Examining Equity in Accessibility to Undergraduate Scientific Research

Methods

This IRB-approved research study focused on the following questions in regard to undergraduate research at my university: 

• “What information is advertised and made available to students about research and how is this information presented?”
• “What does the process of accessing undergraduate research look like?”

I explored these questions in the spring of 2020 by completing a textual analysis of the information made available to students online at the time and by interviewing student research assistants.

I narrowed the scope of this study after examining the research opportunities provided by the university that fell under the natural sciences. The majority of research performed on campus by natural science majors fell under research in chemistry and research in biology. For this reason, I examined the biology and chemistry majors. The requirements regarding research for both the chemistry and biology majors are on the university website while the research course descriptions for “CHEM 450- Research in the Chemical Sciences” and “BIO 450- Research in the Biological Sciences” are on the website used for student course sign-up. I compared the chemistry and biology department sites, also on the university website, in order to look at how the university advertised research opportunities at the time. Comparing both departments, I analyzed the omission and organization of information regarding how to become a research assistant

In order to look more closely at access to research at my university and gain insight into the selection process of students, I conducted interviews with student research assistants (RAs). Participants included a RA working on a joint marine biology/chemistry research project and, as a RA working on chemistry research, I also recounted my own experience becoming a RA; I also supplemented this data with emails. The other student RA and I were sophomores at the time of interview who had been at the university for the same amount of time for ease of comparison. Both of our experiences accessing research occurred during pre-COVID times. In order to understand how effectively the university and professors communicate about student research and to gain perspective from a student who does not have access to undergraduate research, I interviewed a student who is not a RA. This student was also a sophomore for ease of comparison. All students were majors in a chemistry and/or biology discipline. 

The interviews with the RAs included questions aimed to discover how they heard about the research position they hold, their recount of the process of becoming a RA, and what being a RA looks like now.

The following questions were asked:

1. How was the information about this research position communicated to you? 
2. How did you become a research assistant? 
3. In what ways are you compensated for research, if you are?
4. What is your role in your research project?

This article only addresses questions 1 and 2. The interview with the student who was not working on research at the university included questions aimed to determine what they have heard about student research opportunities both from professors and the university, and how this information was presented. 

The following questions were asked:

1. What, if anything, have you heard about student research opportunities on campus?
2. How was this information communicated?
3. Do/Would you want to become a research assistant? Why or why not?
4. Do you know how students are compensated for research?

Again, this article only addresses questions 1 and 2. 

In order to analyze this data, I used the theory of Critical Discourse Analysis or CDA described by Thomas Huckin, Jennifer Andrus, and Jennifer Clary-Lemon (2012) in their paper “Critical Discourse Analysis and Rhetoric and Composition” as  “. . . an interdisciplinary approach to textual study that aims to explicate abuses of power promoted by those texts, by analyzing linguistic/semiotic details in light of the larger social and political contexts in which those texts circulate” (p.107). CDA is based on the principles that “discourse analysis is interpretive and explanatory” and, with the understanding that discourse itself is historical and inherently social, works to analyze linguistic details quantitatively and qualitatively (Huckin, Andrus, & Clary-Lemon, 2012, p.108). By analyzing the policies and actions surrounding research at my university within the context of the research university environment, I implement CDA as my tool in order to show how the tension elucidated above between advisor and student plays out in policy language and behavior.