Summary

As one of the nation's vanguard research universities and leading educational institutions, the University of Michigan assumes a special responsibility for ensuring that our extensive effort in research, scholarship and creative activity adds value to the education of our undergraduate students. In the last ten years, the UM has continued its tradition of leadership in undergraduate education reform. Many of the programs inaugurated this past decade have augmented long-standing opportunities for undergraduate research. Today, there are many doorways leading to undergraduate involvement in research, scholarship and creative activity at the UM, and many types of such experiences, all sharing a core set of attributes. This foundation provides a remarkable opportunity for the University. If we can systematize and expand our successful research opportunity programs and simultaneously find ways to infuse the regular curriculum with key elements of research (inquiry, discovery, creation, teaming, and mentoring), we will have significantly enhanced what it means to have a Michigan undergraduate education. Ultimately, we envision at the University of Michigan an undergraduate education wherein every student engages in at least one direct, intensive experience in research, scholarship or creative activity before graduation - and is exposed to a formal curriculum infused with numerous elements of the "research experience." Accomplishing this will transform the undergraduate experience, and our whole academic community, including our faculty.

Outline of Presentation

1. Introduction
   
   
   • The role of the research, scholarship and creative activity in supporting undergraduate education
     
     
2. UM Achievement in Educational Innovation
   
   
   • The University of Michigan as an early innovator in integrating research and education
   • The modern record

     EXHIBIT 1: Innovation and Progress in Improving Undergraduate Education
     
     

3. The Road Ahead: Involving Today's Undergraduate in Research
   
   
   • Modes of undergraduate involvement in research and scholarly experiences

     EXHIBIT 2: Types of Undergraduate Experiences in Research and Scholarship
     
     

   • Comments from students (multimedia on the web)

     EXHIBIT 3: Undergraduate Students Comment on Research Experiences
     
     

   • Common attributes of undergraduate research experiences

     EXHIBIT 4: Qualities of Undergraduate Experiences in Research and Scholarship
     
     

   • Challenges and Opportunities

     EXHIBIT 5: National Science Foundation Goals for Undergraduate Education

     EXHIBIT 6: NSF Recognition Award for Integration of Research and Teaching

     EXHIBIT 7: Influence of a Research Experience on Academic Success

     EXHIBIT 8: Independent Research Experiences Involving Undergraduate Students

     EXHIBIT 9: Bringing Research into the Formal Classroom

I. Introduction

The role of the research, scholarship and creative activity in supporting undergraduate education

Let me begin with word about the choice of this topic, lest there be any doubt about the appropriateness of a research office speaking about undergraduate education. As one of the nation's vanguard research universities and leading educational institutions, the University of Michigan assumes a special responsibility for ensuring that our extensive effort in research, scholarship and creative activity adds value to the education of our undergraduate students. OVPR understands its role in the university to include the integration of the research mission of the University with its teaching and service missions. We feel that deeply. The core of our understanding of university-based research is the conviction that the special nature of this university is that it is a place where knowledge is generated and discoveries made by the activities of a community of scholars--some of whom are called faculty, and some, students. The product of this communal activity is not just the knowledge, ideas and creative works that are produced, but includes also the maturation of the student through exercise of the creative forces of the student's mind. The University develops trained minds as unique products of the scholarly and creative activities of its members. This is not a new vision...it has been the traditional vision of this University since its founding.

But there is a special timeliness--even urgency--in discussing research and the undergraduate today. The reason is that there are serious public challenges to the notion that research and creative activity belong at the heart of higher education. Many of us have read the newspaper accounts, watched the televised exposŽs, and heard talk-show discussions about the shortcomings of the American research university, including the U-M. Three statements are common in these discussions:

0. Research and education are competing and conflicting missions of research universities.
1. Faculty at research universities spend an overwhelming amount of time on research activity, to the detriment of teaching.
2. Research is a primary cause of escalating tuition at universities.

These charges have been expressed nationally and also quite close to home, including at Budget Committee hearings in Lansing, and at various public forums discussing U-M issues. Today's presentation, while meant as an update on U-M's research mission, and not as a defensive reaction to bad publicity, is relevant to these allegations.

II. UM Achievement in Educational Innovation   [Outline] [Summary]

The University of Michigan as an early innovator in integrating research and education

From its beginning in 1817 the University of Michigan has demonstrated a passion for curricular innovation. While other American universities were still wedded to teaching the classics within a strong religious tradition, the U-M integrated science and the humanistic curriculum, creating a hybrid program that drew strength from the "liberal arts" and "utilitarian" ideas of the time. When Tappan gave his inaugural address in 1852 he set out the path to major reform along the German university model. Tappan advocated that a university professor should engage in research as well as teaching; his idea was of a university that did not simply disseminate learning, but participated in the advancement of knowledge--an investigating institution that maintained the excitement of learning. In 1855 U-M became the second school in the country to grant a B.S. degree. Tappan established an art gallery and built what was at that time one of the three best astronomical observatories in the world. The U-M introduced elective courses for upper division students years before Harvard adopted this dangerous move. Likewise, the U-M was the first university to create an undergraduate teaching laboratory in chemistry and, later, a bacteriology laboratory for undergraduates. We introduced the first course in newspaper writing in the country, and were the first of the large American universities to admit women as students (1870). The century just completed has seen the inauguration of the Residential College, the introduction of community service courses, and many other innovations.

The modern record   [Outline] [Summary]

The past ten years has seen the University of Michigan emerge as a leader in undergraduate education reform through a large number of improvements and innovations:

• The Undergraduate Initiative in LSA has attracted national attention: the Undergraduate Research Opportunity program (UROP), reform of the introductory chemistry, mathematics, geology and physics curricula, establishment of the First-Year Seminars, and other programs have received national acclaim.
• LSA has placed increased emphasis on undergraduate education in its reward structures.
• The Provost's Office has established the Thurnau Professorships, which have had a significant impact on college and university culture.
• The College of Engineering has launched a major revision of its educational programs through a Task Force on Excellence in Engineering Education (E3), leading to the near completion of the Curriculum 2000 Initiative.
• The University has adopted a comprehensive strategy for the development of living-learning programs, building on the success of the Women in Science and Engineering (WISE) Residential Program, the 21st Century Program, and the Residential College.
• With a high-profile Institution-wide Reform Award (RAIRE) from the National Science Foundation, the University has established an Undergraduate Curriculum Development Testbed within its Global Change program, designed to develop a new interdisciplinary curriculum in global change, in the process exploring and facilitating curriculum development across unit boundaries.

III. The Road Ahead: Involving Today's Undergraduate in Research   [Outline] [Summary]

Modes of undergraduate involvement in research and scholarly experiences

The programs inaugurated this past decade have augmented other longstanding opportunities for undergraduate research. Students at Michigan can avail themselves of a variety of opportunities, in the classroom and outside of it, to become involved directly with faculty or senior researchers in research, scholarly, design, or creative projects. These projects engage the student, in some depth, in inquiry or activity that does not have a predetermined or correct outcome. In these experiences, the students themselves must assume a measure of intellectual risk and responsibility in defining the problem or task and the path to its completion or resolution.

In a few moments we will show you a video starring six U-M undergraduate researchers. These students will explain to you far more effectively than I can how the opportunity to engage in research, scholarship and creative activity transformed their understanding of themselves and their experience of the University. These interviews in toto will illustrate two points I want to emphasize now: (1) there are many, many doorways to research, and (2) many, many modes of research activities. No single model is suitable for every student or for every discipline.

The video you will see in a few minutes illustrates at least a part of this spectrum. Two of these students were led to research endeavors through course work. One of them, Emma Jones, found that a very small course, her First-year Seminar in English, drew her into investigations at the Bentley Library that grew later into a UROP project. Another, Katherine Kim, completed a two-semester, large interdisciplinary lecture course on Global Change and took on both mathematical and library-based inquiries as a non-science major that will enrich her future studies in philosophy and, perhaps, law. For several of these students -- including Robert Stampes and Julian Helwig -- their peak experience as Michigan undergraduates--and, indeed, the definitive moment of career choice--came in projects developed through programs centered on one-to-one relationships between a student and a faculty member--programs such as UROP or SROP (Summer Research Opportunity program). One student, Sunga Carter, started doing research in high school, and continued it through UROP. Another, Catherine Grasso, benefited from the NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Program. Yet another, Charles Van Hoy, operated completely on his own in seeking out a faculty sponsor. The opportunity to combine creative activity and research involved in dance and choreography also touched a recent graduate from our Dance Department, Jason Marchant. And there are scores of doorways to creative inquiry not represented here, such as:

• departmental honors programs
• independent study courses
• Living-Learning programs
• community-based study involving faculty-supervised research

What does not vary is the level of excitement registered by our student scholars. Like the bee, they have tasted, in the words of an eighteenth-century poet, "the honey of...deep research."

Comments from students   [Outline] [Summary]

This link leads to a menu of short video clips of undergraduate students commenting on their research experiences.

Common attributes of undergraduate research experiences   [Outline] [Summary]

As we look ahead to crafting new or expanded undergraduate programs aimed at joining the research and teaching missions of the University, we need to be able to define what qualities are common to these experiences--what qualities, in fact, are defining.

We regard five attributes as central:

0. Social learning through participation in mutual learning communities (small groups in a class setting, UROP peer groups, clusters of students working in a laboratory)
1. Intellectual risk-taking and open-ended inquiry (finding research resources, identifying a subject, following unexpected leads)
2. Interaction with faculty members who are intellectual leaders in a mutually transforming experience (Julie Ellison and Emma Jones example)
3. Mastery of different modes of inquiry and of learning
4. Opportunity to pursue a research, scholarly, or creative goal in whatever way is suited to the particular discipline or interdisciplinary area.

Challenges and Opportunities   [Outline] [Summary]

And now, quo vadis? What are the challenges and promise of the future? How can we build on this splendid record and address the three damaging charges commonly leveled at research universities by critics.

We should know that peer universities and national institutions, such as the NSF are looking to the U-M for ideas and leadership.

Eleven years ago, Homer Neal chaired the National Science Board's Panel that developed the NSF's (1986) decadal report on undergraduate education. James Duderstadt was also a member of this panel and co-author of the "Neal Report" --a document that revolutionized NSF's approach to undergraduate education, particularly stressing "quality" and "pipeline" issues. NSF's version of UROP - the Research Experiences for (or "REU") program was born. During the past year, and partly in response to such demonstrable successes as our UROP program, the NSF has developed a new decadal study - the George Report. This report augments the earlier document by stressing the need for "Institution-Wide Reform of Undergraduate Education". Thus, the national emphasis is turning from support of individual, discipline-based curriculum programs to one of systemic or institution-wide reform - facilitated through the large-scale deployment of successful programs and approaches that benefit all students. To reinforce this point and tie the two reports together, NSF has formally stated that the integration of research and teaching is and will remain a major priority for the future. Importantly, this priority does not depend solely on the nation's need for scientists and engineers...it is regarded as crucial for the education of an informed citizenry who are increasingly called upon to exert judgments on issues critical to society in a technological age.

Within this overall national context resides a remarkable opportunity for the U-M. If we can systematize and expand our successful research opportunity programs and simultaneously find ways to infuse the regular curriculum with key elements of research--namely, inquiry, discovery, creation, teaming, and mentoring--we will have significantly enhanced what it means to have a Michigan undergraduate education. At present not every student who desires an experience of this sort can be accommodated, at least in the program of his or her first choice, and not every student is aware of the opportunities that exist to enrich their undergraduate experience in this way.

Two factors either limit or have the potential to limit large scale expansion of undergraduate research experiences. One relates to faculty, the other to students.

Faculty members at the U-M have experienced a considerable increase in the demands placed on them. In an era when maintaining competitiveness in securing the funding necessary to support their research requires extraordinary attention to the quality of their research proposals, when they are forced to conduct their research with fewer dollars of direct funding for research personnel, equipment and supplies, and when they are being exhorted to pay even more attention than usual to the nurturing of their professional and graduate students, expecting greater effort for individual personal interactions with undergraduates is a special burden. For years the faculty of the U-M professional schools have been deeply involved in mentoring research activities of LSA undergraduates. It is common for any laboratory of consequence in the Medical School, for example, to host undergraduate students on a year-round basis. Expecting a great increase in faculty effort from some of these quarters is unreasonable. In this regard it is important to acknowledge the great contribution to undergraduate mentoring provided by the research faculty (the Primary Research Scientist, or PRS, Faculty) of many of our schools and research units. And it is important for us to be creative in maximizing the effectiveness of our faculty by devising student experiences that are meaningful and well mentored, but not necessarily one-on-one.

The other limitation on extensive research experiences outside of classrooms is the lack of information among many undergraduates about such opportunities and about their value. While it would be the rare premedical or other pre-professional student who would be ignorant of such matters, it is not uncommon for the general liberal arts student to lack the information that would enrich their U-M experience. OVPR will be taking steps to increase undergraduate awareness of research opportunities beginning with the earliest phases of student recruitment.

Given the enormous size of the U-M...with five thousand students admitted to undergraduate programs each year...we must keep in mind that achieving even small increases in the percentage of students engaged in research (and in the fraction of courses that utilize innovative ideas for active engagement of students with faculty) will take considerable effort and resources.

Nevertheless, if we are resolved to continue the U-M tradition of leadership in education, there are reasonable steps that can now be planned. Consider the following situations, for example:

Recently, the U-M received a prestigious NSF Recognition Award for the Integration of Research And Teaching (RAIRE). I note that this is a recognition award, not a grant. As such, it is designed to reward past and to encourage future accomplishments, with no strings attached. Our proposal was entitled: "Integrating Research and Education: Diversity Through Engagement in Research".

The successful proposal cited the remarkable results of a controlled experiment on UROP outcomes. Let me repeat a few of them here:

0. A first-year student from an underrepresented (minority) group with a UROP experience is about half as likely to drop out in the second year than is a minority student without a UROP experience - and 30% less likely to drop out than an equivalently qualified non-UROP minority student.
1. In their academic work, UROP students from underrepresented Minority, White and Asian American backgrounds all outperform equivalently qualified students by a significant amount (~ 0.2 GPA)
2. The attrition rates for UROP women are lower by several percentage points than equivalently qualified non-UROP women students.

These are very impressive results by any measure, particularly given the unusually large sample sizes afforded by our current program (600-800 students annually enrolled in UROP). These and other results convinced the NSF RAIRE reviewers of the enormous value of our research experience programs - they should also convince us of the great untapped potential of our campus, given its size and research volume.

The Recognition award was also based on our successful Women in Science and Engineering - Residential Program (WISE-RP). This program seeks specifically to retain women in the sciences and engineering by creating a supportive academic environment outside the classroom. WISE-RP houses students with similar academic interests together in the same residence hall, providing formal and informal study groups, academic and career workshops, research facility tours, etc. Since 1993, about 500 women have participated, with great enthusiasm. The WISE-RP and UROP programs are linked and, together, they are providing an effective supportive fabric for aspiring U-M women scientists and engineers. Indeed, one of the unique contributions of the Michigan vision to date is the degree to which it has synthesized the goals of increased diversity and engagement in a research community. We see a reciprocity between the goals: the engagement with faculty and other students in research and scholarship is seen as a primary means to promote success by a more diverse student body; conversely, through the effort of diversifying the student body, we find means of engaging all students in research and inquiry.

The UROP, SROP, REU, and WISE-RP programs are all examples of new ways of enriching our students experience, and are based primarily on activities located in research labs and informal settings. The NSF has, however, also supported the U-M in finding ways to bring the "research experience", broadly defined, into the formal classroom setting though the development and evaluation of new instructional methodologies to engage students in more active and interactive learning. The goals here are essentially the same as for a UROP program. Reforms of the formal curricula are motivated by a desire to increase creative thinking, to engage the students more fully and more personally in the academic life of the University, to provide more expansive and more open-ended educational experiences, and to add to students' experiences of feeling welcomed and mentored on campus.

Recently, the U-M was awarded another highly-visible grant from the NSF's "Institution-Wide Reform of Undergraduate Education" Program. With support from this program, the University has established a new "Undergraduate Curriculum Development Testbed". The Testbed is designed to develop, deploy, and test new ways of teaching interdisciplinary offerings - in the process exploring and facilitating curriculum development across unit boundaries. The first project of the Testbed involves a two-semester introductory course sequence in Global Change for freshmen and sophomores of any background and concentration. Team-taught by faculty from 4 schools and 6 departments, the Global Change course challenges students with open-ended, computerized dynamical modeling within a week of their arrival on campus! It uses video, graphics, animation, computer simulation and web resources for self-paced student exploration of concepts. It enables, for example, non-science majors to build their own computer models of global climate change, investigating the impacts on the Earth's inhabitants of various future scenarios of fossil fuel burning. The students choose the scenarios, run their own dynamical models and interpret and present their data. Future components of the Testbed will provide large numbers of students with access to research-caliber instrumentation making real-time observations of the atmosphere and local environment - allowing experiments to be conducted via the web as part of formal classwork or homework. A important aspect of the Testbed is the evaluative component. Faculty and students from the School of Education conduct detailed and continuous evaluations of effectiveness based on student outcomes. These studies are then used to modify and improve the design of the instructional elements.

These types of course-based activities incorporate many of the elements of UROP-like experiences - research, modeling, experimentation, field trips, visualization, interpretation, open ended inquiry, discussion, teaming, presentation skills, etc. Integrating many disciplines, such new curricular elements bring the excitement of research into the classroom for large numbers of students.

These few examples of course-based research experiences represent only the tip of the iceberg. There are innumerable courses offered at the U-M that engage students in research and scholarship. Our challenge is to draw from the best examples, communicate the tools and templates across the campus, evaluate them carefully for effectiveness, and more generally use them to infuse the overall curriculum with a sense of active learning. We are just beginning to appreciate the magnitude and importance of this task.

  [Outline] [Summary]

You may have gathered by now that we are very excited by this proposed program, still in its infancy. It strikes to the very heart of what a great research university should be. It exploits the traditions of our University and its leadership position and potential. It promotes intellectual growth and encourages intellectual risk-taking on the part of our students - it treats students as grown-up partners in the process of scholarship. It brings Primary Research Faculty closer to the core mission of the University. It will make our campus a more welcoming place for students through increased mentoring, contact with faculty and collegial discourse.

We will be able to make inroads in solving the intransigent problems of diversity, pipelines, and retention.

The integration of teaching and research, however, will not only benefit our students, but will also transform our faculty in profound ways, without forcing professors to neglect their scholarly interests.

Finally, It will help provide improved access to our tremendous set of research resources for all students.

In summary, our approach will be to engage students in a community of inquiry, whether it be:

• in research projects with faculty,
• in living-learning communities dedicated to students interested in science and engineering, or
• more broadly via curriculum reform aimed at bringing students into direct contact with faculty. A multifaceted approach will be needed, coupled with a rigorous evaluation component. Building incrementally on already successful elements, such as UROP, WISE-RP, UCDT, etc. will provide a sound foundation for this program.

What is the ultimate goal? We envision at Michigan an undergraduate education wherein every student engages in at least one direct, intensive experience in research, scholarship or creative activity before graduation - and is exposed to a formal curriculum infused with numerous elements of the "research experience". The Office of the Vice President for Research stands ready to help this goal become a reality.

[Outline] [Summary]