Prince, M. J., Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2007). Does faculty research improve undergraduate teaching? An analysis of existing and potential synergies. Journal of engineering education

Short summary of the scope and focus in the article

The article examines the assumptions that academic research enables educators to provide better teaching. There are two main schools of thought on this, those that say that research helps undergraduate instruction, and those that show that there is a consistent failure to empirically validate such a claim. The article suggest that the two sides are debating two sides of different propositions. The article reviews the extant literature and suggest ways to better realize the potential synergies between faculty research and undergraduate education.

Quote a statement that summarizes what the author claims they contribute to the field.

“The article reviews the literature on the current state of the research-teaching nexus and then examines three specific strategies for integrating teaching and scholarship: bringing research into the classroom, involving undergraduates in research projects, and broadening the definition of scholarship beyond frontier disciplinary research.”

In your own words, compare the results/arguments presented in the article with the authors’ claim(s) you identified in question 1.

According to the authors involving students in research and the practice of conducting research itself provides benefits in education. This is what the article concludes with and reinforces this claim by providing ways to do this. I believe this is something that has been done from the authors and see I see that there is a tendency of them to adopt the former perspective.

Is the argument that the authors provide solid enough based on the evidence and/or theoretical considerations to convince you of their claim(s)?

Yes, the authors are convincing as they systematically review different relevant aspects, including what undergraduate research entails, as well as providing a broader view of research. By doing this they enable the reader to develop a more holistic view of what these activities entail and why introducing research to undergraduate teaching has benefits. Through their suggestions they also strengthen their claims by providing practical advice about how to implement their proposals.

What is missing in the article?

I believe an empirical assessment or a meta-analysis using quantitative methods is missing from the article. Perhaps I am a bit biased coming from a more quantitative discipline but the claim that research contributes to better undergraduate teaching could be empirically assessed in different settings and through different measures.

What was most interesting for you?

The most interesting part were the recommendation that the authors provided in the last section. I found them very well written and interesting to implement. In addition, their broadened perspective of the undergraduate education was interesting as it opened up new perspective to me about it should include.

How does this article relate to your own teaching?

I often try to incorporate elements of research into my teaching and I encounter the issues that students might not be able to grasp the latest developments of research. This article provides a perspective through which you can introduce students to research without necessarily having them delve into the state-of-the-art research but engaging them in activities that are core to research. In addition, the practical suggestions in the end were ones that I found very interesting and I would like to try to implement them in my own teaching.

What can you learn from it?

I can learn that research is a gradual process rather than one where students need to be thrown directly into the most advanced fields of study. It also allowed me to understand the breadth of undergraduate research and how it can be fused in teaching.