Premium
Year‐long Research Experiences in Drug Discovery May Lead to Positive Outcomes for Transfer Students
Author(s) -
Beckham Josh,
Metola Pedro,
Strong Lisa
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.31.1_supplement.589.8
Subject(s) - curriculum , undergraduate research , medical education , institution , test (biology) , psychology , mathematics education , pedagogy , medicine , sociology , biology , ecology , social science
Conceptual understanding of biochemistry and success in science can be challenging for transfer students when transitioning into a degree plan from another institution. These goals may be more readily achieved through a curriculum tied to research. We have begun to test this hypothesis through establishing a pilot CURE (course based undergraduate research experience) called the Accelerated Research Initiative (ARI) built upon the successful framework of the Freshman Research Initiative (FRI) in the College of Natural Sciences at The University of Texas at Austin. The ARI caters to upper‐division undergraduates science majors (juniors and seniors). Several of the students in a starting class of 16 have transferred into the university from other 4 year institutions or from community colleges. The student‐researchers are guided by a non‐tenure track professor, several undergraduate TAs and peers who have prior research experience. For each project, the overall goal is to identify small molecule inhibitors of an enzyme from an infectious disease organism (bacterial or protozoan). Computational molecular docking software is used to make predictions about which compounds may bind. They then seek to test these in biochemical assays against the enzyme they have made through recombinant DNA cloning and protein expression. In order to gain insight into the students' perceptions of the experience so that the curriculum could be tailored in subsequent semesters, surveys and focus groups were used. The questions and discussion focused on gaining insight about the contexts, activities, and outcomes cited in other CUREs (Corwin et. al. 2015), such as: content and skills, self‐efficacy, persistence in science, ownership, communication, science identity, and mentoring. When compared to responses from transfer students who did not participate in a CURE, these perceptions of the course may help identify which aspects are most meaningful to achieving science success. Support or Funding Information Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)