Long-Term Outcomes of Biotechnology Student Participation in Undergraduate Research Experiences at Delaware Technical Community College

Abstract

Engagement in undergraduate research experiences (UREs) positively impacts student skill development, scientific identity, and retention in STEM. Incorporating UREs into 2-year programs would greatly benefit the diverse, nontraditional student populations enrolled at community colleges. This article describes the infusion of the Bioscience/Biotechnology program at Delaware Technical Community College with course-based and mentored research experiences that could serve as a model for other institutions. Studies done with the Office of Institutional Research revealed a concurrent increase in enrollment and graduation rates. Retrospective interviews with graduates from the program highlight the critical influence of research, the mentor/student relationship, and a sense of community on the development of transferable skills, self-efficacy, and subsequent successes in pursuing higher education and employment.

Undergraduate research experiences (UREs) positively impact STEM students, particularly female, underrepresented minorities (URM) and first-generation students (Espinosa 2011; Gentile et al. 2017; Haeger and Fresquez 2016; Hurtado et al. 2009; Jones et al. 2010). Increasing numbers of community colleges (CCs) have adopted both classroom-based and mentored models of undergraduate research experiences (Hensel and Cedja 2014; Hewlett 2018). This movement holds promise of greater access to STEM fields through wider CC student participation (Bangera and Brownell 2014) given that almost half of all URM students in the US are enrolled in CCs (AACC 2020) while more than half of all students receiving STEM bachelor’s degrees complete some part of their education at community colleges (NCSES 2010). With lower costs, open access policies, and support for non-traditional students, community colleges serve populations who benefit greatly from exposure to these opportunities (Olson and Labov 2012).

Many publications on UREs report on perceived gains in skills, confidence, and career plans gathered from student surveys and interviews (Lopatto 2010; McIntee et al. 2018; Mraz-Craig et al. 2018) while others use institutional data to investigate student retention and graduation rates (Rodenbusch et al. 2016). Several studies delve deeper into nuanced dynamics such as whether mentoring relationships impact retention, how scaffolding across multiple courses impacts skill development, and how multi-semester research experiences impact development and identity as a scientist (Adedokun et al. 2014; Linn et al. 2015; Nagda et al. 1998; Thiry et al. 2012). Because UREs are relatively new to community colleges, there are few studies that examine their impacts on community college students or ask alumni to take a retrospective look at the impact of UREs on their career trajectories or pursuit of advanced degrees (Nerio et al. 2019). In this article, we examine the long-term education and career outcomes for alumni who participated in a URE-infused program over a five-year period in the Bioscience/Biotechnology program at Delaware Technical Community College. Working with data from the National Student Clearinghouse and the college’s Office of Institutional Research, we show that infusion of the program with multiple opportunities for UREs corresponded with increased program enrollment, higher graduation rates, and continuation of higher education. Interviews with graduates provide more detailed insights into the program’s influence on student success after graduation, whether continuing their education or entering the workforce.

THE RESEARCH INFUSED PROGRAM

Delaware Technical Community College (DTCC) is an open-access college serving a diverse population of approximately 15,000 students. It is both a technical and a community college with three campuses across the state, each addressing the needs of local industry, preparing students to enter directly into the workforce upon graduation or to transfer to a four-year institution. The Biotechnology/Bioscience (BIS-BIT) program described in this article, housed on the Stanton campus in the Biology and Chemistry Department, has an average enrollment of 200 students, graduating about 12 students per year. The program is rigorous, requiring students to take five biology courses and six chemistry courses (Table 1); all science courses included a laboratory section. Lack of college readiness, financial issues, and family obligations extended the time to degree completion from two years to an average of four years. Responding to current industry needs, the college has created articulation agreements with local four-year institutions where most students transfer upon graduation.

TABLE 1.

BIS/BIT Program Biology and Chemistry Courses

Year 1
Fall	Spring
Biology I Chemical Principles I	Biology II Principles of Microbiology Chemical Principles II
Year 2
Fall	Spring
Biotechnology I Organic Chemistry I Analytical Chemistry I	Biotechnology II Organic Chemistry II Analytical Chemistry II

Note: Italicized courses have embedded UREs.

Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences

To provide research experiences to the maximum number of students, laboratory activities were modified to provide scaffolded experiences that emphasized scientific and transferable skills through a sequence of three biology courses (Table 1). The laboratories consisted of instructor-designed research-based projects in which students took ownership of the project, had opportunities for reiteration to complete the project, and were vested in the outcome. Scientific literacy was explicitly emphasized through laboratory reports where students were expected to use scientific terminology and style when analyzing data and communicating results. New in-class activities were introduced to strengthen critical thinking, reinforce group work, and to develop a deeper understanding of primary literature and ethical conduct of research.

Mentored Undergraduate Research Experiences

Students also had the opportunity to work on a research project in a traditional mentored model. Many of the research projects were related to course-embedded projects, building on several of the same technical skills, thus lowering the threshold to entry. Each semester, including summers, up to twelve students worked with two to four faculty members on a variety of long-term projects. Because faculty recruited students from their courses and any interested student was encouraged regardless of where they were in the course sequence or their grade point average, demographics of mentored students reflected those of the program and the college (Table 2). Student length of participation in mentored research ranged from one semester to three years. Participating students developed their research skills through multiple semesters, with an initial focus on techniques and reading scientific literature, followed later by troubleshooting and data analysis. Eventually students were able to postulate hypotheses and design their own experiments. Since multiple students were on the same projects, this provided the opportunity for peer mentoring with more experienced students aiding newer ones.

TABLE 2.

Academic Metrics and Demographics of Stanton Campus and Program Students (2008–2014)^*

	Campus wide	CUREs only	CUREs + Mentored Research
Graduation Rate	N/A	34.5% (41/119)	46.8% (22/47)
Average time to completion of AAS (years)	3.25	5.3	3.9
GPA	3.03	3.25	3.4
% Female	57%	55.2%	56%
% URM	32.5%	38.6%	42.7%

Note:

^*Time range includes the students who participated in mentored research in 2008 before CURE implementation.

Several of the research projects were developed in partnership with research faculty at the University of Delaware and Delaware State University, contextualizing students’ contributions to the larger scientific community. As these relationships grew, the reputation of the DTCC students grew, leading to more opportunities for summer internships and transfers.

Students working on mentored research received grant-funded stipends easing some of the financial burdens that frequently required them to work outside of the college. As the program evolved, credit-bearing research courses were created to provide compensation for faculty mentors with each mentor receiving the registration fees for his/her section.

Biannually, students presented their research at a campus research poster session which helped garner support for the undergraduate research program and expand it to other departments. Grant funds also supported student travel for presentations at regional and national conferences, e.g., the Community College Undergraduate Research Initiative (CCURI) biannual research symposia, National Conferences on Undergraduate Research (2013, 2017), and the Council on Undergraduate Research sponsored Posters on the Hill, Washington, DC.

IMPACT STUDIES

The research presented uses institutional and interview data to gain a broad picture of the impacts of the URE-infused program and to identify aspects that alumni found most beneficial in furthering their education and STEM careers (Table 3). Recognizing that instructional practices and research experiences may only partially influence student outcomes, we intentionally combined methods to gather different types of information. First, we compared existing institutional data for changes in enrollment and graduation rates between two five-year periods, pre- and post- implementation of UREs. In the second phase, we examined long-term student outcomes of URE participation by interviewing a random sample of alumni, encouraging them to reflect on their research experiences and assess their impact in light of current education or employment.

TABLE 3.

Summary of Study Questions, Data Sources, and Analysis

Study question	Data source	Analysis
To what extent have DTCC BIS-BIT program’s rates of enrollment and completion changed since implementation of research opportunities?	Enrollment and completion data for 5 years prior to and following research infusion	Comparison of descriptive data
How do graduates fare in employment and further education following participation in URE infused BIS-BIT program?	Interviews with a random sample of graduates regarding current employment and education status	Descriptive data regarding career and education attainment for sample of alumni
How do graduates of URE infused BIS-BIT program describe the program’s influences, supports, and/or deficits on their own subsequent education and employment?	Interviews with random sample of graduates regarding reflections and evaluation of undergraduate research opportunities at DTCC	Identify important program features in view of students’ graduation, further education, and employment.

Institutional Data Analysis

Annually 200 students enrolled in the Biotechnology/Bioscience programs, with fewer than twenty completing their degree. Because high numbers of students struggled with developmental courses or freshman biology and chemistry and dropped out or transferred before the research-infused courses, we calculated program growth and graduation rates using only students who had declared a BIS/BIT major and passed Biology I and Chemical Principles I. This was the student population who were prepared to enroll in the first biology course with embedded research, Principles of Microbiology.

Comparing 2004 – 2009 (prior to URE infusion) with 2009 – 2014 (post URE infusion), we saw a meaningful increase in both program enrollment and graduation rates (Table 4) without a similar increase in campus enrollment or number of graduates (Table 5) (DTCC 2020). We also compared the populations participating in CUREs alone to those with both CUREs and mentored research to find meaningful, but not significant differences in GPA, graduation rate, and time to completion between the two (Table 2). The National Student Clearinghouse (2015) tracked all DTCC students who had participated in mentored research from 2009 – 2014, regardless of major. Of 90 students, 26 (29%) students were continuing their education at DTCC and 47 (52%) had transferred to a four-year institution.

TABLE 4.

BIS-BIT Program Metrics Before and After Infusion of Undergraduate Research Experiences

	Enrollment	Graduation Rates
2004–2009 (pre-URE)	74	24.3% (18)
2009–2014 (post-URE)	148	36.5% (54)

Note: BIS-BIT major students who passed first semester chemistry and biology courses (*χ², p<0.05, df=1)

TABLE 5.

Stanton Campus Metrics for 2008–2009 and 2013–2014 Academic Years

	Fall Enrollment	Number of Graduates
2008–2009	3,857	544
2013–2014	3,572	330

Interviews

Sampling Strategy

From the pool of BIS-BIT graduates 2012–2016, twenty-five were randomly selected and invited to participate in interviews. Twelve graduates agreed to be interviewed for this study. Demographically, the sampled group was similar to all BIS-BIT graduates and differed slightly from Stanton graduates at that time (Table 6).

TABLE 6.

Demographics of Stanton Campus Students, BIS-BIT Graduates, and Interview Participants, 2012–2016

	Campus wide	All BIS-BIT	Interview sample
Female	55.4%	49%	42%
URM	36.9%	49%	58%
Mentored research	N/A	50.9%	67%
Avg. age	25	27	26.25
Avg. GPA	3.06	3.23	3.25

Instrumentation

A semi-structured interview protocol, adapted from Accreditation Board of Engineering Education (ABET) student survey instrument (Volkwein et al. 2004) guided collection of new data. While DTCC BIS-BIT program is not accredited by ABET, the survey’s focus on the impact of learning in context of authentic problem solving aligns well with the goals of DTCC BIS-BIT program focus on UREs.

Interview questions were reviewed and selected by program faculty to align with program goals and practices, as well as with research on typical components and outcomes of URE. To estimate timing and ensure the items were clear, relevant, and well-ordered, the protocol was piloted with a recent graduate who was not part of the sample. Interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes and were held either face to face or by phone. The second author, who had no previous experience with the program or alumni, administered and initially coded all interview data.

An introductory statement encouraged interviewees to think back to a specific time, while Likert -type questions served to focus memories and standardize some statements of evaluation. The interview was conversational in nature, and alumni were encouraged to elaborate on their ratings and describe their experiences. In addition, open-ended questions were designed to elicit additional context and depth. All interviewees gave a verbal or written statement of informed consent and none asked to skip or omit any part. Interviews were recorded and transcribed.

A coding scheme was jointly developed and refined by the authors to capture statements regarding important features and benefits identified in earlier studies of URE. Transcripts were first read as a whole and coded by one researcher. If any additional impacts or insights were noted at this phase, they were coded. As the process continued, patterns and relationships developed within the data. The authors met again to clarify new understandings, insights, and themes, i.e., multidimensional learning, real-world applications, value of learning in a community, and perceived benefits and obstacles to further education and career (Table 7). Most frequently, interviewees mentioned the benefits of interpersonal relationships with peers, faculty, and members of the greater scientific community particularly in gaining information critical to their research projects and career pathways. The students did not discuss learning specific skills but rather recognized their increased confidence, understanding of the scientific process, and recognition of the importance of their work to society.

TABLE 7.

Key Analytic Themes, Subordinate Codes, and Number of Coded Instances

		Instances (n)
UREs are multidimensional learning experiences
	Learn/apply lab skills	11
	Master course content; incorporate writing, math skills	7
	Learn professionalism and teamwork	17
UREs yield positive outcomes
	Confidence	22
	Career advice, including transfer advice	20
	Job ready, including new technologies	11
	Open doors to new opportunities	10
UREs address real-world problems
	Useful, important scientific or social implications	24
	Science is iterative, collaborative, and open to inquiry (Scientific process)	10
Benefits of UREs occur within a community (benefits attributed to---)
	Peers- unspecified	7
	Faculty	17
	Peers- project or research team	47
	Other professionals- off campus REUs/professional experiences	21
Concerns when deciding to further education
	Information gap	5
	Funding, including credit transfers	5
	Time commitment, including credit transfers	10
	Question preparedness	2

Alumni Outcomes

Stem Degrees and Careers

Interviewees provided information regarding current employment and education, i.e., whether they were currently working (or if they ever had worked) toward a four-year degree, the degree major, full vs. part time status, and anticipated graduation date. All were also asked about current full- or part-time employment, job title, and typical responsibilities. Following graduation from DTCC most continued with STEM education and/or employment in STEM related fields.

Of the nine then currently enrolled in Bachelor programs (n=6) or pursuing advanced degrees (n=3), all anticipated finishing their degree programs within two years and continuing to work in research labs and/or professional placements or moving into graduate training. All nine were employed either full (n=1) or part time (n=8) in STEM fields (n=5) or non-STEM jobs including IT, retail, restaurants, and childcare. The three who were not enrolled at that time were working full-time, two in bioscience careers and one in computer sciences. One of the three completed a B.S. in Biology. The other two might consider a four-year degree in the future.

Impact of Program Components

Alumni highly valued their research experiences in the BIS-BIT program, describing a multidimensional learning environment focused on researching real world problems, and situated in relationships with generous, caring faculty and smart supportive peers.

Recalling their research projects, graduates communicated a sense of participating in scientifically relevant projects with broad implications, e.g. “bats with white-nose disease,” “testing soil bacteria from a farm to see the impact of fertilizers and pesticides on soil microbes,” or “what proportion of ticks in New Castle County had markers for Lyme disease”. One compared this work to lab activities at another college where “they were very simple. At Del Tech we were like real scientists. We were doing important work.”

Faculty members were characterized as warm, open, caring, and motivating. Students remembered instructors sharing their own research during lectures, advising students on career paths, and preparing them for “real world work-place.” They held high standards for student professionalism and competence but offered support to get there.

Alumni recognized written and oral communication and sharp math skills were vital to long term success. Some offered insights into the scientific process. All recognized the power of learning new concepts in a problem-focused setting that required critical thinking, deep understanding of text and lecture material, and technical skill.

“Every lab was new. You couldn’t rely on the same techniques. You were constantly learning. And what the book says does not always appear that way in the lab. You have to think and see differences.”

Long term research experiences fostered confidence, enabled growth, and opened doors to more challenges.

“We had to understand lab processes and equipment to get correct results and to know when they aren’t [correct]. It was a year-long process and if we made mistakes we had to start over. It taught us patience and to be careful, and to have pride because MY name was on it. It reinforced classroom learning, which was the best part for me.”

“Improved leadership skills come from the long term [ongoing research projects.] You take over from someone and then pass the project on to someone else.”

In course-based research experiences, all students worked in formal, assigned peer groups, whose members were shuffled during the semester. “It was really annoying at first.” Teams however provided additional opportunities for teaching and learning from each other. Faculty members held an expectation that together, students could work out some of their own solutions. “We were expected to work as a team. We had to work and plan for ourselves, solve problems ourselves.” Looking back, alumni recognized their classmates were “sharp,” and “smart people from diverse backgrounds, but equally important” who they “could depend on.”

Even if a student had not participated in mentored research projects, they benefited indirectly through peer relationships. A network of informal peer mentoring grew. Upper level students who helped with lab techniques and equipment problems also shared information about educational opportunities and credit transfer agreements to the area’s four-year colleges and graduate programs. For some, this was their primary source for transfer advice.

Overwhelmingly, alumni realized they were well-prepared and confident for the next career challenge. Several recalled a point when they understood their own high levels of preparedness relative to others, whether working on lab assignments at their new colleges, or when employed in industry, government research facilities, or university research laboratories. A few wondered if more DTCC BIS-BIT students knew how well trained they were, whether they too would consider graduate degrees. “Biotech students here are ready for it, if they knew how [to access graduate programs].”

DISCUSSION

This study has a few potential limitations. We attempt to address generalizability by providing both qualitative and quantitative data, yet program numbers were small as was the pool of alumni from which the interviewees were drawn. It was hoped that the unaffiliated interviewer might overcome the reluctance of some to participate regardless of further employment or education, and we were encouraged to note that the interviewees’ demographic and academic performance are similar to those of the pool of recent graduates. However, questions remain about how the experiences of non-respondents might differ. Finally, this study does not investigate the experiences of those who did not complete the program. By first understanding the experiences and concerns of program alumni, we offer a foundation for future research to examine this important question.

The BIS-BIT program at Delaware Technical Community College provided students with multiple opportunities for undergraduate research, both in courses and through mentored research. Analysis of institutional data reveals a corresponding increase in the number of students who continued after their first semester core courses as well as a significant increase in graduation rates. Though the data does not prove a direct correlation, retrospective comments by alumni indicate the importance of the mentor-student relationship, skill development over multiple semesters, and opportunities for teamwork for their growth as scientists and increased self-confidence which echoes findings from studies at other institutions (Adedokun et al. 2014; Linn et al. 2015; Nagada et al. 1998; Nerio et al. 2019; Thiry et al. 2012). Of note, the graduates’ discussions focus on the transferable skills they gained being more important to their successes than the course content itself.

Taken together, these reflections offer insight to understand how program components may have worked together to support their success. While they detailed many features and benefits of URE identified in our preliminary research, they also highlighted the importance of other factors potentially overlooked in their simplicity, specifically, the precious commodities of time and money when pursuing higher education today, the central organizing role of relationships, and power of competence and confidence to sustain those in transition.

This interview group represents all the stereotypes of non-traditional community college students. Five of the twelve were older than 21 years when they first entered. Six attended at least one other college before DTCC. Half were in the first generation of their families to attend college. Five were from immigrant families. Four took more than 4 years to complete their AAS degree. We recognize that none of these factors limit a student to attending community colleges and did not directly ask about decisions to enroll in community college. We did not consider it part of the story at first, yet each student revealed its importance in their statements of concern around graduation and decisions to continue education or career paths. It was evidenced when they recalled earlier academic struggles, inability to enroll elsewhere, and aimlessness. It was reflected in the high premium they placed on time, money, proximity to home, and for some, the flexibility to drop in and out by semester as needed. To these alumni, their journey could have been undertaken only at a community college like Delaware Technical Community College.

Biography

Virginia Balke (retired) taught biology courses for 20 years at Delaware Technical Community College. She developed CUREs and mentored research students in a variety of molecular biology, microbiology, and ecology projects. She served as PI for an NSF ATE grant, a co-PI on the Community College Undergraduate Research Initiative, and played leading roles for statewide NIH-INBRE and NSF EPSCoR grants where she worked on further institutionalizing undergraduate research at the college.

Linda Grusenmeyer served as program manager for Delaware Technical and Community College INBRE and EPSCOR grant projects. She earned her M.Ed. from the University of New Orleans and an Ed.D. in Educational Leadership with a focus on science curriculum from the University of Delaware. Grusenmeyer has served as project director for several multi-year multi-site evaluations of federally funded research projects. She is interested in pedagogical, institutional, and social supports that broaden access to STEM.

John McDowell is a faculty member in the Department of Biology and Chemistry at Delaware Technical Community College, Stanton campus. He earned his B.S. in Agriculture from University of Delaware and PhD in Microbiology and Immunology from Virginia Commonwealth University. John emphasizes science education using high impact practices to train future members of the bioscience workforce. This includes course-embedded research in laboratory courses and mentoring undergraduate students in research projects outside of program courses.