Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:47:53.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - Theory and Research on Undergraduate Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 August 2022

Edited by
Harald A. Mieg ,
Elizabeth Ambos ,
Angela Brew ,
Dominique Galli  and
Judith Lehmann
Harald A. Mieg
Affiliation:
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
Elizabeth Ambos
Affiliation:
Council on Undergraduate Research, Washington DC
Angela Brew
Affiliation:
Macquarie University, Sydney
Dominique Galli
Affiliation:
Indiana University–Purdue University, Indianapolis
Judith Lehmann
Affiliation:
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Undergraduate Research , pp. 21 - 84
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Aditomo, A., Goodyear, P., Bliuc, A. M., & Ellis, R. A. (2011). Inquiry-based learning in higher education: Principal forms, educational objectives, and disciplinary variations. Studies in Higher Education, 38(9), 1239–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BAK Bundesassistentenkonferenz. (2009/1970). Forschendes Lernen – Wissenschaftliches Prüfen (Nachdruck der 2. Aufl.). Universitäts Verlag Webler.Google Scholar
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change (Nov/Dec), 13–25.Google Scholar
Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203.Google Scholar
Brew, A. (2006). Research and teaching: Beyond the divide (universities into the 21st century). Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Brew, A. (2013). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(1), 101–114.Google Scholar
Deicke, W., & Mieg, H. A. (2020). Undergraduate research in German higher education: Tradition, policy, and innovation. In Hensel, N. & Blessinger, P. (Eds.), International perspectives on undergraduate research: Policy and practice (pp. 219–235). Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. The Higher Education Academy. www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/developingundergraduate_final.pdfGoogle Scholar
Healey, M., Bovill, C., & Jenkins, A. (2015). Students as partners in learning. In Lea, J. (Ed.), Enhancing learning and teaching in higher education: Engaging with the dimensions of practice (pp. 141–163). Open University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, P., & Petrulis, R. (2012). How do first-year university students experience inquiry and research, and what are the implications for the practice of inquiry-based learning? Studies in Higher Education, 37(1), 85–101.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A. (2019a). Die Entwicklung forschungsnahen Lehren und Lernens und die Internationalisierungsperspektiven durch Forschendes Lernen / Undergraduate Research. Abschlussbericht zum Projekt “High Impact Learning” (Report on research-based learning for the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research, BMBWF).Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A. (2019b). Forms of research within strategies for implementing undergraduate research. ZfHE, 14(1), 79–94.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A., & Dinter, J. (2017). Forschen im Forschenden Lernen: Der Einfluss von Forschungsform, Erkenntnisinteresse und Praxiskooperation. In Laitko, H., Mieg, H. A., & Parthey, H. (Eds.), Forschendes Lernen: Wissenschaftsforschung Jahrbuch 2016 (S. 29–50). Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Berlin.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A., & Evetts, J. (2018). Professionalism, science, and expert roles: A social perspective. In Ericsson, K. A., Hoffman, R. R., Kozbelt, A., & Williams, A. M. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 127–148). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A., & Lehmann, J. (Eds.). (2017). Forschendes Lernen: Wie die Lehre in Universität und Fachhochschule erneuert werden kann. Campus. English version: Mieg, H. A. (Ed.), Inquiry-based learning – Undergraduate research: The German multidisciplinary experience. Springer (open access). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0Google Scholar
Ouellette, D., Zottmann, J., Bolzer, M., Fischer, F., & Fischer, M. R. (2017). Investigating the interplay of epistemological beliefs and scientific reasoning and argumentation. In Laitko, H., Mieg, H., & Parthey, H. (Eds.), Forschendes Lernen: Wissenschaftsforschung Jahrbuch 2016 (pp. 71–86). Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Berlin.Google Scholar
Rueß, J., Gess, C., & Deicke, W. (2016). Forschendes Lernen und forschungsbezogene Lehre – Empirisch begründete Systematisierung des Forschungsbezugs hochschulischer Lehre. ZfHE, 11(2), 23–44.Google Scholar
Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Wissenschaftsrat. (2012). Empfehlungen zur Weiterentwicklung der wissenschaftlichen Informationsinfrastrukturen in Deutschland bis 2020. Wissenschaftsrat.Google Scholar

References

Bowers, J., & Parameswaran, A. (2013). Differentiating undergraduate research. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(5), 453–464.Google Scholar
Braxton, J. (1996). Contrasting perspectives on the relationship between teaching and research. New Directions for Institutional Research, 90, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brew, A. (2013). Understanding the scope of undergraduate research: A framework for curricular and pedagogical decision-making. Higher Education, 66, 603–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brew, A., & Mantai, L. (2017). Academics’ perceptions of the challenges and barriers to implementing research-based experiences for undergraduates. Teaching in Higher Education, 22(5), 551–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brint, S., Riddle, M., Turk-Bicakci, L., & Levy, C. (2005). From the liberal to the practical arts in American colleges and universities: Organizational analysis and curricular change. Journal of Higher Education, 76(2), 151–180.Google Scholar
Eagan, M., Hurtado, S., Chang, M., Garcia, G., Herrera, F., & Garibay, J. (2013). Making a difference in science education: The impact of undergraduate research programs. American Educational Research Journal, 50(4), 683–713.Google Scholar
Feldman, K. (1987). Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration. Research in Higher Education, 26(3), 227–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, D., Besters-Dilger, J., & van der Vaart, R. (2017). Excellent education in research-rich universities. League of European Research Universities.Google Scholar
Hattie, J., & Marsh, H. (1996). The relationship between teaching and research: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 507–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humboldt, W. von. (1970). On the spirit and the organisational framework of intellectual institutions in Berlin. Minerva, 8, 242–250 (original written 1809/1810).Google Scholar
John, J., & Creighton, J. (2011). Researcher development: The impact of undergraduate research opportunity programmes on students in the UK. Studies in Higher Education, 36(7), 781–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, C. (2001). The uses of the university (5th ed.). Harvard University Press (original work published 1963).Google Scholar
Kuh, G. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
Marsh, H., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Complementary, antagonistic or independent constructs? Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603–641.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A. (2019). Introduction: Inquiry-based learning – Initial assessment. In Mieg, H. A. (Ed.), Inquiry-based learning – Undergraduate research: The German multidisciplinary experience (pp. 1–16). Springer (open access). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, J. L. (2018). Undergraduate research for student engagement and learning. Routledge.Google Scholar
Newman, J. (1976). The idea of a university defined and illustrated. (Ker, I., Ed.). Clarendon Press (original work published 1852).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olivares-Donoso, R., & Gonzalez, C. (2019). Undergraduate research or research-based courses: Which is most beneficial for science students? Research in Science Education, 49, 91–107.Google Scholar
Parker, J. (2018). Undergraduate research, learning gain and equity: The impact of final year research projects. Higher Education Pedagogies, 3(1), 145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridder-Symoens, H. de (Ed). (1992). A history of the university in Europe, Volume 1: Universities in the Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spronken-Smith, R., Mirosa, R., & Darrou, M. (2014). “Learning is an endless journey for anyone”: Undergraduate awareness, experiences and perceptions of the research culture in a research-intensive university. Higher Education Research and Development, 33(2), 355–371.Google Scholar
Stanford, J., Rocheleau, S., Smith, K., & Mohan, J. (2017). Early undergraduate research experiences lead to similar gains for STEM and non-STEM undergraduates. Studies in Higher Education, 42(1), 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tight, M. (2016). Examining the research/teaching nexus. European Journal of Higher Education, 6(4), 293–311.Google Scholar
Tight, M. (2019). Mass higher education and massification. Higher Education Policy, 32(1), 93–108.Google Scholar
Turner, N., Wuetherick, B., & Healey, M. (2008). International perspectives on student awareness, experiences and perceptions of research: Implications for academic developers in implementing research-based teaching and learning. International Journal for Academic Development, 13(3), 199–211.Google Scholar
Webber, K., Nelson Laird, T., & BrckaLorenz, A. (2013). Student and faculty member engagement in undergraduate research. Research in Higher Education, 54, 227–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimbardi, K., & Myatt, P. (2014). Embedding undergraduate research experiences within the curriculum: A cross-disciplinary study of the key characteristics guiding implementation. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Altrichter, H., & Reitinger, J. (2019). Analyse von Unterricht durch forschendes Lernen: Wie Lehrpersonen aus ihrem Unterricht lernen können [Analysis of lessons trough inquiry-based learning: How teachers can learn from their lessons]. In Kiel, E., Herzig, B., Maier, U., & Sandfuchs, U. (Eds.), Handbuch Unterrichten in allgemein-bildenden Schulen (pp. 475–485). Klinkhardt UTB.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.Google Scholar
Beck, C. W., & Blumer, L. S. (2012). Inquiry-based ecology laboratory courses improve student confidence and scientific reasoning skills. Ecosphere, 3(12). https://doi.org/10.1890/ES12-00280.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blömeke, S., Gustafsson, J.-E., & Shavelson, R. J. (2015). Beyond dichotomies: Competence viewed as a continuum. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borg, S. (2010). Language teacher research engagement. Language Teaching, 43(4), 391–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowers, J., & Parameswaran, A. (2013). Differentiating undergraduate research. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(5), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.752731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brew, A., & Saunders, C. (2020). Making sense of research-based learning in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 87, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102935Google Scholar
Brownell, S. E., Hekmat-Scafe, D. S., Singla, V., Chandler Seawell, P., Conklin Imam, J. F., Eddy, S. L., Stearns, T., & Cyert, M. S. (2015). A high-enrollment course-based undergraduate research experience improves student conceptions of scientific thinking and ability to interpret data. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-05-0092Google Scholar
Brownell, S. E., Kloser, M. J., Fukami, T., & Shavelson, R. (2012). Undergraduate biology lab courses: Comparing the impact of traditionally based “cookbook” and authentic research-based courses on student lab experiences. Journal of College Science Teaching, 41(4), 36–45.Google Scholar
Cater, M., Ferstel, S. D., & O’Neil, C. E. (2016). Psychometric properties of the inventory of student experiences in undergraduate research. The Journal of General Education, 65(3–4), 283–302. https://doi.org/10.5325/jgeneeduc.65.3-4.0283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damşa, C. I., & Nerland, M. (2016). Student learning through participation in inquiry activities: Two case studies in teacher and computer engineering education. Vocations and Learning, 9(3), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186–016-9152-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627Google Scholar
Deicke, W., Gess, C., & Rueß, J. (2014). Increasing students’ research interests through research-based learning at Humboldt University. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 35(1), 27–33.Google Scholar
Dowd, J. E., Roy, C. P., Thompson, R. J., & Reynolds, J. A. (2015). “On course” for supporting expanded participation and improving scientific reasoning in undergraduate thesis writing. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(1), 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed500298rGoogle Scholar
Earl, L. M., & Katz, S. (2006). Leading schools in a data-rich world: Harnessing data for school improvement. Springer.Google Scholar
Egger, C., Miczajka, V., Bertsch, C., Ottlinger, T., & Mathiszik, J. (2020). Lehrerselbstwirksamkeit von Primarstufenstudierenden im Anleiten Forschenden Lernens. Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung (ZfHE), 15(2), 167–186.Google Scholar
Engelmann, K., Neuhaus, B. J., & Fischer, F. (2016). Fostering scientific reasoning in education – meta-analytic evidence from intervention studies. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22(5–6), 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2016.1240089Google Scholar
Feldman, A., Altrichter, H., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (2018). Teachers investigate their work: An introduction to action research across the professions (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315398822Google Scholar
Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Sodian, B., Hussmann, H., Pekrun, R., Neuhaus, B., Dorner, B., et al. (2014). Scientific reasoning and argumentation: Advancing an interdisciplinary research agenda in education. Frontline Learning Research, 2(3), 28–45. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v2i2.96Google Scholar
Furtmüller, G., Garaus, C., & Güttel, W. H. (2016). Even tiny rewards can motivate people to go the extra mile. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/06/even-tiny-rewards-can-motivate-people-to-go-the-extra-mileGoogle Scholar
Garaus, C., Furtmüller, G., & Güttel, W. H. (2015). The hidden power of small rewards: The effects of insufficient external rewards on autonomous motivation to learn. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gess, C., Wessels, I., & Blömeke, S. (2017). Domain-specificity of research competencies in the social sciences: Evidence from differential item functioning. Journal for Educational Research Online, 9(2), 11–36.Google Scholar
Hernandez, P. R., Woodcock, A., Estrada, M., & Schultz, P. W. (2018). Undergraduate research experiences broaden diversity in the scientific workforce. BioScience, 68(3), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofhues, S. (2019). Inquiry-based learning with digital media. In Mieg, H. A. (Ed.), Inquiry-based learning – Undergraduate research: The German multidisciplinary experience (pp. 375–401). Springer (open access). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0Google Scholar
Hung, D. (2002). Situated cognition and problem-based learning: Implications for learning and instruction with technology. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(4), 393–415.Google Scholar
Kazura, K., & Tuttle, H. (2010). Research based learning approach: Students perspective of skills obtained. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37(3), 210–215.Google Scholar
Khoukhi, A. (2013). A structured approach to honours undergraduate research course, evaluation rubrics, and assessment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(5), 630–650.Google Scholar
Kreber, C. (2010). Academics’ teacher identities, authenticity and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 35(2), 171–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307570902953048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreijns, K., Vermeulen, M., Evers, A., & Meijs, C. (2019). The development of an instrument to measure teachers’ inquiry habit of mind. European Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3), 280–296.Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16–26.Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. (2019). Critical thinking as discourse. Human Development, 62(3), 146–164. https://doi-org.uaccess.univie.ac.at/10.1159/000500171Google Scholar
Kuhn, D., Schauble, L., & Garcia-Mila, M. (1992). Cross-domain development of scientific reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 9(4), 285–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusurkar, R. A., Croiset, G., & Ten Cate, O. T. J. (2011). Twelve tips to stimulate intrinsic motivation in students through autonomy-supportive classroom teaching derived from Self-Determination Theory. Medical Teacher, 33, 978–982.Google Scholar
Laurens, S., Hunter, A. B., Seymour, E., Thiry, H., & Melton, G. (2010). Undergraduate research in the sciences: Engaging students in real science. Wiley.Google Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991/2009). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Löhner, S., van Joolingen, W. R., Savelsbergh, E. R., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2005). Students’ reasoning during modeling in an inquiry learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(3), 441–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.037Google Scholar
McDevitt, A. L., Patel, M. V., Rose, B., & Ellison, A. M. (2016). Insights into student gains from undergraduate research using pre- and post-assessments. BioScience, 66(12), 1070–1078. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw141Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A. (2019a). Forms of research within strategies for implementing undergraduate research. ZfHE, 14(1), 79–94.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A. (Ed.). (2019b). Inquiry-based learning – Undergraduate research: The German multidisciplinary experience. Springer (open access). https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3-030–14223-0Google Scholar
Murray, J. L. (2017). Undergraduate research for student engagement and learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315692159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagda, B. A., Gregerman, S. R., Jonides, J., von Hippel, W., & Lerner, J. S. (1998). Undergraduate student–faculty research partnerships affect student retention. The Review of Higher Education, 22(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1998.0016Google Scholar
Olimpo, J. T. T., Pevey, R. S. S., & McCabe, T. M. M. (2019). Incorporating an interactive statistics workshop into an introductory biology Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) enhances students’ statistical reasoning and quantitative literacy skills. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 19(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1450Google Scholar
Ouellette, D., Zottmann, J., Bolzer, M., Fischer, F., & Fischer, M. R. (2017). Investigating the interplay of epistemological beliefs and scientific reasoning and argumentation. In Laitko, H., Mieg, H., & Parthey, H. (Eds.), Forschendes Lernen: Wissenschaftsforschung Jahrbuch 2016 (pp. 137–151). Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Berlin.Google Scholar
Palmer, R. J., Hunt, A. N., Neal, M., & Wuetherick, B. (2015). Mentoring, undergraduate research, and identity development: A conceptual review and research agenda. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 23(5), 411–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2015.1126165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paseka, A., & Hinzke, J.-H. (2018). Professionalisierung durch Forschendes Lernen!? [Professional development through inquiry-based learning!?]. In Leonhard, T., Kosinár, J., & Reintjes, Ch. (Eds.), Praktiken und Orientierungen in der Lehrerbildung (pp. 191–206). Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
Patel, C. (2017). Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger’s Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Routledge.Google Scholar
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003Google Scholar
Reitinger, J. (2014). Beyond reflection: Thinking outside the box of a necessary but not sufficient condition for successful education in a heterogeneous world. In Hollick, D., Neißl, M., Kramer, M., & Reitinger, J. (Eds.), Heterogenität in pädagogischen Handlungsfeldern. Perspektiven. Befunde. Konzeptionelle Ansätze (pp. 39–59). Kassel University Press.Google Scholar
Reitinger, J. (2016). On the nature and empirical accessibility of inquiry learning: The Criteria of Inquiry Learning Inventory (CILI). In Reitinger, J., Haberfellner, C., Brewster, E., & Kramer, M. (Eds.), Theory of Inquiry Learning Arrangements: Research, reflection, and implementation (pp. 39–59). Kassel University Press.Google Scholar
Reitinger, J., Haberfellner, C., & Keplinger, G. (2016). An overview of the Theory of Inquiry Learning Arrangements (TILA). In Reitinger, J., Haberfellner, C., Brewster, E., & Kramer, M. (Eds.), Theory of Inquiry Learning Arrangements: Research, reflection, and implementation (pp. 1–12). Kassel University Press.Google Scholar
Rogers, M., & McDowell, W. G. (2015). Assessing the impact of undergraduate research on graduation rates at the University of Georgia. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 36(2), 33–38. Retrieved from www.cur.org/assets/1/7/summer08CroweBrakke1.PDFGoogle Scholar
Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., & McCullough, J. (2007). Benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science, 316(5824), 548–549. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1140384Google Scholar
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). An overview of Self-Determination Theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–36). University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-Determination Theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Sadler, T. D., & McKinney, L. (2010). Scientific research for undergraduate students: A review of the literature. Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(5), 43–49.Google Scholar
Saunders-Steward, K. S., Gyles, P. D. T., & Shore, B. M. (2012). Student outcomes in inquiry instruction: A literature-derived inventory. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X11429860Google Scholar
Saunders-Steward, K. S., Gyles, P. D. T., Shore, B. M., & Bracewell, R. J. (2015). Student outcomes in inquiry: Students’ perspectives. Learning Environments Research, 18, 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984–015-9185-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, M., & Preckel, F. (2017). Variables associated with achievement in higher education: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 143(6), 565–600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seyfried, C., & Reitinger, J. (2013). Kompetenz und Reflexion: Zum Begriffsverständnis [Competence and reflection: Definitions]. In Weinberger, A. (Ed.), Reflexion im pädagogischen Kontext (pp. 59–70). LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
Seymour, E., Hunter, A.-B., Laursen, S. L., & DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Science Education, 88(4), 493–534. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10131Google Scholar
Shore, B. M., Chichekian, T., Syer, C. A., Aulls, M. W., & Frederiksen, C. H. (2011). Planning, enactment, and reflection in inquiry-based learning: Validating the McGill Strategic Demands of Inquiry Questionnaire. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 315–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763–011-9301-4Google Scholar
Taylor, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267110000301Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The historical meaning of the crisis in psychology: A methodological investigation. In Rieber, R. W., Wollock, J. L., & Veer, R. van der (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (pp. 233–343). Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Wayment, H. A., & Dickson, K. L. (2008). Increasing student participation in undergraduate research benefits students, faculty, and department. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 194–197.Google Scholar
Wessels, I., Gess, C., & Deicke, W. (2019). Competence development through inquiry-based learning. In Mieg, H. A. (Ed.), Inquiry-based learning –Undergraduate research: The German multidisciplinary experience (pp. 59–69). Springer (open access). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0Google Scholar
Wessels, I., Rueß, J., Jenßen, L., Gess, C., & Deicke, W. (2018). Beyond cognition: Experts’ views on affective-motivational research dispositions in the social sciences. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(33). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01300Google Scholar
Weston, T. J., & Laursen, S. L. (2015). The Undergraduate Research Student Self-Assessment (URSSA): Validation for use in program evaluation. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 14(3). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-11-0206Google Scholar
Whipple, E. E., Hughes, A., & Bowden, S. (2015). Evaluation of a BSW research experience: Improving student research competency. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(4), 397–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2015.1063568Google Scholar
Willison, J., & O’Regan, K. (2007). Commonly known, commonly not known, totally unknown: A framework for students becoming researchers. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(4), 393–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360701658609Google Scholar
Wilson, A. E., Pollock, J. L., Billick, I., Domingo, C., Fernandez-Figueroa, E. G., Nagy, E. S., Steury, T. D., & Summers, A. (2018). Assessing science training programs: Structured undergraduate research programs make a difference. BioScience, 68(7), 529–534. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy052Google Scholar
Wilson, C. D., Taylor, J. A., Kowalski, S. M., & Carlson, J. (2010). The relative effects and equity of inquiry-based and commonplace science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning, and argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(3), 276–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, L. W. (2018). Undergraduate research as engaged student learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2018(154), 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20293Google Scholar
Wulf, C. (2019). “From teaching to learning”: Characteristics and challenges of a student-centered learning culture. In Mieg, H. A. (Ed.), Inquiry-based learning – Undergraduate research: The German multidisciplinary experience (pp. 47–55). Springer (open access). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0Google Scholar

References

Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Babich, B. (2003). From Fleck’s Denkstil to Kuhn’s paradigm: Conceptual schemes and incommensurability. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17(1), 75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bachelard, G. (1934). La formation de l’esprit scientifique. Librairie philosophique J. Vin.Google Scholar
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: One concept, two hills to climb. In Tan, S. C., So, H. J., & Yeo, J. (Eds.), Knowledge creation in education (pp. 35–52). Springer.Google Scholar
Brew, A. (2003). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 22(1), 3–18.Google Scholar
Cunningham, C., & Kelly, G. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101(3), 486–505.Google Scholar
Damşa, C. I., & Ludvigsen, S. (2016). Learning through interaction and co-construction of knowledge objects in teacher education. Learning, Culture & Social Interaction, 11, 1–18.Google Scholar
Damşa, C. I., & Nerland, M. (2016). Student participation in inquiry activities in higher education: Domain-specific characteristics and challenges. Vocations and Learning, 9(3), 275–294.Google Scholar
Damşa, C., Nerland, M., & Jensen, K. (2017). Enrolment of first-year students in knowledge domains: Unpacking transformative practices in three introductory courses. In Kyndt, E., Donche, V., Trigwell, K., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (Eds.), Higher education transitions: Theory and research (pp. 270–287). Routledge.Google Scholar
Feldman, A., Divoll, K., & Rogan-Klyve, A. (2013). Becoming researchers: The participation of undergraduate and graduate students in scientific research groups. Science Education, 97(2), 218–243.Google Scholar
Fleck, L. (1979). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. University of Chicago Press (original work published in German 1935).Google Scholar
Fleck, L. (2011/1960). Krise in der Wissenschaft. Zu einer freien und menschlicheren Wissenschaft. In Denkstile und Tatsachen: Gesammelte Schriften und Zeugnisse (pp. 466–474). Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Fleck, L. (2011). Über die wissenschaftliche Beobachtung und die Wahrnehmung im allgemeinen. In Denkstile und Tatsachen: Gesammelte Schriften und Zeugnisse (pp. 211–238). Suhrkamp (original work published 1935).Google Scholar
Hasse, C. (2015). An anthropology of learning. SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, K., Nerland, M., & Enqvist-Jensen, C. (2015). Enrolment of newcomers in expert cultures: An analysis of epistemic practices in a legal education introductory course. Higher Education, 70(5), 867–880.Google Scholar
Kelly, G. (2011). Scientific literacy, discourse, and epistemic practices. In Linder, C., Östman, L., Roberts, D. A., Wickman, P., Erikson, G., & McKinnon, A. (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy. Routledge.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (2001). Objectual practice. In Knorr Cetina, K., Schatzki, T. R., & von Savigny, E. (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 175–188). Routledge.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (2007a). Knowledge in a knowledge society: Five transitions. Knowledge, Work and Society, 4(3), 25–42.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K. (2007b). Culture in global knowledge societies: Knowledge cultures and epistemic cultures. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 32(4), 361–375.Google Scholar
Knorr Cetina, K., & Reichmann, W. (2015). Professional epistemic cultures. In Langemeyer, I., Fischer, M., & Pfadenhauer, M. (Eds.), Epistemic and learning cultures – woher und wohin sich Universitäten entwickeln. Juventa Verlag.Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. (1997). The view from giants’ shoulders. In Smith, L., Dockrell, J., & Tomlinson, P. (Eds.), Piaget, Vygotsky & beyond: Central issues in developmental psychology and education (pp. 187–197). Routledge.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langemeyer, I. (2015). Das Wissen der Achtsamkeit. Kooperative Kompetenz in komplexen Arbeitsprozessen. Waxmann.Google Scholar
Langemeyer, I. (2019a). Models for investigating and developing research-driven learning in science education. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies, 20(1), 71–94.Google Scholar
Langemeyer, I. (2019b). Mindfulness in cooperation and the psychodynamics in high-reliability organizations. Annual Review of Critical Psychology, 16, 1237–1257.Google Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2016). Epistemic fluency and professional education: Innovation, knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. Springer.Google Scholar
Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2017). Insights into the dynamics between changes in professional fields and teaching in higher education. Paper presented at the 17th Biennial EARLI Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction: Education in the Crossroads of Economy and Politics Role of Research in the Advancement of Public Good. 27 August–2 September 2017. Tampere, Finland.Google Scholar
Mieg, H., & Evetts, J. (2018). Professionalism, science and expert roles: A social perspective. In Ericsson, K. A., Hoffman, R. R., Kozbelt, A., & Williams, A. M. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 127–150). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nerland, M. (2018). Knowledge practices and relations in professional education. Studies in Continuing Education, 40(3), 242–256.Google Scholar
Nerland, M., & Jensen, K. (2012). Epistemic practices and object relations in professional work. Journal of Education and Work, 25(1), 101–120.Google Scholar
Neuweg, G. H. (1999). Könnerschaft und implizites Wissen. Zur lehr- und lerntheoretischen Bedeutung der Erkenntnis- und Wissenstheorie Michael Polanyis. Waxmann.Google Scholar
Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557–576.Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1961). Faith and reason. The Journal of Religion, 41(4), 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Stetsenko, A. (2016). The transformative mind: Expanding Vygotsky’s approach to development and education. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vianna, E., Hougaard, N., & Stetsenko, A. (2014). The dialectics of collective and individual transformation: Transformative activist research in a collaborative learning community project. In Blunden, A. (Ed.), Collaborative projects: An interdisciplinary study (pp. 59–88). Brill.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speaking. In Rieber, R. W. & Carton, A. S. (Eds.), The collected works of Vygotsky, vol. 1: Problems of general psychology (Minick, N., Trans.). Plenum (original work published 1934).Google Scholar

References

Aristotle. (1890). The ethics of Aristotle: With introductory essay by George Henry-Lewes (The Nicomachean Ethics). (Chase, D. P., Trans. newly revised) (pp. 173–200). Walter Scott Publishing Co. (original work published in ancient Greek ca. BCE 350).Google Scholar
Barnett, R. (1997). Higher education: A critical business. Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, R. (2000). Realizing the university in an age of super-complexity. Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, R. (2008). A will to learn: Being a student in an age of uncertainty. Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press.Google Scholar
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203.Google Scholar
Boker, J. (2012). University of the future: A thousand year old industry on the cusp of profound change. Ernst & Young.Google Scholar
Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2016). Cultivating student–staff partnerships through research and practice. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 1–3.Google Scholar
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities for the professoriate. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Brew, A. (2001). The nature of research: Inquiry in academic contexts. Routledgefalmer Research.Google Scholar
Brew, A. (2006). Research and teaching: Beyond the divide. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Brew, A. (2013). Understanding the scope of undergraduate research: A framework for curricular and pedagogical decision-making. Higher Education, 66(5), 603–618.Google Scholar
Bronstein, D. (2016). Aristotle on knowledge and learning: The Posterior Analytics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chalmers, A. F. (1980). What is this thing called Science? The Open University Press.Google Scholar
Code, L. (1991). What can she know? Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2008). Rethinking expertise. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Collins, H., & Pinch, T. (1998). The Golem: What you should know about science. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comte, A. (1971). The positive philosophy (Martineau, H. & Chapman, J., Trans., 1853). Reprinted in Thompson, K. & Tunstall, J. (Eds.), Sociological perspectives (pp. 18–32). The Open University Press.Google Scholar
Connell, R. (2020). Southern theory: The global dynamics of knowledge in social science. Routledge.Google Scholar
Connell, R. (2019). The good university: What universities actually do and why it’s time for radical change. Monash University Publishing.Google Scholar
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Descartes, R. (1962). A discourse on method meditations and principles (Veitch, J., Trans.). Dent (original work published in French 1637).Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1976). Experience and education. Collier Macmillan (first published in 1938).Google Scholar
Donald, W. E., Baruch, Y., & Ashleigh, M. (2019). The undergraduate self-perception of employability: Human capital, careers advice, and career ownership. Studies in Higher Education, 44(4), 599–614.Google Scholar
Elton, L. (2000). Research and teaching: Conditions for a positive link. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(1), 43–56.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. (1970). Consolations for the specialist. In Lakatos, I. & Musgrave, T. (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 197–230). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage.Google Scholar
Gibbs, P. (2015). Transdisciplinarity as epistemology, ontology or principles of practical judgement. In Gibbs, P. (Ed.), Transdisciplinary professional learning and practice (pp. 151–164). Springer.Google Scholar
Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professoriate. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Greco, P. (2002). Virtues in epistemology. In Moser, P. K. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of epistemology (pp. 287–315). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hattie, J., & Marsh, H. W. (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 507–542.Google Scholar
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2016). Students as partners: Reflections on a conceptual model. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 4(2), 1–13.Google Scholar
Hesse, M. (1980). Revolutions and reconstructions in the philosophy of science. Harvester.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. (1973). The idea of phenomenology. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1961). The critique of pure reason (Abridged, ed.). Macmillan (original work published in German 1781).Google Scholar
Karukstis, K. K., & Elgren, T. E. (2007). Developing and sustaining a research-supportive curriculum: A compendium of successful practices. The Council on Undergraduate Research.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Maxwell, N. (1984). From knowledge to wisdom: A revolution in the aims and methods of science. Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Maxwell, N. (2014). How universities can help create a wiser world: The urgent need for an academic revolution. Andrews UK.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A. (2019a). Forms of research within strategies for engaging in undergraduate research. Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung, 14(1) 79–94.Google Scholar
Mieg, H. A. (Ed.) (2019b). Inquiry-based learning – Undergraduate research. The German multidisciplinary experience. Springer (open access). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Polity Press.Google Scholar
Ozmon, H., & Craver, S. (1990). Philosophical foundations of education (4th ed.). Merrill Macmillan.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1980). The logic of scientific discovery. Hutchinson (original work published in German 1934).Google Scholar
Reiss, M. J., & Straughan, S. (2001). Improving nature? The science and ethics of genetic engineering. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robertson, J. (2001). Human embryonic stem cell research: Ethical and legal issues. Nature Reviews Genetics, 2(1), 74–78.Google Scholar
Sosa, E. (2007). A virtue epistemology: Apt belief and reflective knowledge (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trowler, P. P., Saunders, M., & Bamber, V. (Eds.). (2012). Tribes and territories in the twenty-first century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimbardi, K., & Myatt, P. (2014). Embedding undergraduate research experiences within the curriculum: A cross-disciplinary study of the key characteristics guiding implementation. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 233–250.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×