchers:

1. Provide students with their perception of sufficient guidance.
2. Explain the why behind what you are doing in the lab.
3. Be flexible with students.
4. Pay students.
5. Be nice and create a positive working environment.

These recommendations address several of the factors that are influential in students’ decisions to stay or leave their research experience, and the author’s work suggests that these actionable items may be particularly important to support women, first generation college students, and students from underrepresented minority backgrounds in their research experiences.

For more resources, see:

Cooper, K. M., Gin, L. E., Akeeh, B., Clark, C. E., Hunter, J. S., & Roderick, T. B. & Brownell SE (2019). Factors that predict life sciences student persistence in undergraduate research experiences. PLoS ONE, 8, e0220186.
Cooper, K. M., Cala, J. M., & Brownell, S. E. (2021). Cultural capital in undergraduate research: an exploration of how biology students operationalize knowledge to access research experiences at a large, public research-intensive institution. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 1-17.

Gin, L. E., Clark, C. E., Elliott, D. B., Roderick, T. B., Scott, R. A., Arellano, D., ... & Brownell, S. E. (2021). An Exploration across Institution Types of Undergraduate Life Sciences Student Decisions to Stay in or Leave an Academic-Year Research Experience. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(3), ar47.
Limeri, L. B., Asif, M. Z., Bridges, B. H., Esparza, D., Tuma, T. T., Sanders, D., ... & Dolan, E. L. (2019). “Where’s my mentor?!” Characterizing negative mentoring experiences in undergraduate life science research. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(4), ar61.

Post Author:

Emma Goodwin is a postdoctoral scholar in the Research for Inclusive STEM

Education (RISE) Center at ASU. Her research focuses on how we can broaden

access to research through the creation of course-based undergraduate

research experiences and how these experiences impact students.