Download PDFResults
My first method was to examine the language concerning research opportunities in biology and chemistry. The B.S. biology degree page found on the university website had both a section titled “Research Opportunities” as well as a featured section titled “Meaningful Research.” The section titled “Research Opportunities” says “Undergraduate research is integrated into the biology curriculum, with opportunities for students to earn academic credit for doing research” (Biology, 2020). It is important to note that biology research is not a requirement for graduating with a biology degree. The section titled “Meaningful Research” on the other hand, outlined in detail the specific research one biology major alumnus completed when they were a student. In this way, the organization of the page calls attention to the biology research that is available, but not guaranteed, at my university and provides examples of what this research could look like for potential students if they chose to do this optional research. As the intended audience is prospective students, the university essentially uses the possibility of access to research in order to attract biology students. In other words, the biology major site encourages research-centered discourse by highlighting the benefits for students.
Unlike the B.S. biology degree page, the B.S. chemistry degree page does not have a section devoted to research. Instead, chemistry research is only mentioned in the description of the major saying “Students can collaborate with faculty on research as early as their first year, presenting their research at chemistry meetings across the U.S.” (Chemistry, 2020). Unlike the biology major which does not call attention to the role the research professor plays in the process of becoming involved in research, the relationship between the student and the research professor is described as a “collaboration” for chemistry, making the position of research assistant seem equal to that of research professor. This can be misleading and set up false expectations for students as the level of collaboration between the student and research advisor is highly dependent on the research advisor. When considering the importance of collaboration in the scientific community, advertising the student/research advisor relationship as a collaboration is particularly significant and shows exactly how highly the social aspect of research is valued. Instead of focusing on the work that would be done while performing research, this particular description skips straight to how completed research would allow the student to engage in scientific discourse with esteemed fellow scientists and make a name for themselves in the community by “presenting their research at chemistry meetings across the U.S.” (Chemistry, 2020). This description places a significance on communicative and collaborative skills from the beginning, something that the scientific community values. It is important to note, however, that the description implies that research “can” be a possibility when the chemistry major at my university actually requires research to graduate with this degree. This description can be misleading for chemistry students who may believe research is optional and could subconsciously discourage students from actively seeking out research.
It is also important to recognize that while this description does paint chemistry research in a positive light, this was only one sentence, which directly contrasts the way research is discussed and featured for the biology major. The page also does not make the fact that research is required for the major readily obvious; in order to find this information, you have to open up another link that details the major requirements. In this way, the chemistry major page does not encourage research centered discourse; at most it implies that research is a possibility. Despite the emphasis placed on communicative skills in this description, there is actually very little information communicated to the student about research even though research is a requirement for the major, so research must consequently be guaranteed to chemistry majors. In this way, the language downplays chemistry research by making it seem less accessible in comparison to biology. This could potentially act to discourage, or at least not actively encourage, chemistry majors from seeking out assumedly guaranteed research opportunities.
As the chemistry and biology departments play a role in determining the requirements for their majors and are instrumental to student research on campus, I looked at their pages on the university website as well. On the Department of Chemistry and Physics page and on the Department of Biology, Marine Biology, and Environmental Science page, there are links entitled “Learn More About Research Opportunities” (Research in Chemistry, 2020 & Research Opportunities, 2020). Both departments initiate conversation about research and seem to actively inform students about opportunities. The information provided on the two pages, however, is drastically different. The link for chemistry leads to a list of student presentations and theses from past years. There is no information about how to become involved in research; instead, the page explains that B.S. Chemistry majors are required to do research. Only displaying student presentations once again emphasizes the importance placed on communicating completed research without communicating how to get the opportunity to engage in research in the first place. The link for biology leads to a page that has a list of ways to get involved in undergraduate research as well as links to more information and applications. This shows that not only is chemistry research downplayed, but the information of how to get involved is completely omitted.
Despite the welcoming language on the biology site, the policies surrounding both biology and chemistry research are still exclusionary in that there is a somewhat informal and selective recruitment and application process, as determined by the information found on the biology site in regard to applying for positions and as determined through interviews with RAs. In order to get an understanding of how effectively the university communicates about research opportunities, I interviewed a biology student on campus who is not involved with research. They said:
I’ve seen a couple of emails that have gone out about research but I’ve never really looked into them . . . none of my teachers really said they were doing any research at all. I could probably ask them… Nothing has really stood out. I have some friends who do research, or they’re helping teachers with research.
When asked if they knew how their friends got their research position they said, “I believe that they asked the teacher about research and they had to go through some hoops to get on their research team.” This indicates that students have to be the ones to initiate conversation about research. Since communication skills are highly valued within the scientific community, waiting for students who communicate first allows research professors to ensure their research assistants already come with these valued skills, at least to some degree. This becomes especially obvious when considering that professors can feel “pressured to accept ‘weaker’ students” (Laursen et al., 2012, p.36) when research is required.
At my university, usually students engaging in research are either paid for their time or complete a major-specific research course. When looking at the research courses for chemistry and biology, CHEM 450, “Research in the Chemical Sciences,” is a required course for the B.S. in Chemistry major while the BIO 450, “Research in the Biological Sciences,” course is offered but not required for the B.S. in Biology major. The course descriptions are below:
BIO 450 Rsch in Biological Sci (1 to 4 Credits) Original independent research in biology or marine biology. Project chosen in consultation with a research advisor” (Course catalog – BIO 450, 2020).
CHEM 450 Rsrch in Chem Science (1 to 3 Credits) Prerequisite: Only open to qualified students with consent of a research advisor Research and directed readings. Project chosen in consultation with the research advisor” (Course catalog – CHEM 450, 2020).
Once again, the course description language makes chemistry research sound more exclusive by listing a vague prerequisite: being a “qualified” student and having consent from the research advisor. It is through these course descriptions that we first explicitly see the importance of the student “consulting” with a research advisor. Knowing that research professors often feel as if they must choose students they perceive as “weaker” when research is required, discreetly making chemistry research seem less readily available wards off possible students who don’t have the communication skills and who may not be able to jump through the hoops set up by this language use (Laursen et al., 2012). By emphasizing biology research but not requiring it, however, the university is able to keep its reputation as a research-focused undergraduate university while still being able to turn away “weaker” biology students because research opportunities for undergraduates are not guaranteed. The power to grant desirable research positions to students is put into the hands of the research advisor when research advisors may not want research assistants in the first place, reinforcing this polarizing power dynamic.
My own experience becoming a RA continues to emphasize the importance of initiating discourse surrounding research and how easy the process of becoming a chemistry RA can be when a professor deems you “qualified.” I approached my chemistry professor in class after I scored the highest on an exam and asked if they’d be available to talk about research. We then had a meeting where they asked what type of research I’d like to do, and once describing what I wanted to work on, they said they would talk to a chemistry professor who specialized in my interests about their research. I specifically remember my professor pulling up my grades and saying that while I have great grades so far, they would know if I’d be a “strong” chemistry student after I took Organic Chemistry. Afterwards they sent me the following email:
I mentioned your name to Dr. [Redacted] and Dr. [Redacted] over the last couple of days. They are excited that you are interested in doing some research. Dr. [Redacted] invited you to join a “Master Class” which will be given by the “Distinguished Seminar Speaker” we have scheduled . . . If you can arrange your schedule to attend the lecture, that would be great. Also, you should plan to attend [the speaker’s] seminar on the same day
. . . And finally, you are invited to dinner after the seminar to get to know some chemistry majors and to have some relaxed fun time with Dr. [Redacted], Dr. [Redacted] and the guest speaker. Of course, the department picks up the tab. All we ask is that you dress business casual (no jeans, tee shirts etc.). It is an honor to be invited to these events and you should go if you can. If you need me to speak with an instructor if you have a conflicting class, let me know . . .
Once I initiated a conversation about research and once my professor looked at my grades, I received not only an invitation to a master class but to a private dinner with a distinguished guest speaker and my possible research professor. During the dinner, I spoke with that research advisor about making a meeting about research, and I got the position. By taking the first step, showing initiative, and demonstrating I had the communication and collaboration skills necessary to successfully navigate a highly social group dinner in which I took my first real step into the scientific discourse community, I “earned” myself a research position. While this is fortunate for me, this brings up issues of inequity as not all students may be able to take this initiative or be comfortable advocating for themselves. Additionally, there are a variety of reasons why a student may not have exemplary grades that are not taken into consideration by research professors when selecting RAs. This begs the question: How many other students never received this opportunity—and should?
After interviewing the other student RA, I noticed several similarities. Similar to how I reached out to my chemistry professor, this student RA “went to [their] chemistry professor at the time . . . and he told [them] to talk to another marine biology professor about research opportunities that he thought [they’d] be good for.” Once again, the student had to initiate discourse about research opportunities, something that not all students are aware of or may be capable of doing. The professor also actively decided to reach out to other research professors and continue this discourse based on the student’s interests. The opinion of this professor and the research professor was also academically based; the student noted:
I went to the research professor that my chem[istry] professor told me to go to . . . and [he] told me about his project that he thought I’d be good for because I was good at chemistry and marine biology and math. He knew this because I think he talked to my chem[istry] professor, he was my marine bio[logy] professor, and he knew I was a Calc[ulus] 1 tutor. He offered me the position, and I said okay.
I have not conducted interviews with every chemistry and biology research assistant, but through passing conversations with students, this seems to be a common trend.