Forging a Template for Undergraduate Collaborative Research: A Case Study


Undergraduate collaborative research is highlighted in many university initiatives; however there is a lack of exemplars in disciplines that do not employ the scientific method. “Pop Music Reviews” was an attempt to forge a template for Women’s and Gender Studies. This paper presents a description of the pilot project and provides qualitative assessments by the first-and second-year students, fourth-year teaching assistant (TA), reference librarian, and professor. Together, the appraisals indicate that there are two different but equally necessary components for a successful collaborative research endeavour: the structural setting and the social and emotional environment. In both these components, there were weaknesses in the areas of planning and background training. Yet, the benefits as perceived through the experiences of the various participants were significant. Reported gains included increased understanding of research processes and applications, enhanced critical thinking skills, expanded disciplinary knowledge, improved student motivation and confidence, greater interest in graduate studies, and the fostering of collegial interactions and mentoring.

Share and Cite:

Graham, D. , Hempstead, J. & Couchman, R. (2012). Forging a Template for Undergraduate Collaborative Research: A Case Study. Creative Education, 3, 859-865. doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.326129.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Bauer, K. W., & Bennett, J. S. (2003). Alumni perceptions used to assess undergraduate research experience. The Journal of Higher Education, 74, 210-230. doi:10.1353/jhe.2003.0011
[2] Bowler, M., & Street, K. (2008). Investigating the efficacy of embedment: Experiments in information literacy integration. Reference Ser- vices Review, 36, 438-449. doi:10.1108/00907320810920397
[3] Couchman, R., & Graham, D. (2011). Gender, youth, and media. Ottawa: University of Ottawa, CHARTattack. URL (last checked 23 August 2012).
[4] Craney, C., McKay, T., Mazzeo, A., Morris, J., Prigodich, C., & De Groot, R. (2011). Cross discipline perceptions of the undergraduate research experience. Journal of Higher Education, 82, 92-113. doi:10.1353/jhe.2011.0000
[5] Deemer, K. (2007). Making the most of the one-shot you got. Community & Junior College Libraries, 14, 21-26. doi:10.1300/J107v14n01_04
[6] Drewes, K., & Nadine, H. (2010). Academic embedded librarianship: An introduction. Public Services Quarterly, 6, 75-82. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.498773
[7] Kardash, C. M. (2000). Evaluation of an undergraduate research experience: Perceptions of undergraduate interns and their faculty mentors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 191-201. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.191
[8] Kenny, R. W. (1998). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. Stony Brook, NY: The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University.
[9] Research at CU (2012). Undergraduate research. URL (last checked 23 August 2012).
[10] Seymour, E., Hunter, A.-B., Laursen, S. L., & DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Science Education, 88, 493-534. doi:10.1002/sce.10131
[11] Taraban, R., & Blanton, R. L. (2008). Creating effective undergraduate research programs in science: The transformation from student to scientist. New York, NY: Teachers College.
[12] Veldof, J. R. (2006). Creating the one-shot library workshop: A step-by-step guide. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.