Mentoring Undergraduate Research Reference List

Developing, Maintaining and Promoting Undergraduate Research Mentoring Programs

Cramer, R. J., & Prentice-Dunn, S. (2007). Caring for the whole person: guidelines for advancing undergraduate mentorship. College Student Journal, 41(4), 771.

Cramer and Dunn “propose an approach of effective mentorship based on caring and compassion for personal aspects of young adult mentees” (p. 1) in this discussion of mentoring undergraduate students, mentorship is not limited to a research-based relationship, although a relationship involving research is encouraged. Effective mentors are available/approachable, knowledgeable, “educated in diverse issues” (p. 2), empathic, personable, encouraging/supportive, and passionate. To advance the “mentorship of young adults” (p. 4), these authors advocate for mentor training, making mentorship appealing through incentives such as financial compensation, publicly advertising mentoring, and researching the “design and implementation of the compassion/sensitivity-based mentorship approach” (p. 5).

Fahy, B., & Hughes, A. (2009). Implementing an undergraduate psychology mentoring program. North American Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 463.

Article overviews the implementation of an undergraduate peer mentoring program with freshmen and sophomore psychology students at a comprehensive liberal arts college. The connection between a student’s sense of belonging in a major with their success in the major and their participation in undergraduate research is discussed. Due to the voluntary nature of the mentoring program, the authors note that some mentors did not follow through with their commitments to their mentees and two mentors were assigned to a student new to the program. In their evaluation of the program, “[n]ew students reported . . . the program helped them to get to know the faculty, to learn more about the psychology program, to get acquainted with other psychology students, and to become more involved in the department.”

Garde-Hansen, J. & Calvert, B. (2007). Developing a research culture in the undergraduate curriculum. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8 (105). DOI: 10.1177/1469787407077984

Document overviews the planning and presentation of a half-day, student-led conference for freshman students focusing on the development of a collaborative research culture during their studies. The need for introducing freshmen students to a research culture--moving them from a passive “’Googling’ for knowledge” to “academic research (p. 106)—is discussed followed by an outline of the process students engaged in as they planned and presented the conference with faculty acting solely as facilitators. Discussion notes that student conversations during planning for conference workshops highlighted the need for teaching students how to research beyond an “ABC” approach as students indicated that they do not enter institutions of higher education with the ability to research on their own. During the workshops themselves, “students promoted support, guidance and clear structure as the key ingredients to encourage independent researchers” (p. 114). Among their recommendations, the authors note the challenges associated with striving for the goal of encouraging a research culture:

“Instilling an exploratory curiosity in a cash-strapped, assessment-driven, tuition fee-paying, homesick students is idealistic but it draws attention to the fundamental flaw in how departments deliver research skills. Rather than focus on the ABC of how to research, the very value of undergraduate research needs to be embedded in the curriculum from day one” (p. 114).

The authors conclude with several suggestions to promote undergraduate research in classes, communities, and publications.

Diversity in Mentoring of Undergraduate Researchers

Apprey, M., Preston-Grimes, P., Bassett, K. C., Lewis, D. W., & Rideau, R. M. (2014). From crisis management to academic achievement: A university cluster-mentoring model for Black undergraduates. Peabody Journal of Education, 89(3), 318-335.

Article describes a successful cluster-mentoring model for African American (AA)undergraduates at the University of Virginia (UVA), “a predominantly white institution,” that includes peer advising, faculty mentoring, cultural components, and parental involvement. Discussion provides background information related to AA student achievement, components of the model developed, and discussion of the history and contributions of the Office of AA Affairs at UVA. The faculty-student mentoring program’s contribution to the model includes a description of recruitment and selection methods for faculty and students and includes an overview of commitments that both make to the process. Connections to graduate program recruitment are also included.

Butler, S. K., Evans, M. P., Brooks, M., Williams, C. R., & Bailey, D. F. (2013). Mentoring African American men during their postsecondary and graduate school experiences implications for the counseling profession. Journal of Counseling and Development, 91(4), 419-427.

Following an overview of approaches used to mentor African American (AA) male students throughout the K-12 system, Butler et al. present a multicultural/strengths-based approach to mentoring them at the college level. The authors discuss the “aspirational, familial, social, navigational, and resistance, . . capital or strengths that many African American men possess” (p.423) and suggest that these be emphasized when mentoring AA male students at the college level. The article also includes a reflection section wherein the association between an AA male student’s “locus of control, positive family influence, and a sense of spirituality” contribute to his success as an undergraduate student are discussed.

The powerful role of AA mentors in one AA man’s life is shown in the following quote included in the article:

“It was not until I entered higher education as a student and began my first job that I met African American men who would eventually serve as my mentors. These men were not like my female mentors; they hardly ever talked to me about school, work, or how to navigate the system; instead, they sowed seeds of wisdom into my soul. They demonstrated what a man was and how a man should act and react to life. These wonderfully imperfect men instilled in me that I have a responsibility and an obligation to support and encourage my community, especially African American boys and men” (p. 423).

Clark, M. A., Ponjuan, L., Orrock, J., Wilson, T., & Flores, G. (2013). Support and barriers for Latino male students' educational pursuits: perceptions of counselors and administrators. Journal of Counseling and Development, 91(4), 458-466.

Following a discussion of the “social, cultural, and structural dimensions” (p. 458)—including an examination of the contributions of “familismo” and “machismo”—and other obstacles that contribute to the limited enrollment of male Hispanic students in college, Clark et al. describe their qualitative study with Hispanic students and administrators and counselors. This study notes an unawareness and lack of attention to problems unique to Hispanic students at the schools included in the study attended. The roles of cultural and familial expectations on male students’ career goals, the family’s socioeconomic status, and language barriers to parental involvement also emerge as themes in the authors’ analysis of their data. With respect to mentoring: “High school counselors and administrators at all levels stated that mentoring programs are pivotal in providing ongoing encouragement, support, and resources for Latino male students” (p. 463).

Glenn, M., Esters, L. T., & Retallick, M. S. (2012). Mentoring perceptions and experiences of minority students participating in summer research. NACTA Journal, 56(1), 35-42.

Glenn et al. note that “studies have documented an increase in retention and persistence among minority students to pursue advanced degrees, and remain in the academy when mentoring is made available to them as compared to students who may not have had a mentor” (p. 36). This study of summer research opportunity programs with minority students evaluated students’ perceptions of these programs considering seven mentoring functions identified in previous research by Brzoska et al. (1987) and Jacobi (1981) and included “clarity of project,” “challenging assignments,” “training,” contact,” “assistance,” “feedback,” and “role modeling” (p. 37). In the study’s findings, the “challenging assignments” function rated the highest and the “training” function rated the lowest.

Ishiyama, J. (2007). Expectations and perceptions of undergraduate research mentoring: comparing first generation, low income white/Caucasian and African American students. College Student Journal, 41(3), 540.

Thirty-three low income white/Caucasian and African American students who participated in the Ronald E. McNair Program at Truman State University were interviewed in this research to examine their perceptions of their mentoring experiences in the program with the goal of guiding the pairing of future mentor/first-generation college students in the program. African American students, whether first generation or continuing generation students, were more concerned about their relationship with their mentors, the “psychological benefits from the research experience, and to describe a good mentor as someone who is personally supportive” than other students involved in the study (p. 587). This finding is one that Ishiyama discussed given the fact that African American students were in the minority at Truman State when this research was conducted.

Louis, D. A., Phillips, L. L., Louis, S. L., & Smith, A. R. (2015). Historically black colleges and universities: Undergraduate research, mentoring and extending the graduate pipeline. Perspectives on Undergraduate Research & Mentoring., 4(1).

Louis et al. trace the contributions of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) to undergraduate research through partnerships with research universities, research centers, and involvement in federal programs. This discussion also highlights HCBUs’ “critical role in the pipeline for African Americans to graduate school” (p. 1) noting that “75 % of African Americans who earn a Ph.D. Receive their bachelor’s degree from an HBCU” (p.2). The article includes information about the mentoring process and provides recommendations for administrators, faculty, and students to encourage undergraduate research experiences at HBCUs and elsewhere.

Kendricks, K., & Arment, A. (2011). Adopting a K-12 family model with undergraduate research to enhance STEM persistence and achievement in underrepresented minority students. Journal of College Science Teaching, 41(2), 22-27.

This article reports the application of a program for underrepresented minority students with the goal of increasing their numbers in STEM-based professions. The program in focus was based on a K-12 model at Central State University, a Historically Black University. The K-12 model noted the need for a supportive family environment, caring teachers, high expectations, academic rigor, classroom strategies that provided positive reinforcement and strengthened social skills, and discipline. As an outgrowth of the K-12 model, Central State University’s program included six activities for students: (1) participation in an academic learning community with other program participants; (2) residing in the Honor’s Dormitory to create a living, learning community; (3) mandatory mentoring meetings that included rituals; (4) participation in the campus honor’s program; (5) professional development workshops and graduate school visits; and (6) STEM research (on and off campus). Students ranked their undergraduate research experiences as having the most impact on their future career and graduate school preparation.

Lundmark, C. (2004). Undergraduate mentoring program targets hard-to-find students. BioScience, 54(1), 15.

This brief discussion focuses on efforts to involve students in an environmental biology program funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation with the goal of mentoring students from under-represented racial and ethnic groups in the profession. It traces the development and implementation of one program at the University of Hawaii-Manoa designed for Pacific Island students. Sally O’Connor, program director for this program, stated the following inspirational thought related to any mentoring program seeking to work with a more diverse group of students: “We want [students] to know they can make a difference. . . .We need scientists who come from all perspectives and backgrounds. Problems . . . are complex, and we need all members of our society to help solve them” (p. 15).

Mathis, C., Datta, S., Ramos, H., Gonzalez, E., & (2015, Summer). What prevents business faculty and Latino business students from participating in undergraduate research? Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 35 (4), 35-41.

Following an overview of the benefits of undergraduate research generally, and factors possibly limiting involvement in such research, this article reports exploratory research with clusters of undergraduate Latino business students and one-on-one interviews with business faculty that investigated why Latino students are unlikely to participate in undergraduate research. Mathis et al. found that Latino students did not understand the purpose of undergraduate research possible personal application of this research. These authors question the contribution of a structural focus on practice rather than research in the undergraduate program as a possible barrier to research involvement. They also found that the business faculty did not believe that undergraduate students were interested in participating in research because they felt students were most likely headed directly to employment or an MBA program and would not be interested in research as some reported that students reacted negatively to the more academic components of their classes, and research aligned with academic goals. As reported in other literature cited in the article, Mathis et al also found that faculty members were concerned about the availability of qualified students and the publish-ability of student research.

Olivares, L. (2013, December 1). Retaining Hispanic dietetic undergraduate students through mentoring and professional development. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114 (2), p. 189. DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2013.09.026

Understanding the need to increase “the number of registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs) who are culturally competent to serve the increasing minority populations," Olivares describes the implementation and evaluates the impact of the Estudiante de Dietetico mentoring program designed to retain Hispanic students in the profession. The program included “a retention coordinator, mentors with similar ethnic backgrounds and common personal and/or professional goals to their assigned mentee, opportunities to increase awareness and connectedness with university resources, inclusion of family and field experience with RDNs and food and nutrition practitioners who service the Hispanic community” (p. 190). The program was evaluated through an assessment of students’ perception of support, their satisfaction with the program, “attendance, reflections, and analysis” (p. 191). Twenty-three of the 24 students enrolled in the program completed it. Students valued having a Hispanic retention coordinator and suggested involving families in more events in future mentoring experiences with Hispanic students.

Payton, T. D., Howe, L. A., Timmons, S. M., & Richardson, M. E. (2013). African American nursing students' perceptions about mentoring. Nursing Education Perspectives, 34(3), 173-7.

This discussion of a pilot qualitative study that examined 26 African American students’ perceptions of mentoring begins with a sobering statement from the National League of Nursing in 2010: “Despite a focus on attrition and graduation rates among ethnic minority students in higher education since the 1960s, the period 2006 to 2007 saw no significant increase in the percentage of ethnic minorities graduating from pre-licensure RN programs” (p.173). Themes that emerged from data analysis related to students’ experiences included: 1) need for role models; 2) need to learn processes or “tricks of the trade” in order to succeed on exams and obtaining financial support; and the 3) desire for connection to others, especially those “who look like me” (p. 176). Article concludes with a call to increase mentoring opportunities for African American students.

Pizur-Barnekow, K., Rhyner, P. M., & Lund, S. (2010). The pipeline training program in maternal and child health: Interdisciplinary preparation of undergraduate students from underrepresented groups. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 14(3), 422.

This article highlights a program designed to prepare occupational therapy and speech-language pathology undergraduate students from unrepresented populations for graduate work that would lead to professional service in maternal and child health training with underserved families with children with special needs. Program involved “interdisciplinary teaming, family mentoring, leadership development, public health and population-based research” (p. 422). Fifteen of the 16 students involved in the program were accepted into graduate school.

Faculty Perspectives and Concerns

Adedokun, O. A., Dyehouse, M., Bessenbacher, A., & Burgess, W. D. (2010). Exploring faculty perceptions of the benefits and challenges of mentoring undergraduate research. Online Submission.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Denver, CO, Apr 30-May 4, 2010).

Following an examination of previous research related to undergraduate research (UR) that has largely focused on students, Adedokun et al. use the cognitive apprenticeship model to explore the benefits and challenges that faculty members share in response to research related to their experiences mentoring undergraduate research. Data from a larger study of stem-focused UR programs were analyzed for this discussion. Students’ contributions to personal research and interpersonal gains were identified by faculty members as the principal benefits of involvement in UR research. With respect to challenges, faculty members focused on scheduling enough time to work with undergraduate students and their concerns related determining the parameters of students’ assignments and orienting students to research in their field in a timely manner.

Hall, M. E. L., & Maltby, L. E. (2013). Mentoring: the view from both sides. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 32(1), 70-74.

Hall and Maltby weave literature related to mentoring as they share their experiences in a mentoring journey that began when Liz Maltby was a junior and student in Lauren Hall’s class and extended through Liz Maltby’s academic journey and continued at the time of publication. Authors note that the mentoring relationship changes and serves different purposes over different stages of development. Authors suggest that professionals in the formative stages of their careers should seek mentors. The article concludes with a response to a question of why one should mentor: Mentoring works. It provides concrete benefits, clearly documented in the research literature, to both the mentee and the mentor” (p.74).

Jarvis, L. H., Shaughnessy, J., Chase, L., & Barney, C. (2011). Integrating undergraduate research into faculty responsibilities: The impact on tenure and promotion decisions. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 31(4), 7.

Jarvis et al. discuss some of the challenges associated with faculty’s responsibilities and involvement in undergraduate research. Among concerns noted in the article are: 1) a need for clarity in the expectations of faculty members from the hiring process forward; 2) resources available to untenured faculty members in light of increasing demands for participation in undergraduate research; and 3) a call for inclusion of a faculty member’s involvement in undergraduate research as a part of his/her performance review.

Mentoring Approaches

Albuja, A., & Greenlaw, S. A. (2014). Distance-Mentored Undergraduate Research. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 46(5), 44-51.

Authors describe a distance mentoring project for public liberal arts colleges designed to provide undergraduate students with faculty mentors from larger research universities to support their research in content areas unavailable on their campuses. Students worked individually and in groups with the 19 faculty members who participated from institutions throughout the United States (with one mentoring during sabbatical leave in Japan). Nineteen projects completed in conjunction with the program are listed. Three challenges to the success of this program identified as “appropriately matching distance mentors with each undergraduate researcher, identifying effective means of communication for the research teams, and negotiating differences in institutional cultures” (p. 4). The greatest challenge noted was “the expectations that the distance mentors had about the background and preparation of their mentees” (p. 51).

An, S., & Lipscomb, R. (2013). Instant mentoring: Sharing wisdom and getting advice online with e-mentoring. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 113(5 Suppl), S32. DOI:10.1016/j.jand.2013.02.012

An and Lipscomb characterize and contrast online mentoring with traditional mentoring approaches. They also share examples of programs, approaches used in these programs to match potential mentees with mentors, and methods used during e-mentoring. They conclude the article with a discussion of the costs and benefits of mentoring in cyberspace.

Cascio, T., & Gasker, J. (2001). Everyone has a shining side: Computer-mediated mentoring in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(2), 283-293.

Findings from research related to mentoring via email are reported in this article. Mentors for undergraduate mentees in the experimental group were graduate students during one semester of a pre-professional course. Mentors emailed their mentees once a week with topics provided by the investigators for the first four weeks, with mentors choosing their own topics for the remaining weeks of the semester. Pre- and post-treatment surveys were administered to the experimental and comparison groups and the mentored group showed the greatest gains in professional identity. Results of thematic analysis of email messages and were discussed largely from mentors’ perspective. Themes in email messages include validating and normalizing mentees’ experiences, providing emotional support, and socializing mentees into the profession.

Clifford, P. & Lakoski, J. (2010, October 8). Top 10 tips for mentors. Science. DOI: 10.1126/science.caredit.a1000098

Authors discuss ten suggestions for mentors that can not only assist them as they help mentees progress, but help them enjoy their experiences as mentors.

Collins, N., Mitstifer, D. I., Nelson Goff, B. S., & Hymon-Parker, S. (2009). Undergraduate research in the human sciences: Three models. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 101(3), 24-31.

Article reports the establishment and activities of an undergraduate research community (URC) in the human sciences/family and consumer sciences to prepare “the next generation of scholars” (p. 26); the article also describes future initiatives of the URC. Activities discussed include the establishment of an online peer-reviewed journalfor undergraduate research, conferences where undergraduates report their research, and online resources. Undergraduate research models employed at three institutions involved in the URC (Bradley University, Kansas State University, and the University of Maryland, Eastern Shore) are described. Authors note that there is a research base to support mentoring of successful undergraduate research in the human sciences:

“It seems that undergraduate research in the human sciences can be successful at most institutions, regardless of size, as long as there is a commitment to providing such experiences for students. Scholarship/financial aid support, travel support, and recognition for completed projects are motivations for students” (p. 30).

Lukeman, P. S. (2013, November 1). A guide to mentoring undergraduates in the lab. Nature Nanotechnology, 8 (11), p. 784. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2013.237

Although conducting research training with undergraduates may be “far more detailed and didactic—and . . . more time consuming” (p. 784), Lukeman notes that “a significant undergraduate research project can . . . be the formative scientific experience of a student’s career,” (p. 784) one that helps undergraduates gain a realistic perspective of what research involves. Lukeman runs a research group where research is conducted solely by undergraduate researchers and this article was written to help others who wish to work with undergraduate researchers in a lab setting. Suggestions provided in the article include the following:

  • Make explicit the implicit: Because mentors share the “culture of science,” often unknown to undergraduates, Lukeman suggests that mentors should “make explicit how your implicit beliefs affect [their] practice of science” (p. 784). Mentors’ motivation for research, time commitments, and expectations for time spent in the laboratory, safety, and the roles expected while they work in the laboratory are among the guidelines he offers for sharing with undergraduate research mentees.
  • Recruiting students: Author suggests advertising with explicit requirements for participation in the research at the same time each year. Application process for his lab includes two faculty recommendations and a predetermined GPA, although he notes that he believes that an “interested” student is more important than an “interesting” student (p. 785).
  • Training students: Lukeman has a training approach that he uses with students wherein they reproduce research done elsewhere. Irrespective of the training approach used, Lukeman suggests that “it should be feasible and relatively brief, offer useful feedback . . . and exemplify most (if not all) of the techniques they will use in the lab” (p. 785).
  • Be kind: Lukeman does not believe that students should feel the pressures associated with producing results and publishing. Students in his lab are only sanctioned for “safety violations, [a] serious breach of promises or dishonest behavior” (p. 786).

Mangan, L. (2013). The many modes of mentoring: New spins on the classic relationship. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 113(5 Suppl), S38. DOI:10.1016/j.jand.2013.02.017

Mangan provides a nice overview of various modes of mentoring in professional environments. Several of Mangan’s definitions of mentor-based terminology have been incorporated into this minisite’s glossary.

Michigan State University's W.K. Kellogg Biological Station. (2010, April). Mentoring (and Managing) your Undergraduate Intern or REU.

Document includes guidelines that may be used when mentoring students. Suggestions are provided for planning, setting goals, and meeting with students who are being mentored.

Ramirez, J. (2012, Fall). The intentional mentor:  Effective mentorship of undergraduate science students.  The Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 11 (1), A55-A63.

This article focuses “on the characteristics that define a mentor, the attributes that make a mentor effective, and tips for successful mentoring.” In addition, it includes a developmental profile of an undergraduate mentee.

Shellito, C., Shea, K., Weissmann, G., Mueller-Solger, A., & Davis, W. (2001). Successful mentoring of undergraduate researchers. Journal of College Science Teaching, 30(7), 460-464.

Article reports research with students and faculty at the University of California-Davis “to determine what faculty can do to become better mentors to undergraduate researchers and what characteristics make a good faculty mentor” (p. 460). Students were most satisfied with their experiences when they were mentored by faculty members rather than graduate students. Satisfied students also spent more time with their mentors and received “support, direction” and guidance for their projects (p. 460). Article includes “13 tips for successful undergraduate mentoring experiences” (p. 463) related to resource management, building relationships with students, and guiding students during the mentoring process.

Stark, E. (2013). Real-life solutions to real-life problems: Collaborating with a non-profit foundation to engage honors students in applied research. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, (2), 129-145.

Stark shares the collaborative efforts of the University of Minnesota-Mankato and the Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation (SMIF) that engaged undergraduate honors students in research that evaluated the effectiveness of their programs in a 27-county area. Students participated in research as applied projected in a research methods course and subsequently participated in research sponsored by SMIF that was coordinated by faculty members. Article concludes with the perspective of Timothy Penny, SMIF President, wherein he discusses the impact of the applied research students participated in.

Wolfe, A. J., Retallick, M. S., & Martin, R. (2009). Agriculture faculty perspectives on undergraduate mentoring: Definitions, practices, and processes. NACTA Journal, 53(3), 44-49.

Goal of this research was to examine faculty members’ perspectives associated with their experiences mentoring undergraduate students. Faculty members characterized mentoring as a “complex role” beyond “academic advising” (p. 44). Mentoring is defined as “a form of teaching where faculty members provide advice, guidance, and counsel in the areas of academic, career, and personal development, which can occur either individually or in small groups” (p. 44). Most faculty members (87 percent of survey respondents) indicated that they had no formal training to prepare them for their mentoring roles and only 18 percent had been offered professional development to assist them as they filled their mentoring roles. Includes suggestions for topics related to mentoring-based professional development and its delivery.

Mentoring Ethics

Ahern-Rindell, A. & Quackenbush, A. (2015, Fall). Applied ethics can foster the teacher-scholar model and impact undergraduate research campus-wide. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 36 (1), 19-24.

Recognizing a difference between discussing ethics in the classroom and applying ethics in real life situations, these authors describe the Dundon-Berchtold Program for Moral Formation and Applied Ethics at the University of Portland developed to “[foster] students’ moral development utilizing a team-taught course with a reflective format” and “[provide] student-faculty teams with opportunities to conduct applied ethics-related research” in various content areas (p. 19). With a healthy endowment, this program provides faculty and students with stipends and a curriculum to support the application of ethical principles in undergraduate research. Authors also report findings from a survey of students who had not received ethical training designed to assess their understanding of “the topics of authorship and acknowledgements, collaboration, data management, experimental design, mentoring, peer review, plagiarism, and safety” (p. 21). Although only 29 surveys were completed and results are not generalizable, the topics of authorship, data management, and experimental design were of particular concern to the researchers and led them to conclude “that there are gaps in students’ knowledge of ethical practices or uncertainty about the application of their knowledge of proper ethical research practices” (p. 21). An outgrowth of this research was the development and university-wide adoption of “a web-based training program for ethical research” (p. 22). 

Anderson, D., & Shore, W. (2008). Ethical issues and concerns associated with mentoring undergraduate students. Ethics & Behavior, 18(1), 1-25. DOI:10.1080/10508420701519577

Considering undergraduate researchers’ “status as emerging adults,” Anderson and Shore highlight ethical issues associated with mentoring them (p 1). The mentoring relationship is characterized and the undergraduate research mentee/protégé is distinguished from a graduate mentee/protégé. The authors indicate that “despite its more instrumental nature, the relationship, like all those in mentoring, is emotionally intense and carries with it a clear fiduciary responsibility requiring the mentor to posit action based on the protégé’s current and future well-being, not the mentor’s own advancement” (p. 6). Specific ethical concerns examined in the article include the 1) nature of guidance given to students to help them discover their own vocational goals; 2) level of autonomy and amount of influence given to students; 3) power differential between faculty member and mentee/protégé [The authors note that “undergraduate protégés’ naiveté about power and trust makes them highly vulnerable to exploitation by the unscrupulous mentor” (p. 15)]; 4) prioritizing the protégé’s needs; 5) mentor’s motives; and 6) availability/accessibility of mentors. Anderson and Shore suggest that the mentor/mentee relationship be considered a client/counselor relationship—more professional than personal. They also posit that “mentoring is something that the mentor does for the protégé: Not because of the mentor’s needs or personal characteristics, not entirely because of the protégé’s needs or personal characteristics, but because doing mentoring is a vital part of the job for most undergraduate faculty” (p. 16)

Löfstrom, E. (2012). Students' ethical awareness and conceptions of research ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 22 (5), 349-361.

Following a discussion of ethical awareness and the need for students to obtain it, this article reports research designed to examine undergraduate and graduate “students’ conceptions of research ethics, and the features in their study environment that facilitate the development of these conceptions” (p.350). Participants responded to multiple-choice questions related to ethical issues connected to a fictional research proposal and were asked to provide related examples related to ethical issues in the Domain-Specific Ethical Awareness Test. Graduate students exhibited higher scores than undergraduate students.

Mabrouk, P. A. (2015). What knowledge of responsible conduct of research do undergraduates bring to their undergraduate research experiences? Journal of Chemical Education93(1), 46-55. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00264

Mabrouk discusses research that explored the effectiveness of science ethics training given to high school and undergraduate students who participated in a summer research university. Although no baseline was set related to students’ understanding of prior to the training given at the beginning of a summer research program, student responses to scenarios related to the training shortly after the training was given, a few weeks into the program, and two weeks following the conclusion of the program. Ethical issues students exhibited the greatest understanding of included data handling and laboratory safety. Students “do not generally appear knowledgeable about confidentiality, intellectual property, and authorship” initially, although their understanding of confidentiality grew by the end of the program (p. 97). Students did not increase their understanding of intellectual property and authorship. Author suggests that program coordinators and mentors periodically incorporate discussions of ethical topics into the mentoring process to increase students’ understanding of these topics.

Peden, B. & Keniston, A. (2012). What and when should undergraduates learn about research ethics? In R.E. Landrum & M.A. McCarthy (Eds.), Teaching ethically: Challenges and opportunities. American Psychological Association, pp. 151-160. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/13496-013

Peden and Keniston provide a “developmentally appropriate” model for ethics education across the undergraduate curriculum with the assumption “that teaching ethically requires instructors to learn and teach ethics throughout their careers” (p. 152). Authors provide suggestions for students throughout their undergraduate career. Specific recommendations for first year students: 1) Distinguish between classroom demonstrations and original research; 2) Participate in research and experience practices with ethical considerations such as “letters of invitation, consent forms, the competent conduct of research, and debriefing, especially in cases of deception” (p. 153); and 3) Ascertain their rights as research participants” (p. 153). For second year students, the authors suggest a discussion of plagiarism, and that “students . . . apply knowledge about . . . ethics and statistics during the design, planning, and analysis phases of research” (p. 155). During the final years of their undergraduate program, Ped and Keniston recommend that students have the opportunity to participate in collaborative research and examine ethical issues in order to become aware “of the ethical challenges and opportunities inherent in specific research designs” (p. 156). It

Mentoring Evaluation

Cox, M. F., & Andriot, A. (2009). Mentor and undergraduate student comparisons of students' research skills. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research10(1/2), 31-39.

Cox and Androit explore differences in the perceptions of undergraduate students’ research skills reported by these students, faculty, and graduate students involved in undergraduate students’ research experiences. This research also sought to determine the possible impact of interaction time, mentoring relationship quality, students’ desire for assistance with their research, and the level of students’ autonomy in the research process on evaluations. 128 undergraduate students, 58 graduate student mentors, and 96 faculty members were involved in the study conducted during an 11-week summer program at Purdue University.

Faculty members’ ratings differed from student responses in seven areas: “(1) observing and collecting data, (2) listening effectively, (3) interpreting data, (4) framing a research question, (5) relating results to the ‘bigger picture,’ (6) designing an experiment or theoretical test of a hypothesis, and (7) writing a scholarly article for publication” (p. 33). When graduate student mentors evaluated the undergraduate researchers, the only item where differences in ratings was significant was “relating results to the “bigger picture.” When relationship quality was considered, there was a greater difference in student and faculty mentor ratings when the relationship quality was high with students often rating their skills lower and mentors rating the students’ skills higher. When the time spent in the mentoring relationship was considered, faculty who spent less time with their students rated their students lower; a similar, related finding emerged when the frequency with which a student asked for help was considered. As well, “faculty rated lowest those students they controlled the least” (p. 35, emphasis in the original).

Mentoring Outcomes

Hartmann, J. Q., Widner, S. C., & Carrick, C. (2013). Strong faculty relationships and academic motivation as potential outcomes of undergraduate research. North American Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 215.

Following a discussion of outcomes associated with undergraduate research mentoring URM), URM formats, faculty support, factors influencing student participation in URM, the authors report their research using a quasi-experimental design that explored student-faculty relationships and academic motivation across undergraduate students who gain research experience in two different contexts with students in a non-research course.” Data for this study were collected from 132 students: 29 of these students were mentored individually, 34 participated in a research course, and 44 were enrolled in a non-research course. The Student-Faculty Relationship scale used in this study included items related to collegiality, connection to the department, instruction, respect, faculty support using a five-point Likert scale. Academic motivation was measured using four scales. In both pre- and post-testing, students who were mentored individually reported strongest relationships with their faculty mentors and scored highest on curiosity levels in the motivation testing.

Linn, M., Palmer, E., Baranger, A., Gerard, E., & Stone, E. (2015, February 6). Undergraduate research experiences: Impacts and opportunities. Science, 347 (6222), 1261757. DOI: 10.1126/science.1261757

The purpose of this review of 60 investigations of previous studies of undergraduate research was to “identify impacts and opportunities for future investigations” (p.1). Seventy percent of studies included in the review were conducted at four-year institutions. Most of the studies focused on one semester of the research experience and involved underclass students. Students were most often mentored by graduate students with a focus of such mentoring being technical skills development whereas Lim et al. note that faculty are more often to focus on building a scientific identity and problem solving with the students they mentor. Specific impacts of undergraduate research discussed include:

  1. Promoting persistence and identity and involvement in the field: The authors note that “access, duration, and selectivity of research experience influence their impact” (p. 4). They also note that the faculty at small colleges are more likely to mentor than those at larger institutions. Support was found in previous research for the assertion that longer undergraduate research experience increase identity with the field research is conducted in. The authors note that “short undergraduate research experiences have little to no benefit” with respect to this goal (p. 4).
  2. Improving research practices: Findings from previous studies is questioned by the authors. They conclude that students are often found following previously-designed lab procedures “rather than interpreting results” (p.5).
  3. Expanding conceptual understanding: Authors note that there is “limited evidence for gains in conceptual understanding” as “students need guidance to understand the rationale, research design, and contribution to the field in this new area” (p. 5).
  4. Communicating the nature of science: With respect to the impact of an undergraduate researcher’s increased ability to communicate the nature of science, the authors state that previous research appears to lead to the conclusion that “motivating students to articulate their views about the nature of science and talk or write about their experiences helps them reflect on their experiences” (p. 5). This, they also note, seems “ consistent with the knowledge integration framework” (p. 5).

Among their conclusions, Linn et al. call for more rigorous research of undergraduate research. The article concludes with the following recommendations:

“The field would benefit from research that identifies mentoring practices and incorporates them into professional development for mentors, including graduate and postdoctoral researchers. Professional development can help mentors (i) identify and negotiate expectations with their mentees; (ii) explore undergraduate assumptions about research experiences; (iii) monitor student progress; (iv) encourage reflection; and (v) support students emotionally as well as intellectually” (p.6).

Morris, N., & Labhard, L. (2005). Benefits of undergraduate research in family and consumer sciences. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 97(1), 75.

Authors note that students who participate in undergraduate research in family and consumer sciences in connection with an undergraduate thesis “apply research methods to questions for inquiry and . . . increase subject matter expertise in a chosen area, develop organizational ability, provide a unique contribution to the body of knowledge, . . .expand skills in presenting findings, and develop networking and career-related skills” (p. 75). Article includes examples of student foci in completed undergraduate thesis projects. The use of a senior project manual to guide students’ work is recommended.

Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P. & McCullough, J. (2007) Benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science, 316, 548-549. Retrieved from http://curca.buffalo.edu/pdfs/benefitsUGResearch.pdf

Summary of findings from four web-based surveys conducted by SRI International to examine “who participates [in STEM-based undergraduate research], what effects the experience has on them, and what factors favor positive outcomes” (p. 548). Data were collected from 15,000 respondents, who represented a demographically diverse group. More students participated in research associated with chemistry, environmental sciences and psychology than mathematics and computer science. Undergraduate researchers had high grade point averages and were juniors and seniors; and the majority (59 percent) reported an interest in a STEM career since childhood. Undergraduate researchers connected an increase in understanding of the research process, confidence in their abilities, and awareness of graduate school expectations with their research experiences. Several undergraduate researchers also increased their expectation of obtaining a PhD following completion of undergraduate research. Strongest effects of undergraduate research were found “among Hispanics/Latinos and weakest among non-Hispanic whites,” although the differences were small (p. 489). No statistically significant differences existed between male and female students in the data, although the authors note that their “findings suggest that having a mix of mentors (in terms of their sex and race/ethnicity) is likely to have a mildly beneficial effect for all students, not just women and minorities” (p. 489).

Mentoring Relationship

Allen, T.D., & Eby, L.T. (2008, June). Mentor commitment in formal mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, (3) 309-316. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.016
This paper reports research designed to examine the impact of a mentor’s commitment on a mentee/protégé’s perception of the relationship between the mentor and the mentee/protégé.  Research was conducted with 91 matched mentoring pairs in four different organizations. “Mentor reports of mentor commitment . . . related significantly to protégé reports of mentor commitment . . .  and mentor reports of mentor commitment . . . related significantly to protégé reports of relationship quality” (p. 312). Mentorship quality was found to be greatest in pairs where the mentor “underestimate[ed] his/her commitment to the relationship relative to the protégé’s estimate of mentor commitment” (pp. 312-313). In most of the relationships, mentors reported less commitment to the mentoring relationship “relative to what the protégé believed the mentor’s commitment level to be” (p. 314).

Fuentes, M.V., Alvarado, A.R., Berdan, J. & DeAngelo, L.  (2014, July 4). Mentorship matters:  Does early faculty contact lead to quality faculty interaction? Research in Higher Education, 55, 288-307.  DOI:  10.1007/slll62-013-9307-6
This study was designed to investigate the impact of early interactions with faculty “as a part of a socialization process in college leading students to have more meaningful interactions with faculty later in college, in the form of mentorship” (p. 289). Weidman’s model of undergraduate socialization was used as a theoretical model to explore the mentoring relationship. Fuentes et al. “hypothesiz[ed] that early faculty contact in the first year of college socializes students to engage in faculty mentorship relationships by their senior year of college” (p. 292). The longitudinal data from this study came from student surveys administered to freshmen seniors administered by the Cooperative Institutional Research Program at the Higher Research Institute at UCLA.  Measures significantly impacting outcomes for student-mentor interactions relate to students who have frequent contact with their high school teachers, female, Caucasian, are “rising star[s]” (p. 297), have frequent contact with their families, who are undecided about their majors, and GPA.  As well, student contact with faculty during the first year of college was associated with greater faculty mentorship by the senior year of college” (p. 300) in the data.

Lipscomb, R. & An, S. (2013, May). Mentoring 101: Building a mentoring relationship. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 113, (5), Supplement, S29-S31. ISSN 2212-2672, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2013.02.010
Following a basic overview of mentoring relationships, Lipscomb and An indicate that “a good mentor can increase a mentee’s chances for success, . . . introduc[e] him or her to career advancement opportunities, [expand] the mentee’s professional network, and [bolster] his or her confidence. Mentoring skills identified as critical in The Helping Hand, a mentoring guide from the California Dietetics Association, are listed and include: “active listening,” “identifying goals with respect to current reality,” “building trust,” “encouraging and inspiring,” “providing corrective feedback,” “managing risks,” “opening doors,” “instructing and developing capabilities,” and “knowing oneself” (p. S29).   “The most basic responsibility of a mentee is choosing his or her mentor” (p. S29).  The authors suggest that mentees be a “proactive partner” and take responsibility to initiate contact with and communicate with his/her mentor: “The more self-reliant the mentee, the greater the success of the partnership” (p. S30).  The ability to learn quickly is identified as a mentee’s most important skill. The mentoring process is also described and suggestions are made for the creation of a successful mentoring relationship.

Shephard, G. (2004). Attachment and undergraduate mentoring relationships. (Order No. 3161055, State University of New York at Stony Brook). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 132-132 p.
Shephard’s research focused on the role of attachment in mentoring relationships using two assessments:  the Walters and Rodrigues Attachment Assessment at the beginning of the school year, and a modified mentor-student assessment, including a Protégé Satisfaction Survey at the end of year. Results indicated that those “students who joined the mentoring program were more secure than those who declined the invitation to join.  Among the mentored students, those who had more secure attachment representations were more goal-directed in their mentor-protégé relationship, providing more critical evaluations of the mentor’s performance at the end of the year assessmentHowever, the relationship between attachment representations and mentor-student representations was not clearcut, in part because the time during the year at which the student joined the mentor program was related to the representation of the mentor/protege relationship (p. iv).

Mentoring Research Methodology

Hoskins, M. L., & White, J. (2013). Relational inquiries and the research interview: Mentoring future researchers. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(3), 179-188. DOI:10.1177/1077800412466224
This article discusses challenges novice researchers working with interpretive (especially hermeneutic, narrative, phenomenological and ethnographic) research might encounter in their research. Authors highlight “objectivity, bracketing, and leaning in” (p. 181) and lessening (p. 184) in conjunction with interviewing.  Article concludes with a discussion of mentoring but caution that they “do not advocate a prescriptive approach, but suggest . . . preparing students to consider . . . conceptual images” that may be useful “when doing the kind of leaning” they consider useful” (p. 185).

Perdue, S., Driscoll, D., Matthews, J., Paz, E. & Tess, J. (2014). Negotiating the sponsorship continuum: Preparing humanities undergraduates to conduct RAD research. Perspectives on Undergraduate Research and Mentoring, 3(2), 1-19. Retrieved from http://blogs.elon.edu/purm/files/2014/04/WYNNPDF.pdf
Authors provide a history of undergraduate research and its place in writing studies, including a description of what “Haswell (2005) calls RAD research, research that 1) can be reproduced by other researchers (replicable), 2) builds upon or extends previous research (aggregable), and 3) leverages data (data-supported),” an approach that they believe provides “a model for building undergraduate research expertise” (p. 2), “a model of thinking and action” (p.5).  Perdue et al. “advance the sponsorship continuum, a recursive process by which academic professionals serve as teachers, mentors, and collaborators, sometimes all in one setting” (p. 5). Four concerns associated with undergraduate research are identified:  1) “help[ing] students understand and navigate different routes to assessing research questions:  theoretical, rhetorical, historical, and/or RAD based” (p. 6); 2) facing fear of rejection in the professional arena; 3) “push for professionalization of undergraduate students” (p. 6); and 4) the time commitment for undergraduate research projects.  Article concludes with “the experiences of two faculty mentors and three undergraduate researchers” (p. 7).

Student Perspectives

Adedokun, O. A., & Burgess, W. D. (2011). Uncovering students' preconceptions of undergraduate research experiences. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 12(5/6), 12.
Adedokun & Burgess use “qualitative data from twenty-five undergraduate research interns’ reflective journals” to explore “students’ preconceptions of [undergraduate research experiences] and how those preconceptions compare with students’ actual experiences (p. 12).  “Five categories of preconceptions emerged from the data:  1) preconceptions of scientists and research environments, 2) preconceptions of the ease (or difficulty) of research endeavors, 3) preconceptions of duties in research apprenticeship/involvement in the research projects, 4) preconceptions about team versus independent work, and 5) preconceptions of mentoring and supervision” (p. 14). “Students’ preconceptions were mostly contradicted by their experiences in their research internships” (p. 12).

Dahlquist, L.M. (2013, Winter). How to be a successful undergraduate mentor: Tips to maintain mind and body. CURQ on the Web, 34(2), 10-12.
Dahlquist discusses five “tips for developing a research mindset and staying healthy” (p. 10):  1) “Create a research calendar or timeline” (p. 10); 2) “Carry around a journal” (p. 11); 3) “Use non-research time efficiently” (p.11); 4) “Embrace your research” (p. 11); and 5) “Maintain your physical well-being” (p. 11).

Esters, L. T., Glenn, M., & Retallick, M. S. (2012). Mentoring perceptions and experiences of minority students participating in summer research. NACTA Journal, 56(1), 35-42.
Glenn et al. note that “studies have documented an increase in retention and persistence among minority students to pursue advanced degrees, and remain in the academy when mentoring is made available to them as compared to students who may not have had a mentor” (p. 36).  This study of summer research opportunity programs with minority students evaluated students’ perceptions of these programs considering seven mentoring functions identified in previous research by Brzoska et al. (1987) and Jacobi (1981) and included “clarity of project,” “challenging assignments,” “training,” contact,” “assistance,” “feedback,” and “role modeling” (p. 37). In this study’s findings, the “challenging assignments” function rated the highest, and the “training” function rated the lowest.

Hall, M. E. L., & Maltby, L. E. (2013). Mentoring: the view from both sides. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 32(1), 70-74.
Hall and Maltby weave literature related to mentoring as they share their experiences in a mentoring journey that began when Liz Maltby was a junior and student in Lauren Hall’s class and extended through Liz Maltby’s academic journey and continued at the time of publication. These authors note that the mentoring relationship changes and serves different purposes over different stages of development. Further, they suggest that professionals in the formative stages of their careers should seek mentors. The article concludes with a response to a question of why one should mentor: Mentoring works. It provides concrete benefits, clearly documented in the research literature, to both the mentee and the mentor” (p.74).

Ishiyama, J. (2007). Expectations and perceptions of undergraduate research mentoring: comparing first generation, low income white/Caucasian and African American students. College Student Journal, 41(3), 540.
Thirty-three low income white/Caucasian and African American students who participated in the Ronald E. McNair Program at Truman State University were interviewed in this research to examine their perceptions of their mentoring experiences in the program with the goal of guiding the pairing of future mentor/first-generation college students in the program.  African American students, whether first generation or continuing generation students, were more concerned about their relationship with their mentors, the “psychological benefits from the research experience, and [they] describe a good mentor as someone who is personally supportive” than other students involved in the study (p. 587).  This finding is one that Ishiyama discussed given the fact that African American students were in the minority at Truman State when this research was conducted.

Pate, M. L., & Retallick, M. S. (2009). Undergraduate student mentoring: what do students think? NACTA Journal, 53(1), 24.
Paper reports findings from a survey of undergraduate students in the College of Agriculture at Iowa State University.  This research was designed to: 1) describe demographic characteristics of the student participants, 2) determine undergraduate students' perceptions about mentoring, and 3) determine the extent to which mentoring functions are practiced by CALS faculty based on student experiences” (p. 26).  Most students who participated in the research were Caucasian, and most (63 percent) indicated that they did not interact with faculty outside of the classroom. Those who did, most often did so in conjunction with organizations associated with their majors. Students’ understanding of mentoring follow traditional themes.  55 percent of students indicated that they felt that they had a faculty mentor in the college.

Pita, M., Ramirez, C., Joacin, N., Prentice, S. & Clarke, C. (2013, Spring). Five effective strategies for mentoring undergraduates: Students' perspectives. CUR Quarterly, 33 (3), 11-15. 
This article highlights five “interpersonal strategies that mentors can employ to facilitate the best possible learning outcomes for their undergraduate researchers” (p. 11). Strategies highlighted include:  1) “mak[ing] yourself available” (p. 11); 2) “foster[ing] community” through team meetings, one-on-one meetings, clubs (p. 12-13); 3) “be[ing] attentive” to students using “multiple modes of communication, including email, phone calls, and even texting” (p. 13); 4) “encourag[ing] participation in the broader research community” (p. 13); and 5) “be[ing] understanding” of students’ needs and concerns during the research process (p. 13).

Opayemi, R. (2012). Psychological factors predisposing university undergraduates to mentoring relationship. Ife Psychologia, 20(1), 70-86. 1)
This paper reports research that examined factors that lead students to participate in undergraduate research in the University of Ibadan, South-West Nigeria.  Locus of control, measured using “the Locus of Control of Behaviour Scale . . . a 17 item Likert format scale, developed by Craig, Franklin, and Andrew” (p. 75) was found to be the most important factor predicting a mentoring relationship.  “Age and year of study show[ed a] negatively significant relationship with mentoring relationship” in this research (p. 79).

Payton, T. D., Howe, L. A., Timmons, S. M., & Richardson, M. E. (2013). African American nursing students' perceptions about mentoring. Nursing Education Perspectives, 34(3), 173-7.
Interviews were conducted with 26 African American nursing students to examine their perceptions of mentoring.  Four main themes emerged in the analysis of the transcripts from the interviews:  1) the need for reassuring “mentors who were role models, encouraging, and honest” (p. 175); 2) “a strong need for academic support” including “studying and test-taking skills” (p. 175); 3) students felt stressed, fearful, and alone; 4) the need for a mentor “who looks like me:” in this case, an African American mentor (p. 176).

Summer Undergraduate Research Programs

Esters, L. T., Glenn, M., & Retallick, M. S. (2012). Mentoring perceptions and experiences of minority students participating in summer research. NACTA Journal, 56(1), 35-42.
Glenn et al. note that “studies have documented an increase in retention and persistence among minority students to pursue advanced degrees, and remain in the academy when mentoring is made available to them as compared to students who may not have had a mentor” (p. 36).  This study of summer research opportunity programs with minority students evaluated students’ perceptions of these programs considering seven mentoring functions identified in previous research by Brzoska et al. (1987) and Jacobi (1981) and included “clarity of project,” “challenging assignments,” “training,” contact,” “assistance,” “feedback,” and “role modeling” (p. 37). In the study’s findings, the “challenging assignments” function rated the highest and the “training” function rated the lowest.

Good, D. J., McIntyre, C. M., & Marchant, M. A. (2013). The USDA scholars program: Innovations in a summer undergraduate research program. NACTA Journal, 57(1), 62.
This paper reports research that examined the USDA Scholars Program at Virginia Tech using data from 42 students who participated in the program between 2007 and 2011. The program “integrates undergraduate research with peer mentoring, grantsmanship, a specialized summer course and a summer multi-institutional symposium” (p. 62).  Discussion overviews the program from the application process through its assessment.  78 percent of program participants continued on to graduate school and 42 percent continued working in the labs where they did internships in the program.   Eight publications, 10 presentations, and seven poster presentations were connected with these programs.  Post-survey results showed that students believed they were more competent in research, statistics, speaking, and writing as a result of their involvement in these programs.

Moss, J. Q. (2011). An undergraduate summer research and mentorship experience for underrepresented students in the agricultural sciences. NACTA Journal, 55(1), 32.
Article discusses the development and evaluation of an undergraduate student research internship and mentorship program in the agricultural sciences with a goal to “increase the number of underrepresented students in agricultural science majors at Little Big Horn College, Sheridan College, and the University of Wyoming” (p. 32). In post-survey responses, participants indicated that they felt that agriculture was a scientific area of study worth pursuing, a change from their responses prior to their internships/research. Students also indicated that they increased their understanding of research and “the science of agriculture” (p. 35).  They also indicated that they would recommend the internship and mentorship program to other students.  Ten students indicated they would pursue degrees in agricultural science at the end of the program: Four of these students were Native American and one was Hispanic.

Undergraduate Research

González, C. (2001). Undergraduate Research, Graduate Mentoring, and the University's Mission. Science, 293(5535), 1624-1626.
Author shares her perspective on the role of undergraduate and graduate mentoring in a research university.  “[Undergraduate research and graduate mentoring] both speak to the primary mission of the research university, which is not carrying out research but training students to do research. . . . The distinct mission of the research university . . . is to introduce students to research, to inspire in them a passion for discovery” (p. 1624).  Discussion highlights the role of research in all levels of students’ education.  Notes the importance of developing skills, such as writing and presenting, that lead to success in research itself, and communication of the findings from this research.

Hu, S., Kuh, G. D., & Gayles, J. G. (2007). Engaging undergraduate students in research activities: Are research universities doing a better job? Innovative Higher Education, 32(3), 167-177. DOI:10.1007/s10755-007-9043-y
This study compared the frequency of undergraduate student research experiences at different types of colleges and universities from the early 1990s through 2004. The results indicate that the frequency of student research experiences increased since 1998 at all types of institutions and that students at research universities were not more likely than their counterparts elsewhere to have such experiences. The findings were consistent across major fields” (p. 167).

Kinkhead, J. (2003, April 22).  Learning through inquiry: An overview of undergraduate research. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2003 (93), 5-17.  DOI:  10.1002/tl.85
Discussion wherein “undergraduate research is defined broadly to include scientific inquiry, creative activity, and scholarship” (p. 6) emerges from research conducted with undergraduate researchers involved in various mentoring relationships.  Following a review of the literature related to undergraduate research and the meaning and place of mentoring in the process, Kinkhead identifies student groups who might be invited to participate in undergraduate research.  Funding and research support needed for undergraduate research as well as ethical considerations are included in this discussion.