Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 1 no. 1 (2023)

Evaluation of Undergraduate Research Course Using Stufflebeam's Context, Input, Process, Product Model

Angelo A. Acenas

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

An undergraduate research course is often considered the pinnacle of a student's college experience, as it allows them to apply both the soft and hard skills acquired during their academic journey. In order to ensure students gain relevant experiences that align with desired learning outcomes, the evaluation of such courses is essential. This study explores the perceptions of graduating research students regarding their experiences in undergraduate research courses. Using a descriptive survey, data was collected from 60 students to investigate their views. The assessment of their evaluation of the course was based on their level of agreement with statements related to context, input, process, and outcomes of their Undergraduate Research Experience (URE). The majority of students indicated strong agreement with most statements. However, their agreement was only moderate concerning the availability and usefulness of library and laboratory resources, the financial support available for research, and the accessibility of research advisors. In conclusion, the students' perceptions suggest that the undergraduate research course aligns well with the intended outcomes. Nevertheless, the findings highlight the necessity to evaluate and enhance laboratory and library resources to better support engineering research. Moreover, implementing financial support mechanisms to alleviate financial barriers in conducting studies and optimizing the support provided by research advisors is recommended.



References:

  1. Arellano, E.R.,  Morano, L. N., and Nepomuceno, C.T. (2012).  Assessing Undergraduate Research Competence: Readiness for Research-oriented Jobs. Development Education Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 1(2). https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=6621
  2. Avilla, R.A. (2016).  Practical Research 1. Diwa Learnings Systems Inc.
  3. Belino, M., and Bosshard, H.F. (2011). Towards an Outcomes-Based Mechanical Engineering Education in the Philippines and the Mapua Institute of Technology School of Mechanical Engineering Experience.  doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1236048
  4. Butler, M. (2004). Outcomes Based/Outcomes Focused Education Overview.  Retrieved from www.kfshrc.edu.sa//files/Outcomes%20Based%20Education.doc.
  5. Campillan, R.G. (2019). Difficulties in Research Writing among Communication Students in a Private University. Augustinian, 2(1). https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=14786
  6. Chinta, R., Kebritchi, M., Ellias, J. (2016). A Conceptual Model for Evaluating Higher Education Institutions. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(6), 989-1002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0120
  7. CIPP Model (n.d.). Retrieved from https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/CIPP
  8. Clemeña, R.M., and Acosta, S.A. (2007). Developing Research Culture in Philippine  Higher Education Institutions: Perspectives of University Faculty. Retrieved from  https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000157869_eng
  9. Creswell, J.W. (2014). Educational Research, Planning, Conducting and Evaluating  Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education Inc., 4th ed.
  10. Edward, N.S. (2002). The Role of Laboratory Work in Engineering Education: Student and Staff Perceptions. The International Journal of Electrical Engineering & Education. doi:10.7227/IJEEE.39.1.2
  11. Frey, B.B. (2018). CIPP Evaluation Model. Retrieved from http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/sage-encyclopedia-of-educational-research-measurement-evaluation/i4690.xml
  12. Gunasekera, C. (2010). Students Usage of an Academic Library: a user survey conducted at the Main Library University of Peradeniya. Journal of the University Librarians Association of Sri Lanka, 14(1), pp.43–60.  DOI: http://doi.org/10.4038/jula.v14i1.2687
  13. Holstein, W.K. (n.d.).  Research and development. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/research-anddevelopment
  14. Howison, J., Gonzalez, R., Maier, C., Bass, P., and Washuta, N.  (2018). Benefits and Challenges of Undergraduate Research. http://www.asee-se.org/proceedings/ASEE2018/papers2018/12.pdf
  15. Jamieson, S. (2007). Likert Scale. Encyclopedia of Epidemiology (2007). Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Likert-Scale
  16. Jin, Z., Li, S., and Xu, J. (2014). Quality Evaluation of Undergraduate Thesis  as the Goal of Applied Talent's Cultivation - Based on the Self-Assessment Analysis of Accounting Major Theses. doi: 10.2991/ermm-14.2014.42.
  17. Mapa, D.S. (n.d.). Research Culture in the Philippines. Retrieved from nast.ph
  18. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (1995). Forces Shaping the  U.S. Academic Engineering Research Enterprise. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press https://www.nap.edu/read/4933/chapter/4
  19. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Undergraduate  Research Experiences for STEM Students: Successes, Challenges, and  Opportunities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/24622.
  20. Petrella, J. K., and Jung, A. P. (2008). Undergraduate Research: Importance, Benefits,  and Challenges. International journal of exercise science, 1(3), 91–95.
  21. PH lacks 19,000 scientists in research and dev't – Bam Aquino (2017). Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/nation/philippines-lack-scientists-bam-aquino
  22. Ruchina, A., Kuimova, M., Polyushko, D., Sentsov, A., Jin, Z. (2015). The Role of Research Work in the Training of Master Students Studying at Technical University. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences.  215. 98-101. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.580.
  23. Sancar, T., Hatice, B., Meltem, H., and Fadde, P. (2013). Applying the Context, Input, Process, Product Evaluation     Model for Evaluation, Research, and Redesign of an Online Master's Program. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 14. 273-293. 10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1485.
  24. Seymour, E., Hunter, A.B., Laursen, S.L. and DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three‐year study. Sci. Ed., 88: 493-534. doi:10.1002/sce.10131
  25. Sharma, K., Sharma, Y., Mantri, A., and Sharma, R. (2020). Inculcating the spirit and passion for research among Engineering students at Undergraduate level. Procedia Computer Science, 172: 488-493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.162.
  26. Tan, E. (2011). “It takes two to tango:” The language of research mentoring. The Asian  Journal of Educational Research and Synergy, 3(1). Retrieved from http://ejournals.ph/form/cite.php?id=1147
  27. Thurab-Nkhosi, D. (2019). The Evaluation of a Blended Faculty Development Course Using the CIPP Model. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 15(1). Understanding Research. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/development/research.html
  28. Wayan, M.A. (2018). Status of research and development in the Philippines. Retrieved from https://www.pressreader.com/philippines/sunstarbaguio/20181012/281629601233514.
  29. Zydney, A.L., Bennett, J.S., Shahid, A. and Bauer, K.W. (2002), Impact of Undergraduate Research Experience in Engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 91: 151-157. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00687.x

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic