Impact of a Biomedical Engineering Undergraduate Research Program on Student and Faculty Perceptions of Creativity

Megan Huffstickler; Sarah E. Zappe; Keefe B. Manning; Margaret J. Slattery

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Publication Date: June 24, 2017
Start Date: June 24, 2017
End Date: June 28, 2017
Conference Session: Clinical, Patient, and Innovation Experiences in BME
Tagged Division: Biomedical
Tagged Topic: Diversity
Page Count: 17
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--28456
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/28456
Download Count: 449

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Megan Huffstickler Pennsylvania State University

visit author page

Megan Huffstickler is an Educational Psychology graduate student at Penn State who is interested in student learning in STEM fields.

visit author page

biography

Sarah E. Zappe Pennsylvania State University, University Park

visit author page

Dr. Sarah Zappe is Senior Research Associate and Director of Assessment and Instructional Support in the Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Education at Penn State. She holds a doctoral degree in educational psychology emphasizing applied measurement and testing. In her position, Sarah is responsible for developing instructional support programs for faculty, providing evaluation support for educational proposals and projects, and working with faculty to publish educational research. Her research interests primarily involve creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship education.

visit author page

author page

Keefe B. Manning Pennsylvania State University, University Park orcid.org/0000-0001-9029-5217

biography

Margaret J. Slattery Pennsylvania State University, University Park

visit author page

Margaret Slattery Ph.D., has been a faculty member at Penn State University in Biomedical Engineering since 2007 and her career has focused on undergraduate students and their academic experiences. She currently is directing a new office within Undergraduate Education aimed to increase the visibility and support for General Education while helping to implement a new General Education program for all PSU undergraduates.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Immersive research experiences have been shown to significantly improve the research and communication abilities of students who participate in them, as well as increase the likelihood that these students will pursue higher education after the completion of their bachelor’s degrees. While Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) programs are widespread, the Cardiovascular Research: Engineering a Translational Experience (CREATE) REU program is unique in that it emphasizes the parallels between the creative process and research. Creativity, an attribute that most feel is important for aspiring engineers, is typically not emphasized in research programs or in the undergraduate curriculum. This study describes an initial evaluation of the first year of an NSF funded research experience for undergraduates (REU) in Biomedical Engineering, entitled Cardiovascular Research: Engineering a Translational Experience (CREATE). Cardiovascular research was chosen as the focus of this program, because its innovative technologies allow for a unique emphasis to be placed upon teaching the students and involved faculty about creativity and its alignment with the scientific method.

The assessment protocol used to evaluate this program included the collection of pre-survey, post-survey, and interview data from both the participating students and faculty. Both surveys contained items measuring students’ broad research experiences, specific-scientific skills, and creative role identity, expectation, and self-efficacy. The post-survey also included measures describing students’ future educational and career plans, preparedness to participate in research activities, production metrics during and post-REU, and satisfaction with the REU components.

Students (n=8) demonstrated significant gains in broad research experiences (p<.05) and distinct areas of specific-scientific skills (p<.05) and creative role identity (p<.05) post-REU. These more specific gains included increases in the students’ confidence in their ability to identify limitations of research methods and designs, prepare a scientific poster, and understand journal articles. Students also reported increases in the importance of creativity to their self-image and confidence that they can be creative in their coursework. Seven out of a total of eight participants who responded to the post-survey reported the intent to pursue graduate education post-REU, and the students rated their preparation to perform research related activities and overall satisfaction with the REU as both being very high. All eight students presented their research to students and faculty during the REU; one student presented their work at an academic conference during the REU. Responses by students also indicated that one student will go on to present their work from the REU at an academic conference, one will publish in an academic journal, and one will present again before faculty and students.

Of particular interest to the researchers, is the interview data collected pertaining to the creativity element of the REU. Themes found in the student responses indicate that the emphasis on creativity had a high impact on the way the students approach new ideas and work through problems encountered in research, think about creativity in engineering, and perceive themselves as being creative individuals. Faculty responses revealed that while the faculty approached mentorship of their students with the intent of inspiring creative work, they did not always feel that they were successful or know whether or not the students were receptive to their efforts and those of the REU coordinators. Further responses from the faculty indicate that this may be due to a lack of direct communication between the REU coordinators and the faculty about the students’ experiences with program activities throughout the course of the REU, and this factor is an area we seek to improve in future years. Other themes in the qualitative data relate to additional positive impacts of the REU on the students and other areas in which the program may be improved in the future.

Citation
Format

Huffstickler, M., & Zappe, S. E., & Manning, K. B., & Slattery, M. J. (2017, June), Impact of a Biomedical Engineering Undergraduate Research Program on Student and Faculty Perceptions of Creativity Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--28456

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - Immersive research experiences have been shown to significantly improve the research and communication abilities of students who participate in them, as well as increase the likelihood that these students will pursue higher education after the completion of their bachelor’s degrees.  While Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) programs are widespread, the Cardiovascular Research: Engineering a Translational Experience (CREATE) REU program is unique in that it emphasizes the parallels between the creative process and research.  Creativity, an attribute that most feel is important for aspiring engineers, is typically not emphasized in research programs or in the undergraduate curriculum.  This study describes an initial evaluation of the first year of an NSF funded research experience for undergraduates (REU) in Biomedical Engineering, entitled Cardiovascular Research: Engineering a Translational Experience (CREATE).  Cardiovascular research was chosen as the focus of this program, because its innovative technologies allow for a unique emphasis to be placed upon teaching the students and involved faculty about creativity and its alignment with the scientific method.

The assessment protocol used to evaluate this program included the collection of pre-survey, post-survey, and interview data from both the participating students and faculty.  Both surveys contained items measuring students’ broad research experiences, specific-scientific skills, and creative role identity, expectation, and self-efficacy.  The post-survey also included measures describing students’ future educational and career plans, preparedness to participate in research activities, production metrics during and post-REU, and satisfaction with the REU components.

Students (n=8) demonstrated significant gains in broad research experiences (p&lt;.05) and distinct areas of specific-scientific skills (p&lt;.05) and creative role identity (p&lt;.05) post-REU.  These more specific gains included increases in the students’ confidence in their ability to identify limitations of research methods and designs, prepare a scientific poster, and understand journal articles. Students also reported increases in the importance of creativity to their self-image and confidence that they can be creative in their coursework. Seven out of a total of eight participants who responded to the post-survey reported the intent to pursue graduate education post-REU, and the students rated their preparation to perform research related activities and overall satisfaction with the REU as both being very high. All eight students presented their research to students and faculty during the REU; one student presented their work at an academic conference during the REU.  Responses by students also indicated that one student will go on to present their work from the REU at an academic conference, one will publish in an academic journal, and one will present again before faculty and students.

Of particular interest to the researchers, is the interview data collected pertaining to the creativity element of the REU.  Themes found in the student responses indicate that the emphasis on creativity had a high impact on the way the students approach new ideas and work through problems encountered in research, think about creativity in engineering, and perceive themselves as being creative individuals.  Faculty responses revealed that while the faculty approached mentorship of their students with the intent of inspiring creative work, they did not always feel that they were successful or know whether or not the students were receptive to their efforts and those of the REU coordinators.  Further responses from the faculty indicate that this may be due to a lack of direct communication between the REU coordinators and the faculty about the students’ experiences with program activities throughout the course of the REU, and this factor is an area we seek to improve in future years.  Other themes in the qualitative data relate to additional positive impacts of the REU on the students and other areas in which the program may be improved in the future.

AU  - Megan Huffstickler
AU  - Sarah E. Zappe
AU  - Keefe B. Manning
AU  - Margaret J. Slattery
CY  - Columbus, Ohio
DA  - 2017/06/24
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Impact of a Biomedical Engineering Undergraduate Research Program on Student and Faculty Perceptions of Creativity
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/28456
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--28456
ER  -