Could Instructor Talk Drive CURE Effectiveness? A Comparative Study of Instructor Talk in Introductory Lab Courses

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Could Instructor Talk Drive CURE Effectiveness? A Comparative Study of Instructor Talk in Introductory Lab Courses
Language: English
Authors: Christopher James Zajic, Kelly Subramanian, Arnav Adulla, Zarae Allen, Meghan B. Blitchington, Avery Brotzman, Edward Carrillo, Jheel Dhruv, Taliyah Evans, Sabrina Haider, Sehee Ashley Han, Leighton Hilton, Katie Holliday, Ethan Keairnes, Joon Kum, William Nathan Lantz, Joel Martin, Victoria A. Martin, Matthew Pierce-Tomlin, Mallory J. Plunkett, Cheryl S. Sam, Fama Sarr, Amanda Shroyer, Caitlin Tucker, Kenneth Walton, Madison A. West, Elizabeth Wolfson, Brandon Yoon, Koleas Zumbro, Erin L. Dolan
Source: CBE - Life Sciences Education. 2026 25(1).
Availability: American Society for Cell Biology. 8120 Woodmont Avenue Suite 750, Bethesda, MD 20814-2762. Tel: 301-347-9300; Fax: 301-347-9310; e-mail: ascbinfo@ascb.org; Website: https://www.lifescied.org/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2026
Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation (NSF), Improving Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE)
National Science Foundation (NSF), Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP)
Contract Number: 2021138
2021112
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Introductory Courses, Laboratory Experiments, Undergraduate Students, Student Research, Student Motivation, Classroom Communication, Teacher Student Relationship, Biological Sciences, Foreign Countries, College Faculty
Geographic Terms: North America
DOI: 10.1187/cbe.24-09-0241
ISSN: 1931-7913
Abstract: Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are thought to enhance students' motivation to continue in college, in science, and in research. Yet, how CUREs enhance student motivation is largely undefined. Theories of instructor immediacy, self-efficacy, and task values suggest that CURE instructors may talk in ways that influence students' motivational beliefs. To set the stage for testing this hypothesis, we characterized the non-content-related talk of instructors teaching 48 introductory biology lab courses, half CUREs and half non-CUREs. We identified 14 types of instructor talk that fit these theoretical perspectives: fostering students' closeness with their instructor (i.e., immediacy talk), building students' confidence in their scientific abilities (i.e., self-efficacy talk), and promoting students' sense of worth in their work (i.e., task value talk). Course type had a medium effect on talk type, with CURE instructors utilizing more immediacy, self-efficacy, and task values talk than non-CURE instructors, but also showing more variation in these types of talk. Our results suggest that motivation-related instructor talk is more prevalent in CUREs than in non-CUREs, but wide variation in CURE instructor talk indicates additional investigation is needed before non-content talk can be considered a mechanism for the motivational influences of CUREs.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1499586
Database: ERIC
Description
Abstract:Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are thought to enhance students' motivation to continue in college, in science, and in research. Yet, how CUREs enhance student motivation is largely undefined. Theories of instructor immediacy, self-efficacy, and task values suggest that CURE instructors may talk in ways that influence students' motivational beliefs. To set the stage for testing this hypothesis, we characterized the non-content-related talk of instructors teaching 48 introductory biology lab courses, half CUREs and half non-CUREs. We identified 14 types of instructor talk that fit these theoretical perspectives: fostering students' closeness with their instructor (i.e., immediacy talk), building students' confidence in their scientific abilities (i.e., self-efficacy talk), and promoting students' sense of worth in their work (i.e., task value talk). Course type had a medium effect on talk type, with CURE instructors utilizing more immediacy, self-efficacy, and task values talk than non-CURE instructors, but also showing more variation in these types of talk. Our results suggest that motivation-related instructor talk is more prevalent in CUREs than in non-CUREs, but wide variation in CURE instructor talk indicates additional investigation is needed before non-content talk can be considered a mechanism for the motivational influences of CUREs.
ISSN:1931-7913
DOI:10.1187/cbe.24-09-0241