This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Astronomy Education Research.] This study investigates students' perceived impacts regarding their participation in course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) in astronomy. Each research experience adopted one or more projects from the Research Based Science Education for Undergraduates (RBSEU) curriculum, which teaches analysis of astronomical data coming from various national observatories. Participating students were enrolled in introductory astronomy courses at one of four universities using the curriculum. They were invited to respond to several instruments, including surveys (N ¼ 199), essays (N ¼ 94), and interviews (N ¼ 19). Each university implemented the curriculum differently with respect to content covered, length of instruction, and whether students' research results were contributed to the astronomical community. We found that participation in all versions of the curriculum had the potential to significantly increase students' perceived confidence participating in science. However, participation in experiences wherein results were contributed to the scientific community more often led to students' nuanced perceptions of science processes, including increased understanding of the role of analysis and the utility of scientific communities and collaborations. We frame our study according to a pathway model under study by discipline-based education researchers of CUREs and explore our findings' connections with psychological theories.

When considering the variety of questions that can be used to measure students' learning, instructors may choose to use multiple-choice questions, which are easier to score than responses to open-ended questions. However, by design, analyses of multiple-choice responses cannot describe all of students' understanding. One method that can be used to learn more about students' learning is the analysis of the open-ended responses students' provide when explaining their multiple-choice response. In this study, we examined the extent to which introductory astronomy students' performance on multiple-choice questions was comparable to their ability to provide evidence when asked to respond to an open-ended question. We quantified students' open-ended responses by developing rubrics that allowed us to score the amount of relevant evidence students' provided. A minimum rubric score was determined for each question based on two astronomy educators perception of the minimum amount of evidence needed to substantiate a scientifically accurate multiple-choice response. The percentage of students meeting both criteria of (1) attaining the minimum rubric score and (2) selecting the correct multiple-choice response was examined at three different phases of instruction: directly before lab instruction, directly after lab instruction, and at the end of the semester. Results suggested that a greater proportion of students were able to choose the correct multiple-choice response than were able to provide responses that attained the minimum rubric score at both the post-lab and post-instruction phases.

No abstract

No abstract