Who is Represented in the Research on Undergraduate Research Experiences in the Natural Sciences? A Review of Literature.

Positive outcomes from undergraduate research experiences (UREs) have resulted in calls to broaden and diversify participation in research. However, we have little understanding of what demographics are reported and considered in the analyses of student outcomes from UREs. Without this information, it is impossible to assess whether participation in UREs has been diversified and how outcomes may vary by participant identity. Through a comprehensive literature search, we systematically identified 147 peer-reviewed research articles on student participation in UREs in the natural sciences, published between 2014 and 2020. We coded each paper to document which student demographic variables are reported and considered in analyses. The majority (88%) of articles on UREs reported at least one demographic variable and 62% incorporate demographics into their analyses, but demographics beyond gender and race/ethnicity were infrequently considered. Articles on independent research apprenticeships included demographics in their analyses more frequently than studies on course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). Trends in reporting and analyzing demographics did not change from 2014 to 2020. Future efforts to collect these data will help assess whether goals to diversify UREs are being met and inform how to design UREs to meet the needs of diverse student groups.

An Exploration across Institution Types of Undergraduate Life Sciences Student Decisions to Stay in or Leave an Academic-Year Research Experience.

Undergraduate research is one of the most valuable activities an undergraduate can engage in because of its benefits, and studies have shown that longer experiences are more beneficial. However, prior research has illuminated that undergraduates encounter challenges that may cause them to exit research prematurely. These studies have been almost exclusively conducted at research-intensive (R1) institutions, and it is unclear whether such challenges are generalizable to other institution types. To address this, we extended a study previously conducted at public R1 institutions. In the current study, we analyze data from 1262 students across 25 public R1s, 12 private R1s, 30 master's-granting institutions, and 20 primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs) to assess 1) to what extent institution type predicts students' decisions to persist in undergraduate research and 2) what factors affect students' decisions to either stay in or consider leaving their undergraduate research experiences (UREs) at different institution types. We found students at public R1s are more likely to leave their UREs compared with students at master's-granting institutions and PUIs. However, there are few differences in why students enrolled at different institution types consider leaving or choose to stay in their UREs. This work highlights the importance of studying undergraduate research across institutions.