@presentation { buxner2020revisiting, title = {Revisiting the Impacts of Science Research Experiences: A Critical Review of RETs, CUREs, and UREs}, address = {}, booktitle = {}, chapter = {}, edition = {}, editor = {}, eprint = {}, howpublished = {}, institution = {NARST}, journal = {}, key = {}, location = {}, month = {March}, note = {}, number = {}, organization = {}, pages = {}, publisher = {}, series = {}, school = {}, url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340224594_Revisiting_the_Impacts_of_Science_Research_Experiences_A_Critical_Review_of_RETs_CUREs_and_UREs}, volume = {}, year = {2020}, isbn = {}, doi = {}, language = {}, accession_number = {}, short_title = {}, author_address = {}, keywords = {}, abstract = {Abstract In efforts to increase scientific literacy and the preparation and interest of learners to pursue careers in STEM fields, there are growing opportunities for students and teachers to engage in scientific research experiences, including Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CURE), Undergraduate Research Experiences (URE), and Teacher Research Experiences (TRE). Prior literature reviews detail a variety of models, benefits, and challenges; and call for the continued examination of program elements and associated impacts. We report the results of a comprehensive review of 307 papers published between 2007-2017 that include CURE, URE, and TRE programs, with a special focus on research experiences for K-12 teachers. A research-supported conceptual model of science research experiences was used to develop a coding scheme to analyze published papers based on participant demographics, theoretical frameworks, data collection methods, and reported outcomes (among others). This study provides an update on the status of the research on scientific research experiences. The field of biology was the predominant scientific disciplinary focus of CURE, URE and TRE programs. Results provide a summative look at recently reported programs and impacts and identify gaps or misalignments between goals and measured outcomes. Findings suggest a lack of studies explicitly targeting (a) participation and outcomes related to learners from underrepresented populations, (b) a theoretical framework that guides program design and analysis, and, for TREs, (c) methods for translation of research experiences into K-12 instructional practices, and (d) measurement of impact on K-12 instructional practices. We also discuss implications of recent CURE and URE publications for science teacher preparation.}, call_number = {}, label = {}, research_notes = {}, author = {Buxner , Sanlyn and Krim , Jessica S and Cote` , Laleh and Schwartz , Rennee S and Stone , Elisa and Cleeves , Jessica and Horvath , Lawrence and Keller , John M. and Lee , SoonChun and Rebar , Bryan M and Barry , Kelly and Burgess , Wilella and Locke , Sharon and Gerton , Jordan} }