{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030038759689922482, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.886666666666667, '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}}
Implementing the CURE: Combining Wet‐Lab Protein Biochemistry with Computational Analysis to Provide Gains in Student Learning in the Biochemistry Teaching Lab

Most undergraduates studying biochemistry and molecular biology get their broadest exposure to wet‐lab techniques in protein and nucleic acid chemistry (and, increasingly, computer/visualization) in their upper‐level laboratory courses. These tend to be juniors and seniors with well‐defined career goals. Some of these students will have already have a research background in a traditional one‐to‐one (or one‐to‐few) research mentoring setting, for example a summer research program. This approach has proved effective at increasing student learning and persistence in the sciences. At the same time, extended full‐time PI‐directed research is limited in the number of students served, and can even present a barrier. To broaden the impact of teaching through research, many practitioners have adopted a CURE, or Course‐based Undergraduate Research Experience, approach.