{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020842572062084258, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.09433962264151, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An analysis of Course‐based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) efficacy at community colleges, primarily undergraduate, and research institutions

Course‐based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) have emerged as a well supported high‐impact practice for improving both retention of students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines and overall achievement of students in STEM coursework. While considerable scholarship has been performed on the overall efficacy of CUREs as a teaching approach, comparatively little work has been done to uncover the more nuanced data on how CUREs serve students at different types of undergraduate institutions (community colleges, primarily‐undergraduate institutions (PUIs), and research‐intensive institutions) as well as students characterized as Persons Excluded due to Ethnicity or Race (PEER). In this study, we leverage the Malate Dehydrogenase CURE Community, a CURE network focused on bringing research experiences in protein biochemistry to undergraduates, to collect data on student achievement and attitudes. Using several validated assessment instruments, we considered how effective the MCC CURE experience was at each type of institution as well as for PEER students versus their White/Asian counterparts. Our data revealed that the CURE approach to instruction was especially effective at PUIs, with significantly‐higher levels of student collaboration and overall positive attitudes about STEM careers found in comparison to community colleges and research‐intensive institutions. Community colleges reported the most significant gains with respect to PEER student achievement relative to White/Asian students as well as enthusiasm among PEER students for conducting future research. Taken together, the data suggest that while all undergraduates may expect to benefit from exposure to CUREs, the specific benefits vary by the type of institution as well as the PEER status of student. The outcomes of this research will ultimately enable institutions to provide biochemistry‐focused high‐impact educational experiences for undergraduates tailored to the needs of these institutions to enable them to become a well‐equipped next generation of life scientists.