2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Engaging undergraduate students in original research activities is well-recognized as a high-impact educational practice. As such, many institutions focus on undergraduate research in efforts to improve recruiting and retention. Documented benefits to students include deepened critical thinking, improvement of technical skills, greater communication and teamwork abilities, and enhanced awareness of career opportunities. In contrast, the faculty experience of mentoring undergraduate researchers is less studied. This investigation focuses on the perceptions and practices of chemical engineering faculty across the United States regarding the benefits of and barriers to including undergraduate students in their scholarly activities. Additionally, it explores departmental and institutional cultures related to undergraduate research.

In a survey distributed to chemical engineering faculty , most respondents indicated that they are confident in their ability to effectively engage undergraduates in their research activities. While some do report that they have not yet received useful research products from their undergraduate assistants, there is strong consensus that undergraduates can be contributors to research success. In questions regarding faculty motivation to engage undergraduates in research, the benefit to the students was the strongest motivator reported, closely followed by concern for future generations of scholars , and enjoyment of working with the students. Advancing a faculty member’s research agenda was a very slight motivator. In general, respondents did not perceive strong barriers to engaging undergraduates and research, though lack of funding and time were slight obstacles.

A majority of respondents strongly agreed that active engagement in undergraduate research mentorship should be considered in promotion and tenure decisions. However, a disconnect occurs as they reported only slightly positive value of that work towards those decisions in their institutions. A second disconnect also occurs as very few faculty indicated that undergraduate research mentorship was included in their job descriptions, but most stated that their dean and administrators were supportive of it. Further, some institutions incentivized mentorship with faculty awards or funding for student stipends or supplies. Institutional promotion of undergraduate research opportunities for marketing and recruitment was widely reported, consistent with the goals of this high impact practice.

Further details on faculty practices and institutional culture were also probed and will be discussed, as will any differences in our results based on institutional classification.