EDITORIAL

Dedicated to Winning the Futurethrough Undergraduate Research

When most of us think about the value of biomedical research to society, we reflect on the discoveries andinventions that affect human welfare. Many also consider the graduate student and postdoc training ac-

complished through research as a critical outcome. Fewer of us will immediately peg research as a way to changethe lives of undergraduates who can solve one country’s staggering workforce deficit. But a report recently releasedby President Obama’s scientific advisory council, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology(PCAST), does just that (http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast/docsreports).

The report, entitled Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science,Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, draws on evidence that the United States will suffer a deficit of 1 millioncollege-educated workers in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields over the next decade if wecontinue to train bachelor’s level scientists at the current rate. Economic projections indicate rapid growth in sectorsof the economy that require college-trained STEM practitioners; in fact, a number of the most rapidly expanding jobcategories are those that require a STEM degree at the college level.

The report argues that the swiftest and least costly way to increase production of B.S.-level STEM workers is toretain more students in STEM fields during their college years. Well over half of the students who enter collegeintending to major in STEM fields switch to other majors (typically in the social sciences) before graduation. Ifstudents lacking intrinsic interest or aptitude were the only ones who abandoned STEM majors, this finding wouldnot be quite so disturbing. But the evidence shows that many students with passion and high grades depart forother endeavors because their introductory STEM courses lack opportunities to engage in scientific inquiry or learnhow scientists think. Most are downright uninspiring. Engage to Excel argues that if the United States could retain anadditional 10% of the students who start college intending to major in STEM fields, we could meet most of theexpanding need for STEM workers. Since most students are lost from science in the first 2 years, the report outlinesways to keep students interested in STEM fields while they are taking the introductory survey courses. One of themost proven and effective strategies is to engage students in research.

Studies of undergraduates who engage in research projects during their first 2 years of college reveal thetransformative power of original research at early career stages. Compared with the rest of the student body, thosewho engage in research in the first 2 years of college are likely to have higher grades (Barlow and Villarejo, 2004;Kinkel and Henke, 2006; Junge et al., 2010), shorter time to degree (Kinkel and Henke, 2006), and a greater prob-ability of persisting in a STEM major (Barlow and Villarejo, 2004; Kinkel and Henke, 2006; Summers and Hrabowski,2006; Gilmer, 2007; Carter et al., 2009). Thus, based on abundant evidence, Engage to Excel argues that offeringresearch opportunities to all first-year college students is a cost-effective and proven way to retain more STEMmajors, thereby addressing the workforce demands.

This special issue of DNA and Cell Biology is dedicated to papers reporting research projects that were conductedin part by undergraduates. The issue is intended to remind us that we can help meet national workforce needs andsimultaneously produce outstanding biomedical research. The energy and freshness of the undergraduate per-spective frequently brings new insight to research projects, and research brings the essence of what it means to be ascientist to students at an early career stage.

This issue of DNA and Cell Biology is among the last for which I will serve as editor. It brings me great pleasure todedicate the end of an era for DNA and Cell Biology to winning the future.

—Jo HandelsmanSpecial Guest Editor

References

Barlow, A., and Villarejo, M.R. (2004). Making a difference for minorities: Evaluation of an educational enrichmentprogram. J Res Sci Teach 41:861–881; http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6ht0s15h

Carter, F.D., Mandell, M., and Maton, K.I. (2009). The influence of on-campus, academic year undergraduate researchon STEM Ph.D. outcomes: evidence from the Meyerhoff Scholarship Program. Educ Eval Policy Anal 31, 441–462.

Gilmer, T.C. (2007). An understanding of the improved grades, retention and graduation rates of STEM majors atthe Academic Investment in Math and Science (AIMS) Program of Bowling Green State University (BGSU). High Educ 8,

11–21.

DNA AND CELL BIOLOGYVolume 31, Number 6, 2012ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.Pp. 891–892DOI: 10.1089/dna.2012.2515

891

Junge, B., Quinones, C., Kakietek, J., Teodorescu, D., and Marsteller, P. (2010). Promoting undergraduate interest, pre-paredness, and professional pursuit in the sciences: an outcomes evaluation of the SURE Program at Emory University.CBE-Life Sci Educ 9, 119–132.

Kinkel, D.H., and Henke, S.E. (2006). Impact of undergraduate research on academic performance, educational planning,and career development. J Nat Resour Life Sci Educ 35, 194–201.

Summers, M.F., and Hrabowski, F.A. (2006). Preparing minority scientists and engineers. Science 311, 1870–1871.

892 EDITORIAL