Purpose This project used a reflective practice framework to examine outcomes of an undergraduate student–faculty collaborative research project. The project examined benefits of undergraduate contributions to a large-scale systematic review and explore benefits to the students. Conclusions Throughout a large literature search process, two student researchers documented their reflections, including field notes and written reflections about their personal learning. Students completed searches of articles about speech and language impairments associated with right hemisphere damage. In the process, a repository of articles was created for further examination by a writing committee of the Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences. Student accuracy in identifying potential articles that met inclusion criteria was measured by comparing student inclusions to those identified by committee members. Authors examined student reflection outcomes in the context of existing research about student–faculty collaborative research outcomes. Broad-based student outcomes included improvements in understanding the research process, collaboration skills, and confidence, along with opportunities to network/disseminate findings, focus career interests, and foster continued interest in research. Outcomes specific to the project included an increase in topic knowledge and increased accuracy in identifying articles that met inclusion criteria. The two undergraduate student researchers were able to search and identify potential articles for the systematic review. This provided an opportunity to become more proficient in searching databases and interpreting articles. Beyond direct contributions to the systematic review project, both undergraduates reported growth as student learners, researchers, and future clinicians. The students also report ongoing interests in research and considering academic careers.

Recent privacy regulations such as GDPR and CCPA have emphasized the need for transparent, understandable privacy policies. This work investigates the role technical terms play in policy transparency. We identify potentially misunderstood technical terms that appear in privacy policies through a survey of current privacy policies and a pilot user study. We then run a user study on Amazon Mechanical Turk to evaluate whether users can accurately define these technical terms, to identify commonly held misconceptions, and to investigate how the use of technical terms affects users’ comfort with privacy policies. We find that technical terms are broadly misunderstood and that particular misconceptions are common. We also find that the use of technical terms affects users’ comfort with various privacy policies and their reported likeliness to accept those policies. We conclude that current use of technical terms in privacy policies poses a challenge to policy transparency and user privacy, and that companies should take steps to mitigate this effect.