1 / 14

Findings from an evaluation of an undergraduate research scheme

Findings from an evaluation of an undergraduate research scheme. Jane McNeil & Helen Puntha Nottingham Trent University. Context. Scholarship Projects for Undergraduate Researchers. Strategy . HEFCE Funding for teaching enhanced by research . Working Party for Research-Teaching .

pembroke
Télécharger la présentation

Findings from an evaluation of an undergraduate research scheme

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Findings from an evaluation of anundergraduate research scheme Jane McNeil & Helen PunthaNottingham Trent University

  2. Context Scholarship Projects for Undergraduate Researchers

  3. Strategy. HEFCE Funding for teaching enhanced by research. Working Party for Research-Teaching. Learning and Teaching Enhancement Strategy. Research-Teaching Initiatives. Audit. Student research. SPUR. Research mentor scheme. PG Dip Research-informed teaching. Framework

  4. Griffiths 2004 Research-led teaching Learning about others’ research Research-oriented teaching Learning how to do research Research-based teaching Curriculum is largely designed around inquiry-based activities Research-informed teaching Teaching draws on systematic inquiry into learning & teaching

  5. Evaluation Can undergraduate research schemes contribute to mindfulness of the research-teaching nexus?

  6. Methods and participation • Survey at end of projects. • 16 student respondents (of 17). • 16 staff respondents (all projects represented). • Group discussions, e.g. RIT roundtable. • Other data (interest, outputs).

  7. Findings: motivations

  8. SM8 SM10 SM14 SM9 SM12 Research-oriented SM16 SM5 SM7 SM2 SM11 SM4 SM6 Research-based Research-led Research-informed Students’ reported motivations SM3 SM13 SM15 SM17 SM = Students’ motivations to apply

  9. Research-oriented TM6 TM7 TM4 TM8 TM9 Research-based Research-led TM10 TM12 TM14 TM9 TM15 Research-informed TM13 TM1 TM5 TM16 TM2 TM10 TM3 TM11 Supervisors’ reported motivations TM = Supervisors’ motivations to apply

  10. S4 S10 S14 S6 S11 S16 Research-oriented T1 T7 T2 T15 T3 S13 T8 T9 T4 Research-based Research-led T14 S3 S8 T12 T11 S2 T6 S5 Research-informed T5 S9 S12 T13 S15 T16 S17 Perception of University motivation T = Supervisors’ perceptions S = Students’ perceptions

  11. Findings: perceptions of impact

  12. Selected reflections Project supervisors “reinvigorated my sense of undergraduates as part of a culture of knowledge and research at university” “helped to put the horse back in front of the cart”

  13. Selected reflections Participating students “excellent opportunity to be involved in a real research project” “I feel like a real psychologist doing a real job”

  14. Conclusions & lessons learnt

More Related