Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Bioscience logoLink to Bioscience
. 2024 Jul 30;74(8):567–576. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biae060

Promoting inclusivity in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology education through course-based undergraduate research experiences

Jake A Funkhouser 1,2,✉, Megan Gregory 3,✉, Crickette Sanz 4,5,✉
PMCID: PMC11367669  PMID: 39229624

Abstract

Access to independent research experiences is a persistent barrier that stifles the recruitment and retention of students from diverse backgrounds in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology. The benefits of field experiences are not equitably available to historically excluded and minoritized students. In this article, we summarize evidence that indicates course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) provide a solution to ensure equitable access to independent research experiences in the life sciences. We draw from our own experiences of teaching CUREs in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology and provide the complete curriculum for our effective and largely materials-free CURE in behavioral ecology (CURE-BxEco). We advocate for greater access to and synthesize the benefits of CUREs to promote inclusivity in education. The proliferation of such innovative pedagogical practices benefits science because these classroom methods are critical in recruiting and retaining historically excluded and minoritized students, who offer diverse perspectives in research.

Keywords: diversity and inclusion, animal behavior, behavioral ecology, undergraduate education, field experiences

Diverse perspectives propel scientific innovation (Hofstra et al. 2020). However, access to independent research experiences in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology has proven to be a persistent barrier to facilitating the inclusion of diverse perspectives in these fields.

The ability to participate in field courses and research in situ offers a range of personal, academic, and professional benefits (Beltran et al. 2020, Shinbrot et al. 2022, Hernandez et al. 2023). For most scientists in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology, the field refers to the natural spaces where we learn to conduct science and from which data originate (Tydecks et al. 2016, Fleischner et al. 2017). Taking part in field research (i.e., field experiences) is often the first opportunity that students have to develop their skills in scientific literacy, independent research, and study design, which enables them to envision themselves as worthy practitioners of science (Beltran et al. 2020). In most of the life sciences, access to such field experiences is also critical for degree completion (Scott et al. 2012) and crucial to career advancement (McGuire et al. 2012). However, field courses and field experiences are not equitably available to students who have historically excluded, underrepresented, and minoritized identities (Cheyne 2019, Beltran et al. 2020, Tseng et al. 2020, Demery and Pipkin 2021), including students of color, LGBTQAI2S+, neurodiverse students, first-generation college students, migrant students, students with disabilities, and those with any combination of intersectional identities and backgrounds across these groups. We refer to the conglomerate identities of students rather than their whole selves to reflect the fact that underrepresented students often possess more than one identity that has been historically excluded and therefore minoritized in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology (Veenstra 2011). The intersectional nature of their identities creates a unique combination of minoritized forces that students experience in context-specific conglomerates or universal sums, rather than in isolation (Emery et al. 2021).

Many minoritized students face obstacles to accessing independent research experiences in the field. Frequently cited barriers typically include a lack of time to engage in unpaid opportunities (Alwin et al. 2021), a lack of necessary funds and materials (Giles et al. 2020, Nunez et al. 2020), a lack of access to mentorship and support (Emery et al. 2019), and a lack of ability to travel to and safely navigate the contexts of in situ field experiences (Tseng et al. 2020). Unstructured outdoor settings pose a greater risk of unfamiliar environmental hazards that are difficult to traverse for students with disabilities (John and Khan 2018). Field experiences in outdoor rural localities are often challenging for BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of color) and LGBTQAI2S+ students to safely negotiate, during both living and working in the field (Tseng et al. 2020). For example, minoritized students may face harassment, discrimination, and racism (Demery and Pipkin 2021), including local legislation that directly targets minoritized intersectional identities along the axes of sex, gender, and sexuality (Hughes and Kothari 2023). International field experiences can be equally dangerous to navigate for minoritized student communities. In fact, international travel is simply impossible for students of specific documentation, visa, or citizenship status. Even if possible, international field experiences are often accompanied by substantial financial obligations (Giles et al. 2020) and, in some nations, extreme legal precarity (e.g., anti-LGBTQAI2S+ legislation). Put simply, students with underrepresented, historically excluded, and minoritized identities often face a disproportionate set of barriers to accessing independent field research (Cheyne 2019, Demery and Pipkin 2021). The presence of these barriers suggests that there is a need to propagate other avenues for minoritized students to access research.

Immediate solutions are needed to provide equal opportunities for all students to access independent, inclusive research opportunities in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology that are designed to ensure that no students are precluded from seeking access because of their underrepresented identities (Fleischner et al. 2017, Emery et al. 2019, Harris et al. 2020a, McGill et al. 2021). One strategy is to identify or create equitable, affordable, local, and safe field experiences that are designed with underrepresented, historically excluded, and minoritized students in mind (Demery and Pipkin 2021, Rudzki et al. 2022). Although it is a necessary step forward, even field experiences that strive to be inclusive are often entangled with complicated, exclusionary ideologies, and local beliefs that preclude minoritized students from striving to reach the field at all because they feel that they will be unwelcomed in these spaces (John and Khan 2018, Emery et al. 2021).

There are three key challenges to offering inclusive access to field experiences for all students: piquing minoritized students’ interest in disciplines that place an intellectual emphasis on field experiences (Mourad and Middendorf 2022), ensuring that interested minoritized students who are unable to access the field are able to see themselves as worthy participants in historically field-based disciplines (O'Brien et al. 2020), and providing equitable opportunities for minoritized students to access independent research that is necessary for academic and career advancement (Schell et al. 2020, Totonchi et al. 2021). Given that coursework is a universal component of university education (Handelsman et al. 2022), we suggest that it provides an often overlooked potential solution to the obstacles that hinder inclusive field experiences.

Fully leveraging the potential of inclusive pedagogy in university courses can aid in overcoming systematic disparities in the academic achievement of historically excluded and minoritized students compared with their majority counterparts. Active learning is one example of inclusive pedagogy that has been shown to be an effective strategy for narrowing the achievement gaps of minoritized students (Preszler 2009, Haak et al. 2011, Theobald et al. 2020) and increasing retention in science (Harris et al. 2020b). Many studies on active learning have illuminated its effectiveness compared with what happens in more passive environments, such as classrooms dominated by traditional lecturing (Handelsman et al. 2022). Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are a type of active learning pedagogy that offers a suite of positive benefits to students, including increased scientific literacy (Valliere 2022), science self-efficacy (McBride et al. 2020), a sense of belonging in science (Connors et al. 2021), and access to inclusive independent research opportunities (Smith et al. 2023). In the present article, we illustrate the potential of CUREs to promote inclusive education in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology. We use our experiences teaching hybrid forms of a materials-free CURE to guide our analysis. In addition, we provide our complete curriculum to our CURE in behavioral ecology (CURE-BxEco) to promote the proliferation of such approaches and evidence-based examinations of whether such CUREs are effective in achieving inclusive change.

CUREs can provide inclusive access to authentic research

In CUREs, students engage in reiterative scientific practices to address research questions, collaborate with peers, and discover the relevance of their work outside of the classroom (figure 1; Buchanan and Fisher 2022). CUREs provide students with the agency not only to engage in scientific activities but to do so authentically by defining their own research focus through independently designing studies that investigate research questions with currently unknown answers (Brownell et al. 2012, Ballen et al. 2017a). For example, within a single semester, students can engage with primary literature to develop an original research question, identify appropriate methods, collect or curate data, test hypotheses, and learn to effectively communicate results through the academic process of revising and resubmitting written work after peer review (Fey et al. 2020).

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

The components and benefits of course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs).

In addition, CUREs have the potential to provide research experiences to a greater number of students than would be possible in conventional mentoring opportunities (Smith et al. 2023) as part of the same successful mentorship framework (Emery et al. 2019). In multiple biological sciences programs, the total number of students who had access to independent research experiences more than doubled with access to CUREs compared with one-on-one research mentorship models (Stanford et al. 2017, Jones and Lerner 2019, Smith et al. 2023). Unlike other experiential pedagogical frameworks, which can be cost prohibitive, CUREs that focus on behavioral observations of local animals or other scientific endeavors that do not require many physical materials can exist outside of external funding streams, making these learning experiences accessible to any institution, degree program, and instructor (Sorensen et al. 2018, Jones and Lerner 2019, Gastreich 2021, Sorensen et al. 2021, Tripepi and Landberg 2021). Accounting for students’ varying access to financial and physical resources has the potential to advance efforts to provide equitable and inclusive independent research opportunities across the evolutionary, ecological, and behavioral sciences.

CUREs can disproportionately benefit underrepresented students

CUREs offer many enhanced learning and achievement opportunities to students via the composite benefits of several active learning concepts, including experiential learning (Kong 2021, Stock and Kolb 2021), project-based learning (Eberlein et al. 2008), case-based learning (Holland and Pawlikowska 2019), collaborative learning (Wilson and Varma-Nelson 2019), and learning by doing (Metzger and Langley 2020). CUREs have also been demonstrated to improve students’ critical thinking skills (Brownell and Kloser 2015) and to effectively teach students to engage in the scientific process (Gin et al. 2018).

In addition to nurturing the scientific literacy of those students who plan to pursue careers in science (Millstone and van Zwanenberg 2000, Roberts et al. 2013, Sharon and Baram-Tsabari 2020, Wintterlin et al. 2022), all students can benefit from enhancing their skills in applying scientific concepts to evaluate claims about the world around them (Shaffer et al. 2019). Although scientific literacy commonly improves with engagement in science, historically excluded and minoritized students typically have less experience with science before reaching university science courses. Therefore, curricula that nurture students’ scientific literacy skills can help level the playing field by disproportionately benefiting students from minoritized backgrounds (Theobald et al. 2020). Furthermore, research experiences in CUREs regularly culminate in student-authored research reports, which have been demonstrated to build critical scientific literacy skills, to benefit students’ self-esteem, and to aid in clarifying their personal and professional goals (Theobald et al. 2020, Turner et al. 2021). If not for CUREs, underrepresented and minoritized students may not have opportunities to otherwise engage in research activities and produce manuscripts that are critical for their professional advancement (Shortlidge et al. 2017).

Developing the scientific literacy skills of historically excluded and minoritized students is especially critical given their sense of belonging in the scientific enterprise is often stifled by the disproportionate burden they face in dismantling historically racist and exclusionary forces (O'Brien et al. 2020). Therefore, providing minoritized students with the skills to deconstruct racial oppression and White supremacy (Schell et al. 2020), address misconceptions about natural selection and evolution (Mead et al. 2018), and dispel dichotomous caricatures of human variation in gender, sex, and sexuality (Zemenick et al. 2022) is essential to promoting an inclusive and diverse future for the biological sciences. CUREs are an exceptionally promising avenue to improve students’ scientific literacy skills while disproportionally benefiting the learning and inclusion of historically excluded and minoritized students.

CUREs can provide students with a sense of belonging in science

Not only do CUREs improve the scientific skills of historically excluded and minoritized students so they can engage in science, but CUREs can also change students’ abilities to believe that they are worthy practitioners of science. Science self-efficacy is an individual's belief in their capabilities to engage in scientific inquiry (Bandura 1977, McBride et al. 2020). Increasing science self-efficacy for students has been suggested as a fundamental step in recruiting and retaining scholars from underrepresented and historically marginalized backgrounds in STEM (Robnett et al. 2015, Ballen et al. 2017b). Engaging students in the scientific process in general education courses significantly increases their self-efficacy and connection of their selves to science (McBride et al. 2020). Importantly, the greatest increases in self-efficacy were for minoritized and international students.

By increasing students’ self-efficacy, CURE pedagogy also increases students’ sense of belonging in science (Turner et al. 2021). Belonging includes perceptions of connectedness, social inclusion, and the construction of meaningful social relationships with peers and mentors in scientific contexts (Fink et al. 2018). Providing students with the opportunity to construct a sense of belonging in science is critical to retaining diverse perspectives in any scientific discipline (O'Brien et al. 2020).

A sense of belonging within specific courses, as opposed to campus-wide or discipline-specific belonging, has been suggested as the most influential source of support for the behavioral and emotional engagement of underrepresented and historically excluded STEM students (Wilson et al. 2015, O'Brien et al. 2020). CUREs therefore offer a critical avenue for fostering a sense of belonging by inviting students to participate and contribute to a research network (Connors et al. 2021, Turner et al. 2021). The benefits of belonging offered by CUREs are greatest for students from historically underrepresented backgrounds in science (Chemers et al. 2011, Fink et al. 2018, Syed et al. 2019). The communities constructed in CUREs can be effective in generating a greater sense of self-efficacy and scientific belonging that have cascading benefits to student personal growth, career development, and disciplinary contributions (O'Brien et al. 2020).

CUREs in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology

The benefits of CUREs in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology have been repeatedly demonstrated (see table 1) and can be highlighted through a few case studies. For example, in one CURE, students independently studied canid behavioral ecology and this experience provided them with a sense of place during the uncertain times of a global pandemic (Valliere 2022). In a similar course, students developed advanced scientific skills while engaging in, what they recounted as, meaningful real-world research and reported being more likely to enroll in graduate programs and seek employment related to science as a result of participating in the CURE (Sorensen et al. 2018). Although there are many examples of CURE curricula in the life sciences (e.g., CureNet, serc.carleton.edu/curenet), there are few that take our approach in combining research experience with materials-free data collection and writing-intensive training in scientific literacy.

Table 1.

Benefits of CUREs in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology.

CURE Setting Learning outcomes Reference
Species distribution and biodiversity of urban birds M F Scientific literacy, advocacy for urban conservation, participation in eBird Gastreich 2021
GIS investigations with open-source ecology and environmental data C Scientific competency, experience working in collaborative remote teams Fey et al. 2020
Species distribution and mammalian community dynamics using camera trap methods F A sense of place and belonging, the ability to advocate for and communicate science Sorensen et al. 2021, Tripepi and Landberg 2021, Valliere 2022
Coastal dune plant community restoration F Scientific literacy, systems thinking, greater sense of science identity Stanfield et al. 2020
Behavioral ecology of goats C O Community engagement, international collaboration, critical thinking Kay et al. 2023
Behavioral ecology of squirrels (Squirrel-net) O F A sense of community, career-readiness skills Connors et al. 2021
Behavioral ecology of animals (CURE-BxEco) M C O F Science self-efficacy, writing intensive, a sense of belonging in science The present article
Open in a new tab

Note: The setting of each CURE refers to modules conducted in a single class session (M), independent projects conducted from the classroom or exclusively during scheduled class time (C), independent projects conducted using online resources (O), and urban or local field experiences that were conducted outside of the classroom and outside of specifically scheduled class time (F).

A new CURE in behavioral ecology (CURE-BxEco)

Our institution has offered a materials-free, accessible, and effective CURE since as early as 1965. We call this curriculum “Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience in Behavioral Ecology” (CURE-BxEco). The course is an advanced-level, writing-intensive seminar that provides students with a semester-long, course-based research experience, which also fulfills a general education requirement in the College of Arts and Sciences.

The course curriculum enables instructors to both guide and mentor students as they conceptualize, design, and conduct research projects that include 4 weeks (more than 40 hours) of independent data collection on animal behavior (figure 2). During class sessions, lecture materials and activities are designed to equip students with a background in behavioral and ecological theory, as well as state-of-the-art methods for observational behavioral data collection that can be employed in their projects, such as using customizable apps for data collection (Ross et al. 2016). Students also engage in peer-review workshops to review their writing and work collaboratively to establish interobserver reliability in the methods of each of their projects. Each week, students receive individualized feedback and mentorship on their research designs, drafted manuscript sections, data collection, and research findings. By the end of the semester, all students produce a complete manuscript written in academic journal style and share their findings as an academic conference presentation.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Overview of CURE-BxEco curriculum components and week-by-week timeline. Bars indicate the time students spend independently working on these components of their projects. All students receive feedback after their initial submission. Dots indicate targeted submission dates for revised or updated assignments.

CURE-BxEco and similar course-based research opportunities carry the most impact for underrepresented and minoritized identities. By fostering students’ science self-efficacy and sense of belonging in science classrooms, CUREs can contribute to the persistence of underrepresented and minoritized identities in science. Our CURE-BxEco curriculum has been documented to be effective in these areas. Participation in CURE-BxEco significantly increased students’ self-reported science self-efficacy, changed their beliefs about science, and improved students’ sense of belonging in science (figure 3; also see the supplemental material).

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Change in median composite responses of individual students to the (a) Science Self-Efficacy Scale and (b) Perceptions of Science Scale. Each pair of points represents the response of a single student. Science self-efficacy was measured using McBride and colleagues (2020) items where students were asked to rate their confidence (on a scale of 1–10) in performing several science-related tasks. We measured students’ perceptions of science by asking them to rate their agreement (on a scale of 1–5) with several statements related to the inclusive and realistic nature of the scientific process. Both measurement scales are reported in supplemental tables S4–S5.

Although students had historically conducted data collection via direct observation at the Saint Louis Zoo, this was not possible during the COVID-19 pandemic, and so we adapted the course curriculum to provide students with additional opportunities to conduct their research using live-streamed video webcams and video databases that are freely available. Examples of animal webcam views successfully used by our students are included in figure 4 and supplemental table S1. When the courses returned to in-person instruction, we continued to integrate opportunities for live observations, remote observations, and data collection from video archives into the course curriculum so as to maximize our flexibility in accommodating the diverse needs of students and to enhance the breadth of research opportunities provided by CURE-BxEco. In doing so, the students were afforded new possibilities to increase their sample sizes, conduct comparative investigations across species or study sites, and screen footage for behaviors that are rare or difficult to score during real-time observations.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Examples of remote data collection via live animal webcams that students of CURE-BxEco used in their independent research projects: (a) elephants at San Diego Zoo Safari Park (https://sdzsafaripark.org/cams/elephant-cam), (b) orangutans and siamangs at San Diego Zoo (https://zoo.sandiegozoo.org/cams/ape-cam), (c) domestic donkeys at The Donkey Sanctuary (https://thedonkeysanctuary.org.uk/webcams), (d) penguins at Kansas City Zoo (https://kansascityzoo.org/animal-cam/penguin-camera), (e) flamingos at Maryland Zoo (https://marylandzoo.org/animals/live-cams-feeds), (f) polar bears at Saint Louis Zoo (https://stlzoo.org/animals/live-animal-webcams). A database of possible live animal webcams can be found at https://congo-apes.org/CUREBxEco.

By incorporating freely available animal webcams, the components of CURE-BxEco are more widely portable and can be implemented across many educational settings, therefore extending research experiences to a greater number of historically excluded and minoritized students. Furthermore, by integrating an open science initiative and launching an associated repository for data sets related to this curriculum, we hope to both provide open scholarship training for our students as well as catalyze expansive and comparative research by other scholars. A copy of our entire curriculum and animal webcam database is provided at https://congo-apes.org/CUREBxEco.

CURE-BxEco has been successful in providing students with opportunities to engage in authentic research experiences with unique combinations of questions and study populations. On several occasions, projects stemming from this course have resulted in published, peer-reviewed manuscripts. For example, data on black-tailed prairie dog behavior, response to visitors, and enclosure use have informed the care and welfare management of this species (Eltorai and Sussman 2010, 2011). In another project, data on the social interactions of bachelor gorillas were collected by multiple students over several semesters. These data and their results offered relevant insights into the care and management of western lowland gorillas (Gartland et al. 2018). The type of collective and longitudinal data collection activities associated with CURE-BxEco offers untapped possibilities to address the need for data in zoo science, documenting taxonomic behavioral diversity, advancing conservation biology, and improving the management of captive animal well-being (Cronin et al. 2021, Garcia-Pelegrin et al. 2022).

In addition, the pressing need for research in the zoological, conservation, and well-being sciences assures students that their research is meaningful and relevant in many ways outside of the classroom. Therefore, CURE-BxEco can amass much-needed information and data archives that could span a considerable variety of taxa, number of individuals, and temporal depth. We look forward to seeing a greater diversity of live animal webcams, both in terms of the number of species and the types of institutions providing live webcam views in the coming years. We encourage institutions to invest in publicly accessible webcams and for studies to be conducted to understand the impact of such resources. Furthermore, we hope those with webcams will see the value of providing students or the public with on-screen date and time information and web access to archives of previous footage along with links to group size, demographics, individual life histories, and identifying characteristics of individuals. Reciprocally, we encourage students and educators who use live animal webcams to share their use, impact, study details, and the results of their course-based investigations with curators and caregivers at the host institution.

CURE-BxEco is novel in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology because it combines previously disparate pedagogical components: an exhaustive database of animal webcams as a complement to in-person data collection to provide greater access to semester-long independent research experiences and is centered around writing-intensive components to strengthen career-readiness skills and professional advancement. By facilitating personalized opportunities for students to engage in research and contribute novel findings to academia, CUREs also have the potential to enhance the equity and inclusion of students with underrepresented identities across disciplines. This curriculum is also effective in promoting students' science self-efficacy and sense of belonging, while offering opportunities for academic and professional advancement (supplemental tables S2–S3). Both science self-efficacy and greater opportunities for advancement are mechanisms that contribute to the persistence of underrepresented and minoritized students in the sciences (Ballen et al. 2017a, McBride et al. 2020).

The promising future of CUREs

CUREs can leverage the documented benefits of active learning while providing students with authentic, original research opportunities to be scientists. Engaging in a CURE increases students’ confidence to engage in scientific activities (McBride et al. 2020, Stanfield et al. 2022). Thereby, not only is CURE pedagogy effective in providing students with the skills they need for a productive career in science (Shaffer et al. 2019), but CUREs also have the potential to change the ways students think about science and themselves as scientists (Ballen et al. 2017b, Connors et al. 2021), while providing greater access to independent research opportunities (Jones and Lerner 2019, Smith et al. 2023). However, CUREs are just one among many mechanisms that are necessary to truly propel an inclusive and diverse future of ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology. For example, novel recruitment and retention strategies are necessary to overcome the systematic barriers that historically excluded and minoritized students face in accessing college- and university-level education in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology.

In addition to intervention programs aimed at ensuring that these students gain university admissions and financial assistance, CUREs taught by university faculty to secondary students in high schools with limited resources have the potential to enhance the ability of historically excluded and minoritized students to envision themselves as scientists. Providing precollege students with access to the benefits of CUREs has broad potential to break down systematic barriers and pique the scientific interests of historically excluded and minoritized students in ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology (O'Brien et al. 2020, Mourad and Middendorf 2022). We designed the CURE-BxEco curriculum and course resources to be not only accessible but easily adaptable to different education levels and generalizable to any field that uses the scientific process. Educators from high schools to graduate programs at both public and private institutions can adapt CURE-BxEco to mentor students through authentic scientific engagements using live video webcams from anywhere in the world. Furthermore, components of CURE-BxEco (or other CUREs) could also be extended outside of coursework to professional development modules that can aid in supporting a diverse workforce of practitioners in behavior, ecology, and evolutionary biology (e.g., research group members, animal caregivers). The CURE-BxEco curriculum has unparalleled flexibility in that it can be administered entirely online, without costly materials, and in variable timeframes (within 1 day, several days, or several weeks). As such, we also hope that CURE-BxEco will serve as a feasible means for research groups to incorporate community and workforce outreach into their teaching and service.

In looking ahead at the future of inclusive pedagogy across higher education, continued investigations are necessary to fully understand the mechanisms that make this type of curriculum effective, especially for historically excluded and minoritized students. In a universal sense, it strikes us as necessary to promote the routine collection of information on the intersectionality of students’ identities and experiences across higher education. Studies of student engagement, learning, and success should strive to collect information that encompasses the entire extent of students’ identities, not just sex assigned at birth and race but also dimensions of gender identity, sexuality, familial responsibilities, citizenship, visa status, religion, access to disposable income, and the necessity of secondary employment.

In addition, we see an urgent need to conduct international, multi-institutional, and cross-disciplinary assessments of the specific features of the university curriculum, mentorship culture, and overall academic environment that affect students’ senses of belonging to elucidate how and when students of historically excluded backgrounds can most benefit from opportunities to increase their science self-efficacy. To better understand the mechanisms that promote the effectiveness of CUREs, specifically, we would also promote longitudinal investigations into how experiences in CUREs across different educational settings (e.g., introductory first-year and advanced third- or fourth-year courses) affect the recruitment and retention of minoritized students, the ability to engage a larger number of students in research with CUREs compared with other mentorship models that may be less efficient (i.e., in terms of cost, resources, and time), and the professional impacts of CUREs relative to conventional field experiences. All such investigations are likely to be interdisciplinary as the students of ecology, evolution, and behavioral biology typically move across departmental divides (e.g., animal behavior, biological anthropology, human biology, evolutionary medicine). Finally, in practice, we must exert a concerted effort to harness the potential of CUREs to achieve a just, diverse, equitable, and thriving scientific community around the world.

Supplementary Material

biae060_Supplemental_File
biae060_supplemental_file.pdf (192.8KB, pdf)

Acknowledgments

This article is dedicated to the late Robert Sussman, who, in many ways, was a prescient advocate for core concepts of experiential learning and CUREs as highlighted in this article. Professor Sussman began offering the “Behavioral Research at the Saint Louis Zoo” course as early as 1965 and forged a collaboration with the Saint Louis Zoo that has continued since that time. We are grateful to all past and present administrators, curators, zoological managers, and caregivers at the Saint Louis Zoo who continue to support the students of this course. In particular, we would like to recognize Ingrid Porton, Stephanie Braccini, Heidi Hellmuth, and Helen Boostrom. We also thank other instructors who have taught or assisted in teaching this course (or variations of this course) in a way that honors Professor Sussman's original vision for this course-based undergraduate research experience: Peter Garber, Claire Hemingway, Mrinalini Erkenswick Watsa, Krista Milich, Anneke Deluycker, Benjamin Freed, Elizabeth Kelley, Crystal Riley Koenig, Anna Nekaris, Monica McDonald, and others who assisted with the instruction for these courses. We thank the editor, three reviewers, and our colleagues associated with Washington University's Center for Teaching and Learning for their conversations and feedback greatly improved this article (Shaina Rowell, Rick Moore, Kristen Edgeworth, Taylor Nye, Elizabeth Eikmann). Finally, we acknowledge the five decades of devoted and conscientious students whose excellent scholarship and engagements with science continue to inspire us. The intersectional identities of these authors represent a conglomerate of underrepresented scholars in the life sciences and across higher education. One or more of these authors self-identifies as a first-generation college student, historically excluded minority, and member of the LGBTQAI2S+ community.

Author Biography

Jake A. Funkhouser (jakefunkhouser@wustl.edu, jake.funkhouser@uzh.ch) is affiliated with the Department of Anthropology at Washington University, in St. Louis, Missouri, in the United States, and with the Department of Evolutionary Anthropology at the University of Zurich, in Zurich, Switzerland. Megan Gregory (meggregory@wustl.edu) is affiliated with the College Writing Program and with the Center for Teaching and Learning at Washington University, in St. Louis, Missouri, United States. Crickette Sanz (csanz@wustl.edu) is affiliated with the Department of Anthropology at Washington University, in St. Louis, Missouri, United States, and the Wildlife Conservation Society's Congo Program, in Brazzaville, Republic of Congo.

Contributor Information

Jake A Funkhouser, Department of Anthropology at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States; Department of Evolutionary Anthropology at the University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Megan Gregory, College Writing Program and with the Center for Teaching and Learning at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States.

Crickette Sanz, Department of Anthropology at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States; Wildlife Conservation Society's Congo Program, Brazzaville, Republic of Congo.

Author contributions

Jake A. Funkhouser (Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing), Megan Gregory (Supervision, Writing – review & editing), and Crickette Sanz (Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – review & editing)

References cited

  1. Alwin  A, Geleta  Y, Mourad  T. 2021. Toward conceptualizing student outcomes in undergraduate field programs and employer expectations for field positions. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America  102: e01820. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ballen  CJ  et al.  2017a. A call to develop course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) for nonmajors courses. CBE—Life Sciences Education  16: 2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Ballen  CJ, Wieman  C, Salehi  S, Searle  JB, Zamudio  KR. 2017b. Enhancing diversity in undergraduate science: Self-efficacy drives performance gains with active learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education  16: 6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bandura  A. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review  84: 191–215. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Beltran  RS, Marnocha  E, Race  A, Croll  DA, Dayton  GH, Zavaleta  ES. 2020. Field courses narrow demographic achievement gaps in ecology and evolutionary biology. Ecology and Evolution  10: 5184–5196. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Brownell  SE, Kloser  MJ. 2015. Toward a conceptual framework for measuring the effectiveness of course-based undergraduate research experiences in undergraduate biology. Studies in Higher Education  40: 525–544. [Google Scholar]
  7. Brownell  SE, Kloser  MJ, 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: 36–45. [Google Scholar]
  8. Buchanan  AJ, Fisher  GR. 2022. Current status and implementation of science practices in course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs): A systematic literature review. CBE—Life Sciences Education  21: 17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Chemers  MM, Zurbriggen  EL, Syed  M, Goza  BK, Bearman  S. 2011. The role of efficacy and identity in science career commitment among underrepresented minority students. Journal of Social Issues  67: 469–491. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cheyne  SM. 2019. Being “out” in the field: Who is responsible for health and safety?  International Journal of Primatology  40: 468–469. [Google Scholar]
  11. Connors  PK, Lanier  HC, Erb  LP, Varner  J, Dizney  L, Flaherty  EA, Duggan  JM, Yahnke  CJ, Hanson  JD. 2021. Connected while distant: Networking cures across classrooms to create community and empower students. Integrative and Comparative Biology  61: 934–943. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cronin  MR  et al.  2021. Anti-racist interventions to transform ecology, evolution and conservation biology departments. Nature Ecology and Evolution  5: 1213–1223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Demery  AJC, Pipkin  MA. 2021. Safe fieldwork strategies for at-risk individuals, their supervisors and institutions. Nature Ecology and Evolution  5: 5–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Eberlein  T, Kampmeier  J, Minderhout  V, Moog  RS, Platt  T, Varma-Nelson  P, White  HB. 2008. Pedagogies of engagement in science. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education  36: 262–273. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Eltorai  AEM, Sussman  RW. 2010. The “visitor effect” and captive black-tailed prairie dog behavior. Der Zoologische Garten  79: 109–120. [Google Scholar]
  16. Eltorai  AEM, Sussman  RW. 2011. Black-tailed prairie dog affinity for sunlight and its potential animal welfare management implications. Animal Biology Journal  2: 143–145. [Google Scholar]
  17. Emery  N, Hund  A, Burks  R, Duffy  M, Scoffoni  C, Swei  A. 2019. Students as ecologists: Strategies for successful mentorship of undergraduate researchers. Ecology and Evolution  9: 4316–4326. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Emery  NC, Bledsoe  EK, Hasley  AO, Eaton  CD. 2021. Cultivating inclusive instructional and research environments in ecology and evolutionary science. Ecology and Evolution  11: 1480–1491. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Fey  SB, Theus  ME, Ramirez  AR. 2020. Course-based undergraduate research experiences in a remote setting: Two case studies documenting implementation and student perceptions. Ecology and Evolution  10: 12528–12541. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Fink  A, Cahill  MJ, McDaniel  MA, Hoffman  A, Frey  RF. 2018. Improving general chemistry performance through a growth mindset intervention: Selective effects on underrepresented minorities. Chemistry Education Research and Practice  19: 783–806. [Google Scholar]
  21. Fleischner  TL  et al.  2017. Teaching biology in the field: Importance, challenges, and solutions. BioScience  67: 558–567. [Google Scholar]
  22. Garcia-Pelegrin  E, Clark  F, Miller  R. 2022. Increasing animal cognition research in zoos. Zoo Biology: 11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Gartland  K, McDonald  M, Slade  SB, White  F, Sanz  C. 2018. Behavioral changes following alterations in the composition of a captive bachelor group of western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla). Zoo Biology  37: 391–398. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Gastreich  KR. 2021. Assessing urban biodiversity with the eBird citizen science project: A course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) module. CourseSource  (29 August 2021). https://qubeshub.org/community/groups/coursesource/publications?id=2673&v=1
  25. Giles  S, Jackson  C, Stephen  N. 2020. Barriers to fieldwork in undergraduate geoscience degrees. Nature Reviews Earth and Environment  1: 77–78. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gin  LE, Rowland  AA, Steinwand  B, Bruno  J, Corwin  LA. 2018. Students who fail to achieve predefined research goals may still experience many positive outcomes as a result of cure participation. CBE—Life Sciences Education  17: 18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Haak  DC, HilleRisLambers  J, Pitre  E, Freeman  S. 2011. Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science  332: 1213–1216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Handelsman  J, Elgin  S, Estrada  M, Hays  S, Johnson  T, Miller  S, Mingo  V, Shaffer  C, Williams  J. 2022. Achieving stem diversity: Fix the classrooms. Science  376: 1057–1059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Harris  BN, McCarthy  PC, Wright  AM, Schutz  H, Boersma  KS, Shepherd  SL, Manning  LA, Malisch  JL, Ellington  RM. 2020a. From panic to pedagogy: Using online active learning to promote inclusive instruction in ecology and evolutionary biology courses and beyond. Ecology and Evolution  10: 12581–12612. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Harris  RB, Mack  MR, Bryant  J, Theobald  EJ, Freeman  S. 2020b. Reducing achievement gaps in undergraduate general chemistry could lift underrepresented students into a “hyperpersistent zone.”  Science Advances  6: 8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Hernandez  LMA, Mittan-Moreau  CS, Lamb  T, Holmes  KD, McDonald  CA, Zamudio  KR, Ballen  CJ. 2023. A half century of student data reveals the professional impacts of a biology field course. BioScience  73: 59–67. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hofstra  B, Kulkarni  VV, Galvez  SMN, He  B, Jurafsky  D, McFarland  DA. 2020. The diversity-innovation paradox in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  117: 9284–9291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Holland  JC, Pawlikowska  T. 2019. Undergraduate medical students’ usage and perceptions of anatomical case-based learning: Comparison of facilitated small group discussions and elearning resources. Anatomical Sciences Education  12: 245–256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Hughes  BE, Kothari  S. 2023. Don't be too political: Depoliticization, sexual orientation, and undergraduate stem major persistence. Journal of Homosexuality  70: 632–659. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. John  CM, Khan  SB. 2018. Mental health in the field. Nature Geoscience  11: 618–620. [Google Scholar]
  36. Jones  CK, Lerner  AB. 2019. Implementing a course-based undergraduate research experience to grow the quantity and quality of undergraduate research in an animal science curriculum. Journal of Animal Science  97: 4691–4697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Kong  YT. 2021. The role of experiential learning on students’ motivation and classroom engagement. Frontiers in Psychology  12: 4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. McBride  E, Oswald  WW, Beck  LA, Murray  AV. 2020. “I'm just not that great at science”: Science self-efficacy in arts and communication students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching  57: 597–622. [Google Scholar]
  39. McGill  BM  et al.  2021. You are welcome here: A practical guide to diversity, equity, and inclusion for undergraduates embarking on an ecological research experience. Ecology and Evolution  11: 3636–3645. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. McGuire  KL, Primack  RB, Losos  EC. 2012. Dramatic improvements and persistent challenges for women ecologists. BioScience  62: 189–196. [Google Scholar]
  41. Mead  R, Hejmadi  M, Hurst  LD. 2018. Scientific aptitude better explains poor responses to teaching of evolution than psychological conflicts. Nature Ecology and Evolution  2: 388–394. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Metzger  KJ, Langley  D. 2020. The room itself is not enough: Student engagement in active learning classrooms. College Teaching  68: 150–160. [Google Scholar]
  43. Millstone  E, van Zwanenberg  P. 2000. A crisis of trust: For science, scientists or for institutions?  Nature Medicine  6: 1307–1308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Mourad  T, Middendorf  G. 2022. Comprehensive support for diversity in stem. Science  377: 1272–1273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Nunez  AM, Rivera  J, Hallmark  T. 2020. Applying an intersectionality lens to expand equity in the geosciences. Journal of Geoscience Education  68: 97–114. [Google Scholar]
  46. O'Brien  LT, Bart  HL, Garcia  DM. 2020. Why are there so few ethnic minorities in ecology and evolutionary biology? Challenges to inclusion and the role of sense of belonging. Social Psychology of Education  23: 449–477. [Google Scholar]
  47. Preszler  RW. 2009. Replacing lecture with peer-led workshops improves student learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education  8: 182–192. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Roberts  MR, Reid  G, Schroeder  M, Norris  SP. 2013. Causal or spurious? The relationship of knowledge and attitudes to trust in science and technology. Public Understanding of Science  22: 624–641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Robnett  RD, Chemers  MM, Zurbriggen  EL. 2015. Longitudinal associations among undergraduates’ research experience, self-efficacy, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching  52: 847–867. [Google Scholar]
  50. Ross  MR, Neimann  T, Wark  JD, Heintz  MR, Horrigan  A, Cronin  KA, Shender  MA, Gillespie  K. 2016. Zoomonitor. Zoomonitor. https://zoomonitor.org.
  51. Rudzki  EN  et al.  2022. A guide for developing a field research safety manual that explicitly considers risks for marginalized identities in the sciences. Methods in Ecology and Evolution  13: 2318–2330. [Google Scholar]
  52. Schell  CJ, Guy  C, Shelton  DS, Campbell-Staton  SC, Sealey  BA, Lee  DN, Harris  NC. 2020. Recreating Wakanda by promoting black excellence in ecology and evolution. Nature Ecology and Evolution  4: 1285–1287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Scott  GW, Goulder  R, Wheeler  P, Scott  LJ, Tobin  ML, Marsham  S. 2012. The value of fieldwork in life and environmental sciences in the context of higher education: A case study in learning about biodiversity. Journal of Science Education and Technology  21: 11–21. [Google Scholar]
  54. Shaffer  JF, Ferguson  J, Denaro  K. 2019. Use of the test of scientific literacy skills reveals that fundamental literacy is an important contributor to scientific literacy. CBE—Life Sciences Education  18: 31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Sharon  AJ, Baram-Tsabari  A. 2020. Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life?  Science Education  104: 873–894. [Google Scholar]
  56. Shinbrot  XA, Treibergs  K, Hernandez  LMA, Esparza  D, Ghezzi-Kopel  K, Goebel  M, Graham  OJ, Heim  AB, Smith  JA, Smith  MK. 2022. The impact of field courses on undergraduate knowledge, affect, behavior, and skills: A scoping review. BioScience  72: 1007–1017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Shortlidge  EE, Bangera  G, Brownell  SE. 2017. Each to their own cure: Faculty who teach course-based undergraduate research experiences report why you too should teach a cure. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education  18: 11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Smith  KPW  et al.  2023. Course-based undergraduate research experiences are a viable approach to increase access to research experiences in biology. Journal of Biological Education  57: 618–632. [Google Scholar]
  59. Sorensen  AE, Brown  J, Alred  A, Fontaine  JJ, Dauer  JM. 2021. Student representations and conceptions of ecological versus social sciences in a conservation course. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences  11: 139–149. [Google Scholar]
  60. Sorensen  AE, Corral  L, Dauer  JM, Fontaine  JJ. 2018. Integrating authentic scientific research in conservation course-based undergraduate research experience. Natural Sciences Education  47: 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  61. Stanfield  E, Slown  CD, Sedlacek  Q, Worcester  SE. 2022. A course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) in biology: Developing systems thinking through field experiences in restoration ecology. CBE—Life Sciences Education  21: 20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Stanford  JS, Rocheleau  SE, Smith  KPW, Mohan  J. 2017. Early undergraduate research experiences lead to similar learning gains for stem and non-STEM undergraduates. Studies in Higher Education  42: 115–129. [Google Scholar]
  63. Stock  KL, Kolb  D. 2021. The experiencing scale: An experiential learning gauge of engagement in learning. Experiential Learning and Teaching in Higher Education  4: 3–21. [Google Scholar]
  64. Syed  M, Zurbriggen  EL, Chemers  MM, Goza  BK, Bearman  S, Crosby  FJ, Shaw  JM, Hunter  L, Morgan  EM. 2019. The role of self-efficacy and identity in mediating the effects of stem support experiences. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy  19: 7–49. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Theobald  EJ  et al.  2020. Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  117: 6476–6483. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Totonchi  AD, Perez  T, Lee  Y-K, Robinson  AK, Linnenbrink-Garcia  L. 2021. The role of stereotype threat in ethnically minoritized students’ science motivation: A four-year longitudinal study of achievement and persistence in stem. Contemporary Educational Psychology  67: 102015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Tripepi  M, Landberg  T. 2021. Undergraduate research in the time of COVID-19: A remote imaging protocol for physically distanced students studying wildlife. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education  22: 3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Tseng  M, El-Sabaawi  RW, Kantar  MB, Pantel  JH, Srivastava  DS, Ware  JL. 2020. Strategies and support for black, indigenous, and people of colour in ecology and evolutionary biology. Nature Ecology and Evolution  4: 1288–1290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Turner  AN, Challa  AK, Cooper  KM. 2021. Student perceptions of authoring a publication stemming from a course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE). CBE—Life Sciences Education  20: 14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Tydecks  L, Bremerich  V, Jentschke  I, Likens  GE, Tockner  K. 2016. Biological field stations: A global infrastructure for research, education, and public engagement. BioScience  66: 164–171. [Google Scholar]
  71. Valliere  JM. 2022. Cultivating scientific literacy and a sense of place through course-based urban ecology research. Ecology and Evolution  12: 17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Veenstra  G. 2011. Race, gender, class, and sexual orientation: Intersecting axes of inequality and self-rated health in Canada. International Journal for Equity in Health  10: 3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Wilson  SB, Varma-Nelson  P. 2019. Characterization of first-semester organic chemistry peer-led team learning and cyber peer-led team learning students’ use and explanation of electron-pushing formalism. Journal of Chemical Education  96: 25–34. [Google Scholar]
  74. Wilson  D, Jones  D, Bocell  F, Crawford  J, Kim  MJ, Veilleux  N, Floyd-Smith  T, Bates  R, Plett  M. 2015. Belonging and academic engagement among undergraduate stem students: A multi-institutional study. Research in Higher Education  56: 750–776. [Google Scholar]
  75. Wintterlin  F, Hendriks  F, Mede  NG, Bromme  R, Metag  J, Schaefer  MS. 2022. Predicting public trust in science: The role of basic orientations toward science, perceived trustworthiness of scientists, and experiences with science. Frontiers in Communication  6: 13. [Google Scholar]
  76. Zemenick  AT, Turney  S, Webster  AJ, Jones  SC, Weber  MG. 2022. Six principles for embracing gender and sexual diversity in postsecondary biology classrooms. BioScience  72: 481–492. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

biae060_Supplemental_File
biae060_supplemental_file.pdf (192.8KB, pdf)

Articles from Bioscience are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES