Between Culture and Curricula: Exploring Student and Faculty Experiences of Undergraduate Research and Inquiry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Undergraduate research and inquiry is a growing movement within the teaching and learning nexus, with many institutions developing their practices within this culture of education. This study aimed to identify the perceptions and experiences surrounding undergraduate research and inquiry among students and faculty at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada; assess the extent of research and inquiry in the design of undergraduate courses; and explore the facilitators and obstacles educators encounter when attempting to implement this educational approach. Although differences exist in student and faculty definitions of undergraduate research and inquiry, we found two principal models that characterize its structure and delivery—the scaffold model and bookend model. A third, the abstract model, does not employ the practice of inquiry. Despite numerous benefits unique to undergraduate research and inquiry education identified by stakeholders, notable barriers (such as funding, faculty buy-in, limited student experience, and inherent competition) hinder its progress. Overall, we found a diversity of undergraduate research and inquiry practices across the university, operating within varying cultures and comfort levels, which suggests unequal access for student learners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".