Chemical Education Today

1550 Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 81 No. 11 November 2004 • www.JCE.DivCHED.org

Association Report: CUR

Creating Time for Research

Recommendations from Faculty at Predominantly Undergraduate Institutionsby Kerry K. Karukstis

In a recent comprehensive study of the research envi-ronment in the natural sciences at predominantly under-graduate institutions (PUIs) (1), faculty members weresurveyed for their responses to the question, “What are themajor barriers to the performance of research at your insti-tutions?” More than 80% of the responses focused on thelack of time, specifically in terms of the multiple demandson faculty at PUIs. Indeed, faculty interested in maintainingan active research program often face the challenges of heavyteaching loads, expectations by students for significantamounts of individual attention, and the pressures of admin-istrative and advising responsibilities. While reduced teach-ing loads and pre-tenure sabbaticals are common strategiesto enable junior faculty to accomplish the research that con-tributes to their earning tenure, such an array of supportmechanisms is neither typical nor practical for mid-career andsenior faculty. To sustain research productivity throughout acareer, more practical solutions must be found.

Despite the impediments that restrict research produc-tivity, there are many successful faculty who develop andsustain vibrant research programs involving substantial num-bers of undergraduates in research of high scientific merit andproductivity. Are there practices adopted by these faculty andtheir institutions that “create” time for research, short of in-creasing the 24-hour day?

Soliciting Approaches for Creating Time

The Council on Undergraduate Research (CUR) recentlyfocused an issue of the CUR Quarterly (2) on innovative ap-proaches for creating time for scholarly activity without theneed for additional resources. CUR members submitted nu-merous vignettes that were highlighted in the CUR Quar-terly and also posted in their entirety on the CUR Web site(3). These “best practices” fell into two groups—(a) thosesuggestions that created time for research by altering custom-ary operations and/or behavior, and (b) those actions thatused time in an alternative way.

Research students clearly benefit from the added avail-ability of the faculty mentor for sustained periods of time.Interestingly, many of the practices adopted to provide moreresearch time also were found to enhance student learningin the classroom, improve the quality of faculty teaching,and stimulate the intellectual vitality of the campus. Thesecomplementary benefits further illustrate CUR’s belief that

productive collaborative research with undergraduates is aneffective educational practice. Several of the more innova-tive and practical ideas are presented here.

Restructuring Schedules and Calendars

Many of the recommendations centered on creatingblocks of free time for research. The coordination of lecturecourse schedules with laboratory classes to create one or more“free” days is a simple idea that was advocated by many CURmembers. Flexibility on the part of the administration to per-mit such scheduling is essential. Teaching the earliest class inthe morning also enabled one faculty member to gain cov-eted research time (4).

The most creative scheduling revision involved the imple-mentation of a “flexible grid” for scheduling classes at BatesCollege (5). Three 80-minute periods are reserved each weekfor a typical lecture class, although classes are only requiredto meet, on average, for the equivalent of three 55-minutesessions for each week of the semester. Faculty have the flex-ibility to choose how to use the available time to accommo-date the needs of their course, to satisfy the desire for timefor scholarly work, and even to allow for travel to confer-ences or for collaborations. Some instructors use all of theavailable time to facilitate small-group work or homeworkhelp sessions, while others meet twice a week for 80 minutesto reserve the third day for collaborative research for students.Still others adjust the schedule to fit travel plans, meetingregularly for the allotted full time when in town and cancel-ing class when on the road.

Another suggestion involved having differential teach-ing loads for an individual faculty member from year to year,that is, teaching an extra course one year in order to free uptime the following year with a reduced load (6). Many sce-narios might favor this recommendation. For example, a fac-ulty member developing a new line of inquiry might needmore time to focus on generating ideas and learning tech-niques and thus conduct such research planning in a “light”year. Semesters when instruments are in need of repair orwhen compounds are being synthesized by collaboratorsmight be times when little research progress would realisti-cally be made and would be reasonable times to concentrateon teaching. Clearly, such adjusted teaching schedules wouldneed to be coordinated with the necessary departmentalcourse offerings.

Chemical Education Today

www.JCE.DivCHED.org • Vol. 81 No. 11 November 2004 • Journal of Chemical Education 1551

edited byKerry Karukstis

Harvey Mudd CollegeClaremont, CA 91711

Using Scheduled Time in Synergistic Ways

Many of the suggestions focused on alternative ways ofusing already-scheduled time. One of the more common ad-justments evolved from a recognition that research and teach-ing need not be treated as mutually exclusive activities. Manylaboratory courses have been restructured to have studentswork on projects integral to the instructor’s research ratherthan working on traditional laboratory exercises. The phrase“spinning straw into gold” (7) was used to describe such arevision of the laboratory curriculum. The typical scenarioinvolved students working in pairs or teams on semester-longprojects that enabled them to experience the excitement ofdiscovery while also learning essential techniques. Instructorsoften cite that students take greater care and interest in thelaboratory when they know their results are part of a facultymember’s research program (8). The success of such project-based laboratory courses has encouraged faculty to modifytheir lecture courses to include more active-learning strategies(9).

One challenge of this approach, however, lies in design-ing meaningful projects that are consistent with students’skills and available time and that also expose students to thetechniques and concepts that should be addressed in a course-specific laboratory setting. In some cases, faculty might needto adjust their research focus in order to accomplish theseobjectives (9). Coordination of multiple student teams work-ing on different projects is another consideration for the fac-ulty member (10). Research progress also necessitates thatboth the focus of the course and the accompanying labora-tory manual evolve from year to year.

Time can also be “created” by a thoughtful integrationof teaching, research, and service responsibilities. Commu-nity-based research projects provide opportunities to com-bine all three objectives (11, 12). Such partnerships developinstitutional relationships with the community, provide stu-dents with a perspective on the integration of science andsociety, and generate valuable research findings. A “SummerResearch Institute” at Missouri Western State College withhigh school student participants enabled one faculty mem-ber to accomplish research goals while recruiting talented highschool students for his institution (13). Viewing one’sworkload as a dynamic integration of teaching, research, andservice eliminates the unnecessary tension of identifying spe-cific research time.

Not all suggestions for creating research time will workon every campus. The nature of our research programs andour particular career stage will also dictate the most appro-priate recommendations. Nevertheless, the compendium of

vignettes on the CUR Web site is an excellent source of ideasto enable each of us to devise particular strategies that willmake productive research a reality.

Literature Cited

1. Academic Excellence: The Sourcebook, A Study on the Role of Re-search in the Physical Sciences at Undergraduate Institutions;Michael P. Doyle, Ed.; Research Corporation: Tucson, April2002.

2. Numerous articles appear in the June 2004 issue of the CURQuarterly, Volume 24, Number 4, pp 158–180.

3. Creating Time for Research Vignettes; Council on Undergradu-ate Research. http://www.cur.org/publications/TimeVignettes.asp(accessed Sep 2004).

4. Goddard, K. Making Time for Research by Ruthless CourseScheduling. In Creating Time for Research Vignettes; Councilon Undergraduate Research. http://www.cur.org/publications/TimeVignettes.asp (accessed Sep 2004).

5. Wenzel, T. Creating Time for Research with No AdditionalResources. CUR Quarterly 2004, 24, 147.

6. Joseph, M. R.; Boylan, H. M. Grass Roots Movement andCooperative Spirit Enable Teaching Load Reduction atWestminster College. CUR Quarterly 2004, 24, 174.

7. D’Agostino, M. A. Spinning Straw into Gold. CUR Quarterly2004, 24, 158.

8. Reagan, M. S. Integrating Research and Teaching Labs withthe Module Evolution Approach. CUR Quarterly 2004, 24,165.

9. Nikaido, S. A Time To Do Research, a Time To Teach. CURQuarterly 2004, 24, 175.

10. Hooker, P. Creating Time by Recreating Culture: Lessons forFledgling Undergraduate Research Programs. In Creating Timefor Research Vignettes; Council on Undergraduate Research,http://www.cur.org/publications/TimeVignettes.asp (accessed Sep2004).

11. Chapin, J. Making Time for Research through Integration.CUR Quarterly 2004, 24, 173.

12. Freymeyer, R. H. Creating Time for Research: Undergradu-ate Students as Research Partners. CUR Quarterly 2004, 24,177.

13. Caldwell, B. D. Recruiting Can Help Jumpstart Faculty Re-search, Too! In Creating Time for Research Vignettes; Councilon Undergraduate Research. http://www.cur.org/publications/TimeVignettes.asp (accessed Sep 2004).

Kerry K. Karukstis is in the Department of Chemistry,Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711;Kerry_Karukstis@hmc.edu.97