REU Directors Put Heads Together

When it comes to educational programs, the Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program, with more than 600 sites around the world, is the jewel in the National Science Foundations crown. The program fulfills a number of roles: It is intended to attract new students to science, to help retain students who are already interested in science, and to prepare students for graduate school.

Looking for ways to improve the program, the agency convened a pan-REU workshop last month, the first such gathering in the programs history. Directors from 60 REU sites, representing all the NSF divisions and directorates that fund REU programs, and observers from other government agencies that sponsor similar programs gathered at NSF headquarters in Arlington, Va., for two days of intensive discussion.

The workshop was the brainchild of the REU Chemistry Leadership group, a committee of nine site directors that works to strengthen the chemistry REU program. Randolph S. Duran, associate professor of chemistry and REU site director at the University of Florida, Gainesville, and Mary K. Boyd, professor and chair of chemistry at Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, organized the workshop with the assistance of a steering committee representing the other disciplines.

The purpose of the workshop was twofold. At the local level, the organizers urged the attendees to find one new idea that they could implement at their own REU sites. On a broader level, NSF sought advice on ways to improve the program, especially by learning about innovative and effective practices in REU programs across the array of disciplines that NSF supports. R. Corby Hovis, who serves as the overall coordinator for the REU program at NSF, encouraged the participants to think big about things that would be broadly useful to site directors not at the meeting.

The handpicked attendees had been identified as engaged and successful REU site directors, Hovis said. The participants represented a diverse range of institutions, disciplines, and geographic locations.

The workshop was organized around three themes: the impact of REU at the national level, the impact of REU on students, and strategies and models for running and assessing REU sites. Participants spent most of the workshop in small groups at breakout tables, grappling with manageable slices of the broader issues such as ways to attract new students to science, to track REU alumni, and to develop new models for REU sites. The breakout group discussions are being compiled as part of a workshop report that the organizers expect to be available within a few months.

In a plenary lecture, Susan H. Russell, a researcher at SRI International in Menlo Park, Calif., described the findings of several surveys designed to measure the impact on students who participated in undergraduate research opportunities, primarily REUs (C&EN, April 25, page 37). The results demonstrate that the REU program is doing a good job of encouraging students to continue with further study in the sciences but that it is probably not attracting many new students to science because most REU students became interested in science as children. College, maybe even high school, is too late, she said.

In response, participants suggested that REU be expanded to high school and maybe even middle school to help fill the pipeline of potential scientists. Andrew S. Cohen, a member of the steering committee and a geosciences professor at the University of Arizona, called for such vertical integration in the program to bring together students from all educational levels from undergraduates to high school. The impact of the program is lessened by arbitrarily restricting it to undergraduates, he thinks.

Most students participate in summer REU programs as rising juniors or seniors in college. Cohen and many others recommended that NSF provide money for post-REU activities, so that students can attend conferences or continue their REU research after their summer experience. Several people suggested the creation of multiyear REU programs in which students would return for a second summer and serve as mentors to younger students.

Other participants were concerned about any attempt to expand the pool of REU applicants when there arent enough spaces to serve the current demand. Most sites receive applications from many more students than they can accept.

Some of the recommendations were intended to ease some of the administrative burden on REU site directors. Suggestions included establishing a central website and database for all disciplines and creating a common application form and deadline. People felt strongly, however, that such a system should be optional.

The organizers hope that the workshop will lead to concrete actions. Committees are already being formed to address some of the issues that were raised. One committee will investigate whether there is a link between the REU program and students who receive NSF graduate research fellowships. Another group will assess how academia nationwide values undergraduate research programs (not just REU).

Given the current budgetary climate, new ideas that would require substantially more funding dont seem very realistic for the near term, Hovis said. But NSF wants to look toward the long term, and were willing to act on good suggestions to help the program reach more students and to spread the approaches taken by the most effective REU sites.