Silver Bullet or Sampling Bias: The Effect of Undergraduate Research Experiences on Students' Career Intentions in Chemistry and Physics

In the face of projected shortfalls to fill >3 million science, technology, engineering, and mathematics job openings by 2018 in the U.S. alone, attention has been given to promoting retention in the STEM pipeline. Undergraduate research experiences (UREs) are a vetted educational tool that are commonly perceived to trigger interest in STEM students and lead to more students entering graduate school and careers in these fields. While prior findings support this idea, it can be argued that most of this work is based on the post-URE intentions of students already interested and engaged in STEM, and does not adequately define the means by which UREs affect participants’ career interests. In an effort to gain better resolution on the effects associated with these experiences, data were analyzed from URE participants and stakeholders at a sample of colleges and universities across the country participating in a larger ongoing mixed-methods study on undergraduate research in the physical sciences. The results discussed here are based on complete cases of pre- and post-interview and survey data gathered in the initial data collection from students (n=28; 11 women, 17 men); faculty, graduate, and post-doc mentors (n=33); and program administrators (n=3) at five public and private institutions. Most students (~70%) in the pre- and post-data reported STEM career intentions while a fair proportion (17%) indicated being unclear about their future plans; however, through the course of the URE one in five students reported changes to their respective plans. Student accounts indicate that URE participation positively triggered, refined, and reinforced their preexisting general interests in pursuing research-related careers. Often UREs were seen by students and mentors as a means to successfully narrow down participants’ potential career options or excite them about a particular topic by testing their career and intellectual interests through authentic practice. Alternatively, a small, but noteworthy group of students reported losing interest in a specific research field or in pursuing research careers. While often viewed as a “negative” outcome, the early opportunity to “test out” and revise career choices was recognized by mentors to be of particular value to the student. While such shifts were often attributed to interests in other areas that participants may feel better suited for, student accounts also suggested the adverse effect of poor student-mentor interactions, including absentee mentors or minimal guidance, on their interest in STEM careers. The first results of this study support the efficacy of UREs to trigger and sustain high levels of interest in STEM careers. Taken collectively, stakeholder accounts highlight the importance of UREs based on genuine hands-on practice, meaningful content and process engagement, and effective mentorship practices in providing students the momentum to overcome obstacles commonly associated with postsecondary science education and carry them through the STEM pipeline.