Voices from Graduate School and the Workforce: Identified Student Outcomes from Completing a Multi-Semester Undergraduate Research Experience Capstone

Abstract

Recent reforms in undergraduate science education have highlighted the need for student-centered learning that challenges students to take ownership of the scientific process through conducting authentic research. As such, Undergraduate Research Experiences (UREs) have become more prevalent in higher education. However, extensive variations in the structures, durations, and contexts of UREs exist and long-term implications are not well documented. We used the Social Cognitive Career Theory to guide our exploration of student outcomes from completing a required three-semester capstone URE at a predominantly undergraduate institution located in the Midwest, United States. We sought to answer two central research questions: (1) What skills and competencies do alumni perceive to have gained from completing the URE capstone, and (2) What is the impact of the URE capstone on alumni success in the workforce and/or graduate school? We conducted in-depth, one-on-one interviews with 16 alumni who recently completed their undergraduate research capstone and who were currently in a science-based career or attending graduate school. Results indicate long-term benefits from URE capstones and are described through three primary themes: technical skill acquisition and future application, soft skill acquisition and future application, and scientific pursuits.

1. Introduction

The past two decades have been ladened with calls for reform of undergraduate science education in the United States. These calls have been similar in their descriptions of a need to advance undergraduate science education to challenge students by replicating the process of scientific inquiry and problem-solving in authentic settings. It was believed that this approach to post-secondary, science instruction allows students to better develop valuable competencies and skills to address the complex problems in the 21st century [1,2]. Over a quarter century ago, the Bower Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University (1998) argued the need to incorporate inquiry-based learning opportunities within undergraduate curricula [3]. Subsequently, the National Research Council echoed this need, advocating for revamping student-centered inquiry in the sciences [1]. Most recently, in post-secondary biology education, the National Science Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the National Institutes of Health, and the American Association for the Advancements of Science collaborated and proposed a hallmark initiative for undergraduate education reform in the biological sciences. The initiative, Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology, provided a guiding roadmap for the future of biology education [4]. A central component of the reform is an emphasis on student-centered teaching strategies and active student engagement through inquiry-driven collaboration, including student exposure to authentic research experiences.

Recent reports suggest that a growing number of undergraduate students have been exposed to Undergraduate Research Experiences (UREs) in their undergraduate career [5], demonstrating growth toward this aspect of reform initiatives. Teaching strategies to expose students to UREs have varied by level of inquiry and student responsibility, ranging from guided lab-based inquiry to research-based labs in class and research apprenticeships [6]. Additionally, UREs have displayed diversity in structure and level of faculty mentorship [6].

One approach to implementing UREs is to integrate them within academic courses. Described as Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs), students integrate research-focused projects that mimic the scientific process on course topics, often through an extended duration, as a component of a curriculum within a course [7,8,9]. As part of a CURE, the course instructor guides students or teams of students through research stages, where the level of open-ended investigation can vary to meet course needs. Students typically submit staged lab reports or culminating papers or presentations as graded components of the course. Importantly, CUREs vary from “cookbook” experiments that employ step-by-step methodology as they allow students to take ownership of the scientific process through their own authentic research [10]. Prior researchers have advocated for the use of CUREs to foster more student inclusion in authentic scientific research [11]. However, the CURE structure can be challenging for instructors to provide high levels of research mentorship as one or more instructors guide many students [12].

Although CUREs integrate authentic research within a course curriculum, other UREs are often stand-alone programs with the intent to provide students with an authentic experience with a high level of one-on-one or small-group mentorship. These can vary widely in their implementation and design. Some of these UREs are characterized by apprenticeship-styled programs where students work in a faculty’s lab to collect and analyze data and collaborate on research dissemination [13]. Despite allowing students to develop core practical abilities and a strong sense of community, apprenticeship-styled UREs are often highly competitive and limit student participation [14].

Other UREs are implemented during break periods (e.g., summer) of standard academic terms and recruit targeted undergraduate students (e.g., high-achieving students, first-generation college students, minority students, students pursuing specific fields, etc.). Some of these programs can also be designed as consortiums to support collaboration between faculty and students from different institutions [15,16]. Such programs often provide cohorts of students with structured mentorship to conduct research projects [17,18,19,20]. Despite the many documented positive student outcomes from these structured URE apprenticeship and application-based programs, they are typically supplemental to required curricula, thus limiting broad student exposure to these high-impact opportunities.

1.1. UREs as Undergraduate Capstones

A type of URE that can serve as a culminating experience for students’ undergraduate studies in North America is commonly referred to as a capstone experience, capstone project, or senior thesis [15]. Beyond the United States, the capstone may be called an undergraduate “dissertation”, as described in the United Kingdom, or a “bachelor final project” in Europe [21]. The sequencing of the capstone experience is typically in students’ last academic semester or year of degree completion and integrates cumulative learning in their program of study [22]. A study on the pervasiveness of capstones in biology undergraduate programs in the United States illustrated that nearly 70% of biology degree programs required a capstone course; however, only small institutions were likely to include a URE as a significant component of the capstone [23]. As with other types of UREs, the components and sequences of URE-based capstones largely vary, ranging from brief projects incorporating scientific explorations to rigorous, multi-semester, faculty-mentored, authentic research.

The body of literature examining the integration of UREs in undergraduate capstones is limited. However, prior reports have positioned URE-based capstones as an ideal assessment to evaluate students’ abilities to demonstrate competencies and skills gained in academic programs [21,24]. Further, URE-based capstones can prepare students for transitions into their careers or graduate studies as they employ critical thinking to solve uncertain and complex problems [21,25].

Capstones that are required as part of degree completion can combine the unique benefits found in other URE structures. Like CUREs, capstone-based UREs can provide broad student exposure to undergraduate research. Additionally, capstones can provide students with strong mentorship in authentic research aligning with student and faculty interests, like apprenticeship-styled UREs. The investigation of this study is a multi-semester URE capstone required for students majoring in science disciplines at a small, predominantly undergraduate university in the Midwest, United States. To provide context to this investigation, we have provided a detailed description of this unique URE.

1.2. Previewing the Context: Characteristics of the Institution and URE Capstone under Investigation

Doane University, a predominantly undergraduate institution in Nebraska, USA, is considered a small, private liberal arts university. The university offers 24 majors, 26 minors, and several pre-professional programs and serves around 1000 residential undergraduate students. Student-centered instruction is central to the culture of undergraduate degree programs in the institution’s College of Arts and Sciences. Additionally, the science programs have a long history of integrating inquiry-based instruction and have been model programs for curriculum reform, including Vision and Change in Biology Education [4]. The Departments of Biology, Chemistry and Biochemistry, Engineering, Physics, and Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences have dedicated faculty and student research laboratories that are well-equipped with scientific instruments. Programs within these departments have a long history of incorporating UREs, including CUREs [26], grant-funded research opportunities [27], and a university-sponsored and faculty-mentored summer research program. The pinnacle URE for students majoring in biology, biochemistry, chemistry, or environmental science is a required three-semester URE capstone. Faculty receive teaching credit for mentoring the research capstone, which gives them the time and space in their teaching load to provide robust mentorship.

All students in these majors first enroll in a 2-credit Research I course during a semester of their junior year. This course is the first course in the capstone sequence. During this semester-long, cohort-based course, each student identifies a faculty research mentor for their capstone, selects a research topic, thoroughly investigates the research topic through primary scientific literature, and develops an original research proposal [28].

Students enroll in Research II (2–4 credits) during the first semester of their senior year. In Research II, students will conduct their independent research project with one-on-one mentorship from the faculty member identified in Research I. Although the structure of faculty guidance may vary, students typically conduct their scientific study by carrying out laboratory or field experiments, taking appropriate notes, and analyzing their data. Students continue to work on their research projects under the same faculty guidance during the last semester of their senior year in Research III (2–4 credits). At the conclusion of Research III, students present their findings in a written thesis and conduct an oral or poster presentation as part of the university-wide undergraduate research symposium. Following the symposium, some students elect to further present their research at the state-level Nebraska Academy of Sciences conference or similar state or national conferences, and some students have published their work in peer reviewed journals.

2. Theoretical Framework

The social cognitive career theory (SCCT) [29] was used to guide this study. According to Lent et al. [29], SCCT can be used to explain three interrelated aspects of career development: (1) how basic academic and career interests develop, (2) how educational and career choices are made, and (3) how academic and career success is obtained. Derived from Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory [30], SCCT explains career-making decisions through self-efficacy and outcome expectations while considering personal input and background contextual affordances. A model of the SCCT is shown in Figure 1. Elements found within the SCCT have been previously reported by researchers exploring UREs.

2.1. Personal Inputs and Background Contextual Affordances

At the forefront of many organizations and institutions advancing and facilitating STEM education is fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) [32]. Advancing toward DEI requires the use of evidence-based practices that recruit, support, engage, and retain diverse learners in STEM education. Undergraduate STEM programs that are successful in these endeavors can begin to close underrepresentation gaps in gender and racial diversity in STEM careers [33].

The incorporation of UREs may support DEI in STEM education. Increasing diversity in STEM requires the active recruitment and retention of diverse students into undergraduate STEM programs. Minority students have been shown to leave STEM majors at higher rates compared to non-minority students [34]. Importantly, UREs show promise as an effective practice for closing this gap. Prior researchers have found that UREs not only attract diverse students into STEM majors but also aid in retaining traditionally underrepresented racial and socioeconomic groups [35,36].

Improving diversity in STEM careers requires that traditionally underrepresented students not only graduate from STEM majors but persist into graduate STEM programs and STEM-related careers. In a large-scale, 10-year longitudinal study, Hernandez et al. [36] reported UREs to improve the likelihood of diverse students continuing into science-related graduate degrees or becoming employed in the science workforce after graduation. Additionally, in a similar study focused on women in science, researchers identified that UREs can serve as a significant gateway for women to pursue science-related graduate education [37]. Although exposure to UREs can contribute to undergraduates’ recruitment and retention in STEM, it is critical that the design and facilitation of UREs foster equity and inclusion [38].

2.2. Learning Experiences

There are extensive variations in the structures, durations, and contexts of UREs and these differences should be examined when considering the student outcomes from these learning experiences. In fact, poorly structured or not well-executed UREs can be detrimental to the student experience and can even influence students’ decisions to not pursue STEM-related careers [39], whereas well-structured and intentional UREs can provide instrumental preparation for students’ future careers or continuing education [20]. Many best practices have been suggested for the design and facilitation of UREs. Prior researchers have recommended offering UREs for an extended duration, using scaffolding, and consistently evaluating and assessing student learning experiences and outcomes to foster continued improvement of URE design and facilitation [40,41].

High levels of student mentorship have been associated with high-quality and high-impact UREs. Whereas some URE designs, such as CUREs, elicit challenges for a high level of individualized student mentorship [12], other URE designs may position mentorship as a critical element of the URE. Faculty have reported interest and value in being a mentor in the facilitation of undergraduate research [42], but institutional and individual characteristics have been shown to influence URE mentorship motivation [43]. Students have also reported to highly value faculty mentorship and supportive networks during research experiences [44,45]; however, students have also expressed negative perceptions toward mentorship when it was infrequent or of low-quality [46]. Thus, mentorship is most successful when both faculty and students are motivated and when faculty provide high-quality mentorship that students are receptive to.

2.3. Self-Efficacy and Identity

Increasing students’ science identity and self-efficacy can improve their retention in science-based programs of study and can foster stronger commitments to science careers [47]. Multiple studies have reported that UREs provide valuable learning experiences that improve students’ scientific self-efficacy [48,49,50]. Students with higher self-efficacy are more likely to develop a robust science identity. When students develop a science identity, or when they begin to see themselves as scientists, they are more likely to enter science-based graduate programs or science careers [47]. In a longitudinal study using a diverse sample of 251 undergraduate students from colleges and universities across the United States, it was found that students with greater exposure to UREs had stronger science identities [51]. Similar research has confirmed the development of students’ science identity through UREs [44,52,53]. In summary, associations have been found between scientific identity, self-efficacy, and career commitment attributes, and student exposure to UREs can positively impact these student attributes.

2.4. Performance Domains and Attainments

Reform efforts in undergraduate science education were largely sought to improve students’ performance in the sciences and attainment of higher-order thinking skills [1,2]. Skill development in areas such as critical thinking, problem-solving, research, and scientific writing both prepare students for scientific careers and improve scientific literacy. The integration of UREs has been shown as an evidence-based practice to improve students’ content knowledge and development across technical and soft skill domains.

2.4.1. Knowledge

Prior researchers who have favored a constructivist approach to teaching and learning have argued that research-enriched learning, as in the case of UREs, allow undergraduate students to generate their own knowledge rather than being consumers of knowledge [54]. Studies that have compared CUREs to traditional instruction have reported that CUREs led to increased gains in student knowledge [55,56] or have found no difference in knowledge gains between the two methods of instruction [57]. It has also been reported that students who have completed UREs improved their knowledge and understanding of the scientific research process [58,59].

2.4.2. Technical Skills

Technical expertise is needed in the scientific workforce [60,61]. Some technical skills are broad and are more likely to be applicable to most scientific professions. Several studies have reported that students improved broad technical skills, such as research skills and data skills through UREs [62,63,64]. Other technical skills required in the scientific workforce are more discipline- or career-specific. Some UREs are designed to expose students to such technical skills such as utilizing niche scientific instruments in laboratories. Students’ development of laboratory skills was cited as a learning outcome from UREs in prior studies [65,66,67].

2.4.3. Soft Skills

There has been a growing and recognized demand in the workplace for future employees to be equipped with an array of soft skills, including in the science-based industries [68,69]. As UREs mimic scientific discovery and advancement in industry and in the academy, collaboration and communication between individuals are foundational. In the facilitation of many UREs, students collaborate with their peers, mentor(s), and the STEM community. Prior researchers have found that UREs improved students’ teamwork ability [59,64] and ability to generate relationships with professionals in their areas of study [70]. Some UREs provide opportunities for students to disseminate their research findings in written and oral formats. Research experiences that have integrated these components have been found to promote students’ scientific writing and verbal communication abilities [59,63,64,71,72,73,74]. Lastly, empowering students to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills has been central to reform efforts in science education [1,2,4]. Several studies have reported that UREs were successful in developing these skills among undergraduate students [7,75,76].

3. Research Purpose and Questions

Capstones in undergraduate STEM education have been highly recommended to culminate the student experience and to be used in programmatic assessment [21,24]. Although many undergraduate programs in science require students to complete capstones, only small institutions are likely to include URE as a major component of their undergraduate curriculum [23]. Therefore, this seemingly underutilized URE structure should garner greater attention from stakeholders of undergraduate education in the sciences. Few studies have investigated perspectives toward URE capstones from alumni who have completed the capstone and have entered graduate school or careers. The purpose of our study was to explore the impact of the capstone URE at Doane University through the lens of student experiences. We specifically examined alumni perspectives toward the outcomes of their capstone URE and the impact they believed it had on their post-baccalaureate endeavors or successes in their career or graduate education. The two overarching research questions of this study were:

• What skills and competencies do alumni perceive to have gained from completing the URE capstone?
• What is the impact of the URE capstone on alumni success in the workforce and/or graduate school?

4. Materials and Methods

A qualitative, hermeneutic phenomenological approach [77] was used to identify recent graduates’ perceptions toward the outcomes gained from completion of their capstone URE at Doane University. This research was part of a larger project that examined student perspectives toward UREs. The Doane University Institutional Review Board reviewed and approved this study (#S21 007 DC IRB HS), and all research participants provided their informed consent.

4.1. Population and Sampling

All graduates of Doane University who completed an undergraduate degree in biology, biochemistry, chemistry, or environmental science in 2016 through 2020 (N = 86) served as the population for this study. Institutional data was used to generate a sampling frame containing each student’s name, major, year of graduation, and current email address on file. Email invitations to recruit study participants were sent to all members of the sampling frame. The tailored design method was used, which included personalized emails and two scheduled follow-up reminders to non-respondents [78]. The email invitations briefly described the purpose of the study, the time requirements to complete the study, and the structure of the data collection (one-on-one interviews through Zoom). Lastly, participants were told they would receive USD 50 as an incentive to participate. Out of the 86 potential participants, 16 individuals responded and agreed to participate in the study.

4.2. Data Collection

A semi-structured interview guide was created to facilitate one-on-one interviews with each participant [79]. The interview guide contained six areas encompassing 35 open-ended questions (see Supplementary Table S1). A panel of experts, including a faculty member in science communication and two faculty members in biology, reviewed the interview guide for content validity [80]. While employing the interview guide, flexibility was used, and probing questions were asked to confirm the meaning of participant responses and to elicit elaboration [81]. As described by Morse (2015) [82], these practices promote the collection of thick and rich data necessary for qualitative research.

The one-on-one interviews were conducted in June and July of 2021. In alignment with the purpose of this study, the participants were two to four years beyond completion of their undergraduate degree and were either in a career or graduate studies at the time of the interview. Interviews were conducted virtually via Zoom Video Communications Inc., San Jose, CA, USA (Zoom version 5.7.0) to accommodate geographical differences and minimize the risk of COVID-19 exposure. Prior research illustrates that Zoom is an effective modality for conducting high-quality and in-depth qualitative interviews when in-person interviews are not feasible [83]. During the interviews, a second researcher served as an observer to record notes that assisted in the reconstruction of the dialogue during analyses [84]. At the conclusion of each interview, member-checking strategies were used [85]. These strategies included providing each participant with a summary of findings to confirm the accuracy and completeness of the findings and to improve the credibility of the research [86]. Each Zoom interview was transcribed verbatim for later analyses. Audit trails were employed by each member of the research team throughout the research process to improve dependability [85].

4.3. Participants

All 16 participants who agreed to participate in the study completed an interview. Prior literature illustrates that between five and fifty participants can serve as an adequate number of participants in qualitative research employing one-on-one interviews. Therefore, 16 participants were deemed an appropriate sample size for our study [87]. Additionally, data saturation, a point in which additional data collection results in no or limited new information on the topic of the study [88], was reached near the conclusion of the one-on-one interviews.

Nine of the sixteen graduates were male, and most participants graduated with their undergraduate degree from Doane University in 2018. Ten students were enrolled in graduate school at the time of the interview. Due to the relatively small number of STEM graduates at Doane University, race/ethnicity was omitted from reporting at an individual level to protect the identity of participants; however, most participants identified as White. Pseudonyms instead of actual names were also used in reporting. Participant characteristics are shown in

Table 1. Participant characteristics.

Participant Number	Pseudonym	Gender	Graduation Year	Post-Graduation (Graduate School, Career, Both)	Research Experience Prior to Capstone	Interview Length (Minutes)
1	Thomas	Male	2018	Graduate School	No	80
2	Sherry	Female	2017	Graduate School	Yes	70
3	Raquel	Female	2017	Career	Yes	68
4	Riley	Female	2017	Graduate School	No	60
5	Paul	Male	2018	Career	Yes	62
6	Molly	Female	2020	Graduate School	No	47
7	Matt	Male	2018	Graduate School	Yes	73
8	Mary	Female	2017	Graduate School	Yes	58
9	Megan	Female	2018	Graduate School	Yes	57
10	Kane	Male	2016	Career	Yes	51
11	Clark	Male	2017	Graduate School	No	64
12	Dominique	Male	2018	Graduate School	Yes	60
13	Denton	Male	2017	Career	Yes	78
14	Carly	Female	2018	Career	Yes	59
15	Bryan	Male	2019	Graduate School	No	37
16	Brent	Male	2018	Both	Yes	63

.

4.4. Data Analysis

Three researchers worked together to create a codebook containing codes derived from the social cognitive career theory and emergent codes from the transcriptions. The codebook contained 15 codes, with each code containing a written description and example. The transcriptions were then uploaded to the qualitative coding software MAXQDA 2020, where two researchers then worked independently to code 20% of the transcriptions to establish intercoder reliability via Krippendorff’s alpha reliability coefficient [89]. The two researchers completed four coding trails to achieve intercoder reliability. Intercoder reliability was not deemed sufficient after the first three trails, and therefore, after each of these trails the two researchers met and discussed discrepancies between their coding results. After the fourth trial, intercoder reliability was achieved with a Krippendorff’s alpha of 0.82. The remaining transcriptions were split between the two researchers to complete coding. After all coding was completed, the researchers condensed and reorganized codes to create emergent themes related to the overarching research questions. The dependability of the findings was confirmed through the triangulation of data from prior observations, interview notes, and audit trails [85].

5. Results

We identified three primary themes and six subthemes (see Figure 2) related to our research questions: (1) What skills and competencies do alumni perceive to have gained from completing the URE capstone? and (2) What is the impact of the URE capstone on alumni success in the workforce and/or graduate school? The first primary theme was technical skill acquisition and future application, which included two subthemes: discipline-specific technical skills and research-based, technical skills. The second primary theme was soft skill acquisition and future application, and it included the subthemes communication and critical thinking and problem-solving. The third primary theme was scientific pursuits with the subthemes of passion for science and career commitment in science.

5.1. Theme 1: Technical Skill Acquisition and Future Application

All participants recalled learning and applying newfound and science-based, technical knowledge and skills while completing their three-semester capstone URE. As each participant reflected on their prior experience, they described technical skills related to their undergraduate field of study (e.g., environmental science, biology, chemistry), as well as broad research-based, technical skills.

5.1.1. Discipline-Specific Technical Skills

Participants described many advanced scientific skills, such as using specific laboratory instrumentation or computer software, that students needed to learn to complete their authentic scientific research projects. Most technical skills described were highly specific and were influenced by each student’s major, faculty research mentor, and research interest and topic. For example, Paul, who majored in biology, completed his URE on biochar and described learning how to “quantify carbon mineralization of biochar”. Another biology alumnus, Matt, described working with his faculty research advisor and learning how to “sequence data sets from root tropism”. Raquel, who had the same advisor as Matt, discussed learning how to run statistical analyses through R computer software, as well as capturing images through cameras. Mary explained the skills she gained from her URE by saying, “I gained a lot of research skills just in terms of learning different experimental methods, but then also the research project and co-culturing a human cell line with a bacterial cell line—that was something that’s not done a ton”.

Several participants, such as Mary, elaborated on how learning discipline-specific and highly technical skills benefited them after graduation. In fact, Mary continued her education in medical school and stated that she was a “prime candidate” for a unique summer research position with a medical school faculty member. Mary stated the faculty member offered her the job because “they had not met anyone like [her] having that [type of similar] experience”. Some graduates were also able to transfer these highly technical skills directly to the workforce. For example, Denton went into the scientific workforce after receiving his bachelor’s degree. He stated, “I learned how to do DNA extraction, plasmid transfer, and electroporation transformation, and all those skills definitely helped [him] land [his current] job”.

For some participants, the specific technical skills gained during their URE had limited impact on their career or graduate school success. For example, Dominique described “learning how to handle giant crabs” and later remarked that “thankfully, [he] hasn’t had to do that since”. Matt described learning how to write computer code as being the major portion of his URE, however he discussed “never making it a skill for a job” and that he is currently “not really using [coding] day-to-day”.

5.1.2. Research-Based Technical Skills

All participants described some aspects of research skill development that broadly applied to the sciences. For example, Raquel reflected on learning the scientific method throughout her education but believed her URE solidified her understanding and use of the scientific method. She said, “They teach you the scientific method … but you don’t really understand it until you’re put in a situation where you have to use it”. She continued to describe the application of what she learned, “That really influenced the scientific method in me and ingrained into me to a point where I apply it to everything now”. Bryan described being better able to comprehend the scientific research process due to his URE. Bryan stated, “You’re always hearing about all these researchers and experiments and stuff … so to actually go through it was pretty cool to see how data can be collected … and how it comes together to answer questions”.

Students who entered graduate school recalled how the research-based, technical skills that were applied during their URE were beneficial to their successes as graduate students. Dominique, who went to professional school, described being better able to comprehend scientific research due to his URE. He said, “The skill of reading academic papers was a big one that really helped me in chiropractic school”. Dominique also discussed how his URE improved his ability to conduct academic literature reviews:

“[During my URE], I felt confident using databases with the help from my research mentor … it became really easy to do a quick literature review. That has been a huge thing that research did because I think that if I had never done my senior research capstone project, doing research right now would literally be like running with a blindfold on. It’s so fast-paced now. You have to already have had some of this experience as a medical student”.

Other graduate students, like Clark, described learning how to take detailed, discipline-based lab notes and “how keeping up notes across a whole project is very realistic for what [he] is doing now in [his] PhD program”. Megan’s experience was similar, she stated, “having gone through the research of the capstone and like having to do all the hands-on, I was much better prepared to look at research articles … and understand what they’re trying to tell me”.

In general, graduates expressed that they were better prepared than their graduate school or workforce peers because of their URE. Denton said, “When I tell people what I did at school they’re like, ‘Wait, you could do that much research [as an undergrad]—like you’ve had your own project?’… there’s only been like a handful of individuals that have as much research experience as me”.

5.2. Theme 2: Soft Skill Acquisition and Future Application

Nearly all participants described developing soft skills during their URE and using these soft skills post-graduation. Participants described enhancing a variety of soft skills because of completing their URE. These soft skills ranged from effective teamwork to time-management. However, two overarching soft skills were predominately discussed among all participants: communication; and critical thinking and problem-solving.

5.2.1. Communication

In terms of soft skills, communication skills, and specifically science communication skills, were commonly described. Carly described “learning to be empowered in [her] communication skills because of the [URE]”. Participants described learning how to present their scientific work to science and non-science audiences. Sherry described learning how to “switch over from science talk” to effectively communicate science to non-scientists. Brent described “learning how to communicate the big picture and then giving an elevator speech on the work that [he is doing and how] it connects to the big-picture problem”.

Graduates described applying these skills in post-graduation in various ways. At the medical practice where Brent works, he described his ability “to more effectively communicate [the science] … that patients want to know about”. Thomas, also in the medical profession, described how his communication has improved through listening. He stated, “[your] advisor always listens to you, so I just picked up on that. Sometimes listening is better than talking. I listen to patients to see what’s going on and like read between the lines of what a patient tells you”. Denton, who went directly into a science career, recalled learning how to communicate better in professional settings. He reflected that he learned “professional communication” through “sending emails to [scientists] who he never met before”.

5.2.2. Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving

Another commonly described soft skill gained from the URE was critical thinking or problem-solving skills. Participants described that the very nature of authentic research resulted in unexpected events or challenges, thus eliciting them to think critically and to problem-solve to advance their research project. Megan captured this essence by saying, “I ran into quite a few hiccups, especially getting started on my research project, so I had to really think outside the box and just try to figure out different ways to get things to work”. Similarly, Bryan described unexpected “hiccups” and finding “certain tools that would work best” to “fix things”.

Participants expressed that this skill influenced their success in graduate school and their careers. They noted the URE was unique in bolstering their skillset, as explained by Molly:

[I] definitely [gained] some problem-solving skills. Flexibility when something doesn’t go the way you thought it would [and] looking at your different options that you could do and building from teamwork collaboration. [This] is something not easily learned in your typical classroom setting so it was nice to have a chance to incorporate those into your college degree.

Mary described growth in her critical thinking skills because of the type of mentorship provided by her faculty research mentor. She described her mentor as “pushing [her] to work through [the problem] herself … and to navigate those waters rather than giving [her] a lifeboat and saying here is [the answer]”. Raquel drew the connection between critical thinking skills and other skills learned and applied in her URE to her success in the workplace. She stated:

I think I honestly got my positions that I have, and like kept going up in positions, because of research, because it taught me so many critical thinking skills as well as accepting failure when it happens and then moving on. It taught me a lot of social skills and society skills. I think that’s the point of college, and I learned that from my research [URE].

5.3. Theme 3: Scientific Pursuits

5.3.1. Passion for Science

Participants described their UREs as having positively influenced their interest in science, science identity, and appreciation for science. Some graduates, like Matt, developed a passion for scientific research during his URE. Matt described his experience by saying, “[My URE] sort of got my feet wet and to design your own research project. Your mentality has to be a little different from just learning from a textbook, and I really liked that. It really got my interest piqued and wanting to do research”. The URE also provided students autonomy to conduct authentic research in an area of interest to them. Graduates described what avenues of science they liked or disliked. For example, Denton stated, “I found out what I really liked about science”. Similarly, Thomas found that he “liked data analysis” more than “lab work itself”.

Several students discussed becoming more appreciative of science because of their URE. For example, Mary stated, “[The URE] gave me so more of an appreciation for research in general and clinical trials… I have much more appreciation for [scientific] people, labs, and companies”.

5.3.2. Career Commitment in Science

Additionally, many participants connected their passion for science to their decision to continue pursuing science in graduate school or their career after graduation. Matt discussed his newfound passion for research that developed because of his URE. His passion influenced his intention to pursue a similar line of research in graduate school. Matt stated, “After my research project, I wanted to continue to learn more, and more, and more about the subject matter, and not just kind of learn a set of things, I really wanted to be on the forefront of learning”. Similarly, Clark stated, “It was influential to wanting me to stick with doing research and to stay in the sciences”.

Raquel went directly into a research career. She contributed that decision to her URE, “I became really passionate about research and [answering] unknown questions… I wanted to be working in a lab and doing research outside of college because of my URE”. Raquel continued by saying that she felt “very fortunate to be able to do [her own] research [at the undergraduate level] and a lot of [her] coworkers who are chemists never did research to the same extent”. Many other participants shared similar feelings to Raquel. Thomas noted that the URE helped lead him to his career. He described his experience, “My [URE], that’s when I decided what my future career was, which is funny because [my initial path] was never in question. Once I started [the URE] my junior year, I knew what I wanted to do my senior year, and [onward]—leading me to my own career”.

6. Discussion

The emerging body of literature on UREs has positioned them to be a high-impact practice within undergraduate education that aligns with a myriad of positive student learning outcomes. A wide degree of flexibility exists in the context, design, and delivery of UREs. Therefore, it is crucial for researchers to examine student experiences and outcomes from specific URE structures. In this research we examined a required three-semester capstone URE for students majoring in scientific disciplines at a small, predominantly undergraduate institution. In doing so, we used the social cognitive career theory as a lens to view the perspectives of recent graduates who completed this URE.

Capstone experiences are traditionally a sequenced component of a curriculum that allow students to apply knowledge and skills learned previously in a program to a culminating class or project. Additionally, the capstone experience can serve as a method to evaluate students’ understanding and skills as they complete a program of study. Limited research has examined UREs as a sequenced capstone in a program of study [21,24]. However, comparable research has examined student impacts from completing UREs as course-based projects, supplemental programs, and independent studies. The emerging themes found in our research align with the findings of comparable research on students’ skill development through UREs. Our findings illustrated our participants perceived to have gained discipline-specific, technical skills, which corroborated findings from Canaria et al. (2012) [65], Feldman et al. (2013) [66], and Hunter et al. (2007) [67]. Even though some participants discussed that learning these skills was invaluable to their URE, only a few students mentioned translating these discipline-specific technical skills to their career or graduate school.

Most participants described improving broad, research-based, technical skills during their URE. These skills included the ability to effectively design and conduct authentic research using the scientific method, complete literature reviews, and analyze data. Similar results were also reported by Brownell et al. (2007) [62], Bruthers et al. (2021) [63], and Julien et al. (2012) [64]. Interestingly, participants in our study expressed that the development of these broad research skills were very valuable to their career or graduate school success. A majority of participants believed they were better prepared for graduate school or their career compared to their newfound peers or colleagues who they discovered did not complete undergraduate research to the same extent.

Employers have emphasized soft skills as a critical skill set needed by future employees in the workplace [68,69]. Prior researchers have reported the benefits of UREs to improve students’ written and verbal communication skills [59,63,64,71,72,73,74]. Participants in our study perceived to have developed communication skills, especially verbal communication skills, during their capstone URE. Several participants described the development of their science communications skills, that is, the ability to convey complex scientific topics to a general audience. Our findings also reported that graduates applying these communication skills post-graduation in their place of employment or graduate school.

One of the major goals of reform in science education is to foster students’ higher-order thinking ability, especially in the context of critical thinking and problem-solving. Participants in our study expounded on the development of their critical thinking and problem-solving skills because of completing their capstone URE. These findings corroborated findings from Brown et al. (2016) [75], Carson (2015) [7], and Jelen et al. (2019) [76]. Additionally, we found that students not only reported improving their critical thinking and problem-solving skills but also applied these skills in future roles.

The social cognitive career theory illustrates how learning experiences, self-efficacy, and interest influence career decisions. When considering the role of the capstone URE as the learning experience, our participants reflected on it to have increased their interest in science and research, in addition to their self-efficacy of science-based skills. Our findings support prior literature showing that UREs can improve students’ self-efficacy in science [49] and can influence students to continue in STEM-related fields [39,90]. Elements of students seeing themselves as scientists, similar to Burt et al. (2019) [44], also emerged in our findings.

7. Limitations, Conclusions and Recommendations

Our research employed rigorous qualitative methodology to explore alumni’ perspectives on completing a three-semester capstone URE. Although this research provides an in-depth analysis of the student experience, it is not generalizable beyond the population of this study. We acknowledge that many URE structures exist and URE experiences and outcomes will vary by institutional, faculty, and student characteristics. This study was conducted at a small liberal arts university that has had a long history and established a culture of involving all undergraduates majoring in the sciences with authentic scientific research, which may not be typical of larger institutions [23]. Although our results should not be generalizable beyond the population of our study, our findings can be compared to similar studies to provide a rich collection of research on the effects of various URE structures.

Another potential limitation of our study is that it could have included response bias. We acknowledge that graduates who had a more successful capstone experience may have been more inclined to participate in our study. We offered participant incentives in an effort to reduce response bias. Additionally, our research was limited in that we trusted participants to honestly recollect their lived experiences. However, we acknowledge the potential of social desirability bias, a phenomenon where participants concealed their true opinions and embellished what they believed the researchers wanted to hear [91]. Although challenging across time and space, and in agreement with Linn et al. (2015) [13], we recommend large-scale empirical studies on UREs to provide quantitative and inferential evidence toward the degree of effectiveness between varying URE structures and comparison studies between UREs and other student-centered teaching methods.

The results of this study demonstrate that well-structured UREs can be influential to students’ success in science careers and graduate school. All students in our study, regardless of pursuing advanced education or entering directly into the workforce, described similar outcomes resulting from their URE capstone. Although discipline-specific, technical skill acquisition is important to the completion of the URE, the application of soft skills and broad research skills appeared to have had the largest impact on students’ post-graduation endeavors and success. Our findings also show that the UREs can bolster students’ self-efficacy and interest in science, and therefore, can positively influence student retention in the sciences post-graduation. Due to students’ positive experiences and outcomes associated with the URE under our investigation, we recommend capstone UREs as a culminating experience for students in similar undergraduate science programs.