---
id: "edwards-2024-faculty-identity"
title: "The professional identity of STEM faculty as instructors of course-based research experiences"
authors:
  - "David Hanauer"
  - "Richard Alvey"
  - "Ping An"
  - "Christa Bancroft"
  - "Kristen Butela"
  - "Sean Coleman"
  - "Kari L. Clase"
  - "Parks Collins"
  - "Stephanie Conant"
  - "Pamela Connerly"
  - "Bernadette Connors"
  - "Megan K. Dennis"
  - "Erin L. Doyle"
  - "Dustin Edwards"
  - "Christy Fillman"
  - "Ann Findley"
  - "Victoria J. Frost"
  - "Maria Gainey"
  - "Urszula Golebiewska"
  - "Nancy Guild"
  - "Sharon B. Gusky"
  - "Allison Johnson"
  - "Kristen Johnson"
  - "Karen K. Klyczek"
  - "Julia Lee-Soety"
  - "Heather Lindberg"
  - "Matthew D. Mastropaolo"
  - "Julie A. Merkle"
  - "Jon Mitchell"
  - "Sally Molloy"
  - "Fernando Nieto"
  - "Jillian Nissen"
  - "Tiara Perez Morales"
  - "Nick T. Peters"
  - "Susanne P. Pfeifer"
  - "Richard Pollenz"
  - "Mary L. Preuss"
  - "Germán Rosas-Acosta"
  - "Margaret S. Saha"
  - "Amy Sprenkle"
  - "C. Nicole Sunnen"
  - "Deborah Tobiason"
  - "Sara S. Tolsma"
  - "Vassie Ware"
  - "Yesmi Patricia Ahumada-Santos"
  - "Regina V. Alvarez"
  - "Justin Anderson"
  - "Mary Ayuk"
  - "María Elena Báez-Flores"
  - "Dondra Bailey"
  - "Frederick Baliraine"
  - "Elizabeth Behr"
  - "Andrea R. Beyer"
  - "Suparna Bhalla"
  - "Lisa M. Bono"
  - "Donald P. Breakwell"
  - "Christine Byrum"
  - "Iain Duffy"
  - "Alyssa Gleichsner"
  - "Melinda Harrison"
  - "Renee Ho"
  - "Lee E. Hughes"
  - "Jacob D. Kagey"
  - "Kathryn Kohl"
  - "Sean McClory"
  - "Alison Moyer"
  - "Maria A. Mussi"
  - "Holly Nance"
  - "Imade Y. Nsa"
  - "Shallee T. Page"
  - "Jesús Ricardo Parra Unda"
  - "Jessica Rocheleau"
  - "Sarah Swerdlow"
  - "Kara Thoemke"
  - "Megan S. Valentine"
  - "Quinn C. Vega"
  - "Catherine Ward"
  - "Daniel C. Williams"
  - "Ellen Wisner"
  - "William H. Biederman"
  - "Steven G. Cresawn"
  - "Mark J. Graham"
  - "Graham Hatfull"
  - "Danielle Heller"
  - "Deborah Jacobs-Sera"
  - "Denise Monti"
  - "Pushpa Ramakrishna"
  - "Daniel Russell"
  - "Viknesh Sivanathan"
venue: "Frontiers in Education"
year: 2024
date: "2024-10-24"
doi: "10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306"
url: "/research/publications/10-3389-feduc-2024-1442306/"
pdf: "/research/publications/10-3389-feduc-2024-1442306/dustin-edwards-10-3389-feduc-2024-1442306.pdf"
pmc: "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11649311/"
openAccess: true
license: "cc-by"
citedBy: 11
citedBySource: "OpenAlex, read 2026-09-12"
---
# The professional identity of STEM faculty as instructors of course-based research experiences

What 97 instructors of research courses say about being a scientist and a teacher at the same time.

## Abstract

The professional identity of scientists has historically been cultivated to value research over teaching, which can undermine initiatives that aim to reform science education. Course-Based Research Experiences (CRE) and the inclusive Research and Education Communities (iREC) are two successful and impactful reform efforts that integrate research and teaching. The aim of this study is to explicate the professional identity of instructors who implement a CRE within an established iREC and to explore how this identity contributes to the success of these programs. 97 CRE instructors from the Science Education Alliance (SEA) iREC participated in a 2-year, multi-stage, qualitative research project that involved weekly reflective journaling, autoethnographic description, small group evaluation and writing, and large-scale community checking. The resulting description of professional identity consisted of shared values (inclusivity, student success, community membership, ownership/agency, science, overcoming failure, and persistence), specified roles (mentor, advocate, scientist, educator, motivator, collaborator, community builder, learner, evaluator and project manager) and a stated sense of self (dedicated, resilient, pride in students, multiskilled, valued, community member, responsible and overworked). Analysis of individual reflective diary entries revealed how a professional identity underpinned and facilitated the ways in which faculty addressed challenges that arose and worked toward the success of every student. It is the self-concept of the professional identity of the instructor in the context of the CRE classroom that directed the extended commitment and effort that these instructors evidently put into their work with students, which facilitated student engagement, student persistence, and their collective scientific output. The study concludes that a professional identity of STEM faculty in the context of a CRE and iREC combines being a researcher and educator, and that this integrated identity is central for current initiatives aimed at transforming undergraduate STEM education.

## Full text

Machine-extracted from the PDF linked above. It carries the artifacts that come with reading a typeset two-column page: running heads, figure captions in the flow of the prose, and words broken across line ends. The abstract above is the registry's deposit and is the authoritative text.

Frontiers in Education 01 frontiersin.org
The professional identity of STEM
faculty as instructors of
course-based research
experiences
David Hanauer 1*, Richard Alvey 2, Ping An 3, Christa Bancroft 4,
Kristen Butela 3, Sean Coleman 5, Kari L. Clase 6, Parks Collins 7,
Stephanie Conant 8, Pamela Connerly 9, Bernadette Connors 10,
Megan K. Dennis 11, Erin L. Doyle 12, Dustin Edwards 13,
Christy Fillman 14, Ann Findley 15, Victoria J. Frost 16,
Maria Gainey 17, Urszula Golebiewska 18, Nancy Guild 14,
Sharon B. Gusky 19, Allison Johnson 20, Kristen Johnson 21,
Karen K. Klyczek 22, Julia Lee-Soety 23, Heather Lindberg 24,
Matthew D. Mastropaolo 25, Julie A. Merkle 26, Jon Mitchell 27,
Sally Molloy 28, Fernando Nieto 29, Jillian Nissen 29,
Tiara Perez Morales 30, Nick T. Peters 31, Susanne P. Pfeifer 32,
Richard Pollenz 33, Mary L. Preuss 34, Germán Rosas-Acosta 35,
Margaret S. Saha 36, Amy Sprenkle 37, C. Nicole Sunnen 23,
Deborah Tobiason 38, Sara S. Tolsma 39, Vassie Ware 40,
Yesmi Patricia Ahumada-Santos 41, Regina V. Alvarez 10,
Justin Anderson 42, Mary Ayuk 43, María Elena Báez-Flores 41,
Dondra Bailey 44, Frederick Baliraine 45, Elizabeth Behr 46,
Andrea R. Beyer 47, Suparna Bhalla 48, Lisa M. Bono 49,
Donald P. Breakwell 50, Christine Byrum 51, Iain Duffy 52,
Alyssa Gleichsner 53, Melinda Harrison 54, Renee Ho 3,
Lee E. Hughes 55, Jacob D. Kagey 8, Kathryn Kohl 16,
Sean McClory 56, Alison Moyer 57, Maria A. Mussi 58, Holly Nance 59,
Imade Y. Nsa 60, Shallee T. Page 61, Jesús Ricardo Parra Unda 41,
Jessica Rocheleau 62, Sarah Swerdlow 3, Kara Thoemke 63,
Megan S. Valentine 53, Quinn C. Vega 64, Catherine Ward 65,
Daniel C. Williams 66, Ellen Wisner 67, William H. Biederman 68,
Steven G. Cresawn 69, Mark J. Graham 70, Graham Hatfull 3,
Danielle Heller 68, Deborah Jacobs-Sera 3, Denise Monti 71,
Pushpa Ramakrishna 68, Daniel Russell 3 and
Viknesh Sivanathan 68*
1 Department of English, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, IN, United States, 2 Biology, Illinois
Wesleyan University, Bloomington, IN, United States, 3 Department of Biological Sciences, University
of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States, 4 Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, CA, United States, 5 Biology, Wartburg College, Waverly, IA, United States, 6 Agricultural and
Biological Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States, 7 Natural Sciences,
Mitchell Community College, Statesville, NC, United States, 8 Department of Biology, University of
Detroit Mercy, Detroit, MI, United States, 9 School of Natural Sciences, Indiana University Southeast,
New Albany, IN, United States, 10 Science, Dominican University New York, Orangeburg, NY, United
States, 11 Biology, Marist College, Poughkeepsie, NY, United States, 12 Department of Biology, Doane
University, Crete, NE, United States, 13 Biological Sciences, Tarleton State University, Stephenville, TX,
United States, 14 Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology University of Colorado Boulder,
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Patsie Polly,
University of New South Wales, Australia
REVIEWED BY
Crystal Chambers,
East Carolina University, United States
Miha Slapničar,
University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
*CORRESPONDENCE
David Hanauer
hanauer@pitt.edu
Viknesh Sivanathan
sivanathanv@hhmi.org
RECEIVED 01 June 2024
ACCEPTED 26 July 2024
PUBLISHED 24 October 2024
CITATION
Hanauer D, Alvey R, An P, Bancroft C,
Butela K, Coleman S, Clase KL,
Collins P, Conant S, Connerly P,
Connors B, Dennis MK, Doyle EL,
Edwards D, Fillman C, Findley A,
Frost VJ, Gainey M, Golebiewska U,
Guild N, Gusky SB, Johnson A,
Johnson K, Klyczek KK, Lee-Soety J,
Lindberg H, Mastropaolo MD, Merkle JA,
Mitchell J, Molloy S, Nieto F, Nissen J, Perez
Morales T, Peters NT, Pfeifer SP, Pollenz R,
Preuss ML, Rosas-Acosta G, Saha MS,
Sprenkle A, Sunnen CN, Tobiason D,
Tolsma SS, Ware V, Ahumada-Santos YP,
Alvarez RV, Anderson J, Ayuk M,
Báez-Flores ME, Bailey D, Baliraine F, Behr E,
Beyer AR, Bhalla S, Bono LM, Breakwell DP,
Byrum C, Duffy I, Gleichsner A, Harrison M,
Ho R, Hughes LE, Kagey JD, Kohl K,
McClory S, Moyer A, Mussi MA, Nance H,
Nsa IY, Page ST, Parra Unda JR, Rocheleau J,
Swerdlow S, Thoemke K, Valentine MS,
Vega QC, Ward C, Williams DC, Wisner E,
Biederman WH, Cresawn SG, Graham MJ,
Hatfull G, Heller D, Jacobs-Sera D, Monti D,
Ramakrishna P, Russell D and
Sivanathan V (2024) The professional identity
of STEM faculty as instructors of
course-based research experiences.
Front. Educ. 9:1442306.
doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
TYPE Original Research
PUBLISHED 24 October 2024
DOI 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 02 frontiersin.org
Boulder, CO, United States, 15 Biology - School of Sciences, University of Louisiana at Monroe,
Monroe, LA, United States, 16 Biology, Winthrop University, Rock Hill, SC, United States, 17 Chemistry
and Physics, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, NC, United States, 18 Biological Sciences and
Geology, Queensborough Community College, CUNY, New York, NY, United States, 19 STEM,
Northwestern Connecticut Community College, Winsted, CT, United States, 20 Center for Biological
Data Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States, 21 Department of Life
Sciences, University of New Hampshire at Manchester, Manchester, NH, United States, 22 Biology
Department, University of Wisconsin–River Falls, River Falls, WI, United States, 23 Department of
Biology, Saint Joseph's University, Philadelphia, PA, United States, 24 Biology, Virginia Western
Community College, Roanoke, VA, United States, 25 Sciences, Neumann University, Aston, PA, United
States, 26 Department of Biology, University of Evansville, Evansville, IN, United States, 27 Science and
Mathematics, Northern State University, Aberdeen, SD, United States, 28 Molecular and Biomedical
Sciences, University of Maine, Orono, ME, United States, 29 Biological Sciences, State University of
New York at Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States, 30 Biological Sciences, Benedictine
University, Lisle, IL, United States, 31 Plant Pathology, Entomology, and Microbiology, Iowa State
University, Ames, IA, United States, 32 Center for Evolution and Medicine, School of Life Sciences,
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States, 33 Molecular Biosciences, University of South
Florida, Tampa, FL, United States, 34 Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Webster University, St. Louis,
MO, United States, 35 Biological Sciences, The University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX, United States,
36 Biology, College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA, United States, 37 Biology, Salem State
University, Salem, OR, United States, 38 Biology, Carthage College, Kenosha, WI, United States,
39 Department of Biology, Northwestern College, Orange City, IA, United States, 40 Biological Sciences,
Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, United States, 41 Unidad de Investigaciones en Salud Pública,
Facultad de Ciencias Químico Biológicas, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacán, Mexico,
42 Department of Biological Sciences, Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond, IN, United States,
43 Biology, Howard University, Washington, DC, United States, 44 Department of Natural Sciences,
Coppin State University, Baltimore, MD, United States, 45 Biology & Kinesiology, LeTourneau University,
Longview, TX, United States, 46 Biology, Madison Area Technical College, Madison, SD, United States,
47 Department of Biology, Virginia State University, Petersburg, VA, United States, 48 Natural Science,
Mount Saint Mary College, Newburgh, NY, United States, 49 Department of Biological Sciences, Texas
Tech University, Lubbock, TX, United States, 50 Microbiology and Molecular Biology, Brigham Young
University, Provo, UT, United States, 51 Department of Biology, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC,
United States, 52 Department of Natural Sciences, Saint Leo University, St. Leo, FL, United States,
53 Biological Sciences, SUNY Plattsburgh, Plattsburgh, NY, United States, 54 Science Department, Cabrini
College, Radnor, PA, United States, 55 Department of Biological Sciences, University of North Texas,
Denton, TX, United States, 56 Natural Sciences Department, La Salle University, Philadelphia, PA, United
States, 57 Department of Biology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, United States, 58 Departamento de
Microbiología Básica, Facultad de Ciencias Bioquímicas y Farmacéuticas-UNR, Rosario, Argentina,
59 Natural Sciences, College of Coastal Georgia, Brunswick, GA, United States, 60 Microbiology, University
of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria, 61 College of Health and Natural Sciences, Franklin Pierce University, Rindge,
NH, United States, 62 Biology, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States,
63 Biology, The College of St. Scholastica, Duluth, MN, United States, 64 Biology, Montclair State University,
Montclair, NJ, United States, 65 Biological Sciences, Durham Technical Community College, Durham,
NC, United States, 66 Biology, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, AR, United States, 67 Biological
Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, United States, 68 Center for the
Advancement of Science Leadership and Culture, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Chevy Chase, MD,
United States, 69 Department of Biology, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, United States,
70 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States,
71 Hicks Honors College, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL, United States
The professional identity of scientists has historically been cultivated to value
research over teaching, which can undermine initiatives that aim to reform science
education. Course-Based Research Experiences (CRE) and the inclusive Research
and Education Communities (iREC) are two successful and impactful reform
efforts that integrate research and teaching. The aim of this study is to explicate
the professional identity of instructors who implement a CRE within an established
iREC and to explore how this identity contributes to the success of these programs.
97 CRE instructors from the Science Education Alliance (SEA) iREC participated in
a 2-year, multi-stage, qualitative research project that involved weekly reflective
journaling, autoethnographic description, small group evaluation and writing,
and large-scale community checking. The resulting description of professional
identity consisted of shared values (inclusivity, student success, community
membership, ownership/agency, science, overcoming failure, and persistence),
specified roles (mentor, advocate, scientist, educator, motivator, collaborator,
community builder, learner, evaluator and project manager) and a stated sense of
self (dedicated, resilient, pride in students, multiskilled, valued, community member,
responsible and overworked). Analysis of individual reflective diary entries revealed
how a professional identity underpinned and facilitated the ways in which faculty
addressed challenges that arose and worked toward the success of every student.
It is the self-concept of the professional identity of the instructor in the context of
the CRE classroom that directed the extended commitment and effort that these

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 03 frontiersin.org
instructors evidently put into their work with students, which facilitated student
engagement, student persistence, and their collective scientific output. The study
concludes that a professional identity of STEM faculty in the context of a CRE and
iREC combines being a researcher and educator, and that this integrated identity is
central for current initiatives aimed at transforming undergraduate STEM education.
KEYWORDS
inclusive research and education community, Science Education Alliance, course-based
research experience, STEM faculty professional identity, undergraduate science education
Introduction
Longstanding calls for transformation in undergraduate science
education highlight the inertia of change at a national level (Brewer
and Smith, 2011; President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST), 2012). Brownell and Tanner (2012) raise as a
key factor undermining transformation efforts in STEM the
professional identity of STEM faculty, which has historically been
cultivated to value research over teaching and which has created
tension between these two roles of STEM faculty. Over the last decade
and a half, two broadly adopted, highly impactful and related
curricular reform efforts in STEM, namely Course-based Research
Experiences (CREs) and the inclusive Research and Education
Community (iREC), have integrated research and teaching and may
thus operate in a manner that resolves the tension between the two
aspects STEM faculty identity, if not synergizes them (Graham et al.,
2013; Auchincloss et al., 2014; Rodenbusch et al., 2016; Hanauer et al.,
2017, 2022a; Monti et al., 2024). Here, we explicate the professional
identity of STEM faculty who are engaged in a CRE and iREC and
explore how that identity shapes the outcomes of these reform efforts.
CREs are designed to scale up access for undergraduate students to
hands-on research experiences that promote their learning and
persistence in STEM. By placing research in typical undergraduate
laboratory courses (e.g., introductory biology laboratory courses), CREs
enable students to readily access authentic research experiences. Over a
decade of assessments have made clear that through a CRE, students
develop a sense of ownership over their research, agency in their
learning, and science identity that together increases their desire and
likelihood to remain in the sciences (Russell et al., 2007; Jordan et al.,
2014; Hanauer et al., 2017; Hernandez et al., 2018; Hanauer et al., 2022a).
Importantly, these outcomes are observed for students from a wide range
of demographics. Recent studies exploring the ways in which these
student outcomes emerge highlight a central role of CRE pedagogy. In
particular, there is a rich suite of conceptual and emotional facilitation
by the instructor ranging from modeling scientific thinking to promoting
independence and perseverance, all of which takes place across multiple
levels, from large group settings to small peer groups and individual
one-on-one engagement (Hanauer et al., 2022b). There is also extensive
usage of ad-hoc, informal, ungraded formative assessment that is
facilitative of student learning (Hanauer et al., 2023). These studies make
clear that in a CRE, STEM faculty are functioning in ways that go beyond
the usual instructional practices in traditional undergraduate laboratory
courses to also assume the role of mentors more typical in academic
research laboratory settings.
iRECs were developed to support broad adoption of CRE teaching
by STEM faculty. Through an iREC, STEM faculty are provided both
pedagogical and research support to lead a CRE and are coordinated
as a community that convenes regularly to share and advance their
research and pedagogy (Monti et al., submitted). The Science
Education Alliance (SEA) by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute
(HHMI), Genomics Education Partnership, and Tiny Earth are three
well-established iRECs that each support large communities of STEM
faculty at dozens or hundreds of colleges and universities (Shaffer
et al., 2010; Jordan et al., 2014; Elgin et al., 2017; Hanauer et al., 2017;
Hurley et al., 2021).
For these STEM faculty who lead a CRE and supported to do so
within the context of an iREC, research and teaching are integrated into
a single entity, both within and beyond their classroom (Auchincloss
et al., 2014; Hanauer et al., 2017). Accordingly, the professional identity
of these STEM faculty may involve interesting developments in terms of
how they see their roles as researchers and educators, which can shape
their motivation and pedagogy, the resulting educational experience and
outcomes for their students, as well as the overall success of CRE and
iREC as STEM reform efforts. To better understand this positioning, the
current study aims to explicate the professional identity of these
undergraduate STEM faculty in the context of their CRE classroom and
explore the relationship between this identity and student outcomes.
What is professional identity?
Social theory has proposed that people that are together in a social
setting develop a shared discourse which defines how they experience
themselves (Bourdieu, 1993; Gee, 2002). Through conscious and
unconscious social processes this shared discourse integrates, among
other components, a series of values, beliefs, roles, aims and social
understandings into an identity which constructs the individual’s
positioning in that social group (Lundell and Collins, 2001; Hodkinson
and Hodkinson, 2004). On its simplest level, the professional identity
of an instructor relates to a collective set of norms, beliefs, roles and
practices which a social grouping within a higher education setting has
developed (Kuh and Whitt, 1986; Kogan, 2000; Beijaard et al., 2004;
Rhoades, 2007). For college level instructors, these collective identities
may have emerged from prior education, exposure to disciplinary
discourse, shared experiences within an institution, department or
program and explicit position statements for any or all these groups
(Kuh and Whitt, 1986; Mendoza, 2007). From all these different
sources, professional identities may overlap and are subject to change
and development over time (Rhoades, 2007). These identities may also
come into conflict with one another forcing the instructor to navigate
between different ways of self-positioning (Ibarra and Obodaru, 2016).
Prior research has examined various aspects of instructors’
professional identities. These include investigations into how instructors
understand their professional commitments and responsibilities
(Wallenburg et al., 2016; Nadelson et al., 2017; Shahabi et al., 2020), the

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 04 frontiersin.org
aims of their profession and discipline (Hancock and Walsh, 2014;
D’Arcy et al., 2019), the experiences and ways of being in their
professional roles (Wald et al., 2018; Cameron et al., 2020; O’Leary and
Cantillon, 2020), and the values associated with their work (Hancock
and Walsh, 2014; D’Arcy et al., 2019). Overall, as argued by Raste and
Murthy (2024) a teacher’s professional identity reflects the way a person
perceives themselves within the educational setting within which they
are working. This professional identity has direct ramifications on the
way the person functions and interacts in the pedagogical work and the
outcomes for themselves and their students. A professional identity
addresses the beliefs, values, roles, commitments and aims of a teacher
in a particular educational setting (Beijaard et al., 2004).
Research has also shown that the professional identities of science
teachers is different from teachers of other disciplines, and that this
identity can differ based on various social contextual factors such as
institution, science discipline, program and type of employment, and
the degree of support and collegial interaction they experience
(Rodrigues and Mogarro, 2019; Feser and Haak, 2023). Reflecting
Lave and Wenger’s (1991) situated learning theory and Wenger’s
(1998) communities of practice (CoP) model, Chen and Mensah
(2022) considered the way in which science teachers integrate aspects
of the cultural practices of the communities they belong to into their
professional identities. Values, roles, educational attitudes, and
behaviors concerning science teachers’ professional identities are
acquired and learnt within professional contexts (Pérez Gracia et al.,
2019; Shwartz and Dori, 2020). Basically, as predicted by both Lave
and Wenger’s (1991) and Wenger’s (1998) theoretical position on how
personal development occurs, participation in an active community
of practice facilitates instructor professional identity construction
without explicit instruction taking place; it is the participation in the
community which directs these identity developments.
In the current study, all STEM faculty who participated were drawn
from the SEA iREC and implement the Phage Hunters Advancing
Genomics and Evolutionary Science (SEA-PHAGES) CRE project
(Hanauer et al., 2017). The iREC has a particular series of features that
are important in relation to the developmental aspects of a shared
professional identity (Monti et al., 2024). First, an iREC has a well-
defined mission of supporting STEM faculty to provide each student
with a high-quality educational research experience as means to
promote their learning and the persistence, en masse and across diverse
student demographics (Hanauer et al., 2017). Second, the iREC structure
and curriculum provides instructors with recurring opportunities to
leverage one another to advance their science and pedagogy. This is
accomplished through a centralized scientific and administrative
structure that facilitates extensive and continual interactions over the
long-term between faculty who are situated in multiple institutions
across the US (Hanauer et al., 2017). With the program’s underpinning
CRE curriculum being similar for all faculty, there is clear basis for
conversation and collaboration in relation to their research and teaching.
In line with theories of identity development within Communities of
Practice (Wenger, 1998), shared mission, participation, identification,
extended engagement with other members of the community should
be conducive to the development of a shared professional identity.
Research questions
As reviewed above, the professional identity of an instructor has a
role in how they conduct their pedagogical work. To date, there has not
been a study of the professional identity of instructors who lead CREs.
Based on prior research there is reason to believe that instructors have
a particular professional identity in a CRE setting that informs and
directs their pedagogical practice. The current study aims to explicate
the professional identity of instructors in a CRE classroom and explore
how this may facilitate positive educational outcomes for their
students. The current study was directed by two research questions:
1 What characterizes the professional identity of instructors in
the context of a CRE?
2 What is the relationship between the professional identity of a
CRE instructor, their pedagogy, and student outcomes?
Methodology
Overall design and research stages
The investigation of professional identity and the way this interacts
with inclusive STEM education is complex. In order to avoid
oversimplifying aspects of professional identity and the ways in which
this identity might interact with the CRE instructors pedagogical work,
a 2-year, multi-stage, qualitative research methodology involving a
large number of CRE instructors was conducted. The data collection
process integrated weekly reflective journaling, autoethnographic
description, small group evaluation and writing, and large-scale
community checking. Table 1 presents the stages of the project, the
process of data collection and the data that is elicited at each stage.
Participants
The participants for this study consisted of 97 CRE instructors
drawn from the HHMI SEA program. Table 2 summarizes the
demographic data collected from the CRE instructors who
participated in this study. As can be seen in the table, the majority of
respondents were women, were faculty who had tenure, and were
fauclty with full-time positions at the Associate or Full Professor
levels. However, there was also representation of non-tenured faculty
with other rankings. Ethnographic data was not collected from
participating faculty. All data was collected according to the ethical
guidelines of Indiana University of Pennsylvania, IRB #21–107.
Instruments
This study involved multiple stages of data collection. Each stage
involved its own instructions. The full prompts for the following stages
can be found in Supplementary Appendix A: A. Weekly Reflective
Journal Prompt; B. Autoethnographic Writing Workshop Prompts;
C. Small Group Evaluation and Writing Prompts; D. Individual
Identity Differentiation Writing Prompts; E. Community Checking
and Validation Prompts following Presented Analysis; &
F. Community Explication of the Manifestation of Inclusive Education
in CRE Instruction.
Procedure
The process of data collection for this project lasted for 2 years. The
first year of work was conducted by the faculty individually in which
they completed a weekly reflection on their teaching in a CRE. The
individual entries were not monitored. However, every month a short
survey was sent to faculty asking about the number of weeks of entries
had been completed. Following the first year of reflective journal
writing, two workshops were held with faculty. The first of these

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 05 frontiersin.org
workshops directed faculty to read their complete reflective journals,
choose 3 items and write a position on their understanding of their
professional identity. The second workshop involved faculty hearing
each other’s experiences in a small group format and defining a shared
definition of professional identity and ways in which each person
differed from this shared identity. The list of three chosen journal
entries, the shared definition of professional identity and the individual
divergence from that shared identity were all submitted as data to the
lead researcher of this project. The data was analyzed and modeled in
order to see the shared components of a professional identity. The
resultant analyses and models were presented to a large group of faculty
(n = 100 +) in order to check the validity of the analyses, categories and
models. This member checking process was held at an annual faculty
symposium. Faculty considered each of the components of the analysis
in a small group format and then following the symposium submitted
their agreements, changes and modifications in an online survey. The
final process of data collection involved presenting entries from the
journal study which related to the concept of inclusive education to the
faculty member for their explication and interpretation. In small
groups CRE instructors discuss the entries and following the session
each instructor completed a survey providing their interpretation of
how inclusive education is manifest in CRE pedagogy.
Analysis
As a result of the nature of the data which involved year-long
reflective diary entries and considerations of personal and
professional identity, a process of analysis which directly involved
faculty was utilized. This investigation combined collective
autoethnographic approaches (Chang et al., 2013) in which
participants are also analysts of their own data with more traditional
content analysis approaches (Krippendorff, 1980) to resultant written
products. Through prompted individual reflection and small group
discussion, faculty chose and defined their own and the shared
definition of professional identity. Small group discussion between 3
or 4 faculty involved presenting and debating the features of
professional identity. Group discussion was designed to allow a
provisional shared and agreed upon view of professional identity to
emerge. As described below a second stage of validation of these
definitions of professional identity was conducted with a large group
of faculty. These processes of analysis and writing produced 3
different written products: a list of 3 explicated experiences from their
reflective journals, a statement from each small group on the
definition of their shared professional identities and a written
statement of their personal identities as CRE instructors.
The submitted written data was analyzed using a content analysis
approach. Initially the shared descriptions of professional identity
were read by two applied linguistic researchers and a list of general
categories for the specification of a shared professional identity were
proposed. This process specified three general categories of utterances:
(1) The roles a CRE instructor may take on; (2) The values a CRE
instructor believes in; & (3) The sense of self a CRE instructor may
have. Following the specification of these general categories, the
TABLE 1 Overview of the data collection process and resultant data.
Data collection
stage
Process description Resultant data
Reflective journaling For a year, 97 CRE faculty wrote weekly reflections in a provided dedicated journal on
meaningful events that happened during their week of teaching
A reflective journal with weekly entries and
comments on notable teaching experiences
with students. On average participants had
18 weeks of reflective comments on their
teaching
Autoethnographic writing Following the completion of the year of reflective writing, an online Zoom writing workshop
was held with 46 CRE faculty. Each instructor read through their reflective journals and
chose 3 of their entries that in their opinion represented their work and interaction with their
students as a CRE instructor. Following this they wrote a description of their professional
identities as CRE instructors.
A series of 3 weekly journal entries considered
characteristic of the instructors work as a
CRE instructor and a written description of
their professional identities.
Small group evaluation and
writing
A second writing workshop was held in which faculty who participated in the first workshop
shared their professional identity descriptions with a small group of other faculty. The CRE
instructors were tasked to define their collective professional identity
A collection of written descriptions of shared
professional identity
Individual identity
differentiation
The final part of the workshop in which a shared professional identity was defined, faculty
were asked to think of ways in which they differ from the shared identity. Faculty were asked
to specify points at which their personal identities differed from the group identity. Following
the workshop, the written descriptions of individual faculty identities were submitted.
A collection of written descriptions of
individual faculty identities interacted with
the specified shared professional identity.
Community checking and
validation
Once the data had been analyzed, it was presented to over 100 faculty at an annual meeting of
CRE instructors. The analyzed data for the definition of the professional identity of a CRE
instructor was presented and discussed by small groups of instructors. A survey was
presented to faculty to assess the quality of the data and to make revisions and modifications
to the presented categories and analyses.
A survey summarizing the degree of
agreement with presented analyses and
recommendations for modification or revision.
Community explication of
inclusive CRE instruction
vignettes
A final meeting was held with a large group of instructors to explicate the ways in which CRE
instruction may manifest aspects of inclusive educational practices. In small groups faculty
were presented with specific entries from the year-long diary study chosen for their
relevance. Each vignette was discussed in a small group and following the session each
instructor completed a survey in which they presented their understandings.
A list of written explications of the way in
which specific instructors understand how
inclusive education is manifest in CRE
instruction

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 06 frontiersin.org
specific subcategories of the faculty utterances were defined. For each
of these three, a list of specific roles, values and sense of self
were defined.
In order to check the specified general categories and
subcategories, the full set of explicated reflective journal experiences
was read for additional specification of the roles, values and sense of
self of professional identity. The aim was to understand the source and
the experiences which underpinned each of the categories and
subcategories of professional identity. If a specified sub-category could
not be substantiated with at least one described experience, it was
removed from the list of subcategories. If a role, value or sense of self
that had not been specified in the general statements of professional
identity but was found to be present in at least three specific
experiences it was added to the lists of subcategories. A list of general
categories, subcategories, and an overall model of professional identity
was defined. The full dataset of reflective data entries was specified
according to the model and exemplars which manifest the features of
the category and subcategory were chosen through discussion.
The results of the content analysis approach were presented to a
large group of instructors and each member provided feedback. This
feedback consisted of (1) specification of agreement or disagreement
with each category and subcategory; (2) proposals for changes and
modifications; and (3) new items that needed to be added. The degree
of agreement with the model was calculated as a simple percentage of
participants stating agreement and proposed modifications and
additional were evaluated.
The final analysis related to the explication of the ways in which
inclusive education is manifest in CRE instruction. The full set of
journal entries was reviewed and entries were categorized according
to types of inclusive educational action. All entries were read but not
all entries were found to be relevant for the theme of inclusive
education. Once the entries had been categorized according to
different aspects of inclusive education, representative entries that
most accurately represented the theme and offered the desired degree
of detail were chosen. In some cases, two vignettes were considered
for each theme. These were then discussed by three of the researchers.
After this consultation, the faculty who wrote each of the entries were
contacted to see if the interpretation was accurate and their willingness
to highlight their specific diary contributions in the manuscript. As a
final stage all the vignettes were presented all the faculty for their
feedback. Once each instructor had submitted their interpretation of
the journal entry vignettes, they were read and shared understandings
summarized in relation to each vignette.
Results
Categories of professional identity
To establish general categories of professional identity, an initial
analysis was conducted on the small-group, shared descriptions of
professional identity. Table 3 presents the results of this analysis. The
three general categories of values, roles and sense-of-self were defined
in order to organize and analyze the written descriptions provided by
the instructors in this study. While this general analytic frame emerged
from the reading of the data, there is a rationale based on prior
literature that underpins this approach. An analysis of the specific
values involved in the professional identity of an instructor in the
context of their CRE classroom provides insight into the beliefs that
support the actions and decisions taken by each instructor in their
pedagogical work. The shared values of a professional specify the aims
and goals of these instructor and what they are trying to achieve. The
list of roles specified in the small group discussions clarifies the
functions and positions that these instructors utilize in order to
complete their functions and aims as specified by the values they
believe in. The last general category – sense of self – specifies the
personal characteristics that instructors feel are part of their
professional identities in the context of their CRE classroom.
Instructor values
Instructor values refer to ways of behaving that a person considers
important in their professional life. Table 4 presents the list of values
specified by faculty in the descriptions of professional identity that
were validated in their journal entries. Across the full set of values, a
specific educational orientation emerges. These instructors are placing
an emphasis on the success of all students as members of the scientific
TABLE 3 Definitions of general categories of professional identity and the
percentage of overall community agreement.
General
categories
Definition Community
agreement %
Values The ways of behaving
that a person considers
important in their
professional life
91.43
Roles The different types of
professional role an
instructor has with all
associated expectations
and meanings.
88.58
Sense of self The personal
characteristics that are
associated with being a
CRE instructor
85.72
TABLE 2 Demographic features of faculty participants.
N %
Rank Full professor
Associate professor
Assistant professor
Clinical (non-
tenure) professor
Instructor
Graduate teacher
assistant
Other
31
26
19
1
12
1
5
32.6
27.4
20.0
1.1
12.6
1.1
5.3
Teaching position Full time
Part time
85
11
88.5
11.5
Gender identification Woman
Man
Unlisted
65
28
2
68.4
29.5
2.1
Tenure status Tenured
Not-tenured
57
38
60.0
40.0

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 07 frontiersin.org
community. To achieve these aims, instructors value promoting
persistence, understanding and participation in the process of science,
and ownership, agency and belonging in the community. These values
highlight the importance faculty are placing on creating a positive and
supportive educational environment. This suggests that faculty are
prioritizing the success students, reflecting a deep commitment to
their roles as educators and mentors. This focus on student success is
a core component of their professional identity, highlighting their
dedication to fostering an inclusive and supportive learning
environment. This reinforces the sense that their role includes guiding
students through challenges and further fostering a sense of
ownership, enthusiasm and belonging in the scientific community. In
the community checking process of the general category and the
specific items on the values list, 91.43% of faculty agreed with these
definitions and items.
Instructor roles
Instructor roles refer to the various types of professional functions
an instructor has, with all associated expectations and meanings.
Table 5 presents the list of roles specified by the CRE instructors in this
study. As can be seen these instructors see themselves as performing
and providing a range of roles that together support and facilitate
student learning, success and persistence within a CRE. Roles such as
mentor, advocate, and motivator relate to the interpersonal interaction
with the student to facilitate persistence. As seen in prior studies
concerning how CRE instruction is conducted, these roles are crucial
for helping students stay engaged through the challenges of authentic
research. The roles of scientist, learner, collaborator, community
builder and project manager are tied directly to the role of a lead
researcher (i.e., a lab head). Faculty are working with students on
TABLE 4 Specification of the values of CRE instructors with a definition, example statements and percentage of community agreement.
Specification Definition Example statements
CRE inclusivity Behaving in a way that facilitates and supports
that every student is treated fairly and equitably
so that there is equal opportunity to conduct
authentic research
“I conform in terms of the commitment to broadening undergraduate research education
particularly among UR (underrepresented) groups who otherwise would not have access
to a research experience.”
Student success The belief and set of behaviors that each student
can meaningfully complete their authentic
research experience successfully from a scientific,
educational, and personal perspective.
“Additionally, all SEA-PHAGES faculty overwhelmingly share a passion for our students
and their success, and are invested emotionally in this process. Student success, whether it
be research success, content mastery, or some other desired outcome, is our success, too;
we take great pride in our students and their work. I share in their joy and excitement
every semester at the first appearance of plaques, encourage them when experiments fail,
and admire their vast accomplishments when they present their scientific findings in
posters or presentations.”
Community membership The belief and set of behaviors that make every
student feel that they are a member of large
scientific community dedicated to the production
of shared scientific knowledge
“I think providing students an opportunity to build community and connections with each
other and with me in a class/lab environment that is welcoming, comfortable, collaborative
rather than competitive, and open is really important, especially for first-year students – a
big part of my professional identity in these courses is tied to fostering this type of
environment for students”
Ownership/agency The belief and set of behaviors that see every
student as an authentic researcher and learner
who has control, ownership and agency over
their research and education
“I think the best part of teaching is seeing that students can take what they have learned in
introductory and other courses, put it together, and do it on their own in different contexts
and produce a professional product.”
Science The belief and set of behaviors that the authentic
research conducted by students in the lab is
important to a wider community of scientists,
may have value for solving real-world issues and
can help us to understand of the world we live in.
“SEA-PHAGES faculty often treat students as scientific colleagues during the phage
discovery process. In my own experience during the bioinformatics semester,
we discovered an extremely unusual pattern of infection in which one phage seemed to
infect an alternative host better than the original isolation host, and this difference was
striking in terms of plaque morphology and titer. I was so excited to see these results when
I looked in the incubator, and it was hard for me to avoid spoiling the results for students.
I wanted to make sure that students “did the driving” in terms of interpreting these results,
so I needed to tone down my level of excitement at the results until the class was able to
reach conclusions together.”
Overcoming failure The belief and set of behaviors that see authentic
scientific research as unpredictable and involving
failure and that the role of the professional
scientist is to learn from this and overcome
presented challenges.
“students would be forced into difficult, uncomfortable situations where the results could
not be predicted, and failures could sometimes not be explained. They had to be able to
show the students the educational value of failure, in that their time was not wasted by
repeating experiments but instead provided with a new avenue to learn, oftentimes more
than if the experiments went perfectly.”
Persistence The belief and set of behaviors that support all
students in continuing their educational path
even though there are difficulties along the way.
“I’m deeply invested in helping students transition/acclimate to college-level learning and
strongly believe that incorporating both authentic experiences in biology (i.e., phages) and
metacognition into first-year courses can help students from broad backgrounds/levels of
preparedness move through this often-challenging time.”
Degree of community support: 91.43%.

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 08 frontiersin.org
novel projects within the setting of a broader community of scientists
who are all contributing to advancing science. As is typical in authentic
research, the relations between the instructor and student are flattened
in relation to some aspects of the work, with the faculty member and
students learning together as the project develops. Finally, the roles of
educator and evaluator are the more classic aspects of a teacher’s role
and remain a part of CRE teaching. Collectively, this set of roles shows
the full gamut of what CRE teaching can involve, spanning those
typical of both teachers and researchers. It is important to note that
the range of roles that are included in the professional identity of a
CRE instructor includes traditional roles such as being a mentor,
educator and evaluator, psychosocial responsibilities such as counselor
and motivator and the roles of a working scientist such as collaborator,
learner, project manager and community builder. This combination of
roles reflects the complexity of the what teaching a CRE involves,
which goes beyond the traditional concept of teaching.
Instructor sense of self
Instructor sense of self refers to the personal qualities that
instructors find relevant for their professional identity as an
instructor in the context of their CRE classroom. The full list of
items is presented in Table 6. The specific items reflect the challenges
TABLE 5 Specification of the roles of CRE instructors with a definition, example statements and percentage of community agreement.
Specification Definition Example statements
Mentor A role in which the instructor facilitates the development of
a student researcher by providing advice, emotional support,
personal training and feedback.
“The paragraph describes a committed teacher and a caring mentor. A
mentor who motivates students and helps them grow. Person who has
working knowledge of the science necessary to conduct the project and to
run safely lab full of students.”
Advocate and counselor A role in which the instructor provides support and advice
that help a student to overcome the barriers that emerge as a
student researcher or as a student more broadly.
“One of my discussion colleagues noticed a thread through my responses
is that I act like a coach and watch students work (individual or group) and
step in only when they are struggling and need support.”
Scientist A role in which the instructor works and shares with student
researchers their research practices, findings and
communities in order to facilitate the furthering of scientific
knowledge.
“I am a member of a community of scientists and educators who work
collaboratively to seek insights into bacteriophage evolution and enhance
STEM education.”
Educator A role in which the instructor uses their experience and
knowledge of science and pedagogy to advance each
student’s knowledge, ability and disposition to complete their
science education.
“We train students in a variety of laboratory and bioinformatic techniques
and guide them as they analyze their results. As teachers, we teach
scientific communication skills by having students document their work in
a notebook and present their findings in written and oral forms.”
Motivator A role in which the instructor recognizes and announces the
successes of students and encourages and inspires students
during their research.
“I love that students think that I exude enthusiasm for the work they do in
the lab and for the importance of their contributions to understanding
aspects of phage biology.”
Collaborator A role in which the instructor works together with students
for the shared aim of creating scientifically valuable output.
“Early in the semester I am the expert, and they are the learner, however,
as the semester goes along, we are more colleagues working toward a
common goal”
Community builder A role in which the instructor creates for students a sense of
community in the lab and with the broader community of
scientists.
“I have always seen the main role of my course as building community, and
my professional identity is mainly to facilitate the connections in this
community.”
Learner A role in which the instructor learns new skills or knowledge
in relation to science and educational issues
“The program provides opportunities for professional development in both
scientific and education research, and therefore I have been able to
continuously grow and learn in both areas.”
Evaluator A role in which the instructor assesses and evaluates both
formally and informally the scientific work of the student
researcher
“I use weekly reflection assignments to encourage students to relate phages
and bacterial hosts to the topics discussed in the lecture portion. Having to
correlate topics like photosynthesis to phages and bacteria can
be challenging but moves the students away from memorization and to
building connections. For example, I have had students’ reflections relate
photosynthesis to phages by discussing a journal article that they found
about cyanobacteria phages.”
Project Manager A role in which the instructor oversees the development of
the students’ research projects and provides organizational
support for the work being conducted.
“It is critical that SEA instructors are highly organized and well prepared
for lab meetings, as it would be impossible to manage the many
intersecting, complex protocols without these skills. However, as things
will inevitably not work perfectly the first time and plans will change, they
must also be highly adaptable, and have the confidence to manage those
adaptations.”
Degree of community support – 88.58%.

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 09 frontiersin.org
and opportunities that these instructors face in their professional
work, such as adapting to diverse learners, managing multiple tasks,
coping with stress, and collaborating with others. Importantly, this
list indicates a set of attitudes and behaviors that are needed to
support students in the uncertainties of engaging in authentic
research, within a larger community of scientists. The need to
be committed, flexible, creative, confident, and responsible
underpins the qualities needed by instructors in order to function
within the framework of a CRE and iREC. This sense of self is, in
turn, leads to a sense of pride and self-value as an instructor,
scientist and community member. It can also lead to the feeling of
being overworked and overwhelmed with the cognitive, emotional
and administrative load of courses of this type. Finally, it is
interesting to note that in order to be able to function according to
the roles and values of this professional identity, faculty see
themselves as multi-skilled, resilient and flexible. Together this set
of self-concepts can be seen as a response to actually performing
the values and roles that characterize the professional identity of
CRE instructors.
CRE instructor professional identity,
pedagogy, and student outcomes
As previously described, instructors in a CRE are functioning in
ways that go beyond the usual instructional practices in traditional
undergraduate laboratory courses to include the role of mentors more
typical in academic research laboratory settings. In particular,
instructors provide extensive conceptual and emotional support and
ad hoc, informal feedback to their students in a CRE (Hanauer et al.,
2022b, 2023). With the assumption that professional identity
underpins the actions and decisions taken by instructors in their
classrooms, then the shared values, roles, and sense of self for
instructors in the context of a CRE that is revealed in this study offer
a basis for understanding this rich pedagogy. If an instructor sees their
role as a scientist, mentor and an educator, then their pedagogy will
involve the types of facilitation that nurtures an appreciation for the
rigor of science alongside the development of a passion for science. If
their value system promotes inclusivity, belonging and student success,
then they are going to act to promote engagement and learning for
TABLE 6 Specification of the sense of self of CRE instructors with a definition, example statements and percentage of community agreement.
Specification Definition Example statements
Dedicated A sense of commitment, passion and persistence to help
students and the scientific community as a whole to
continue their shared research.
“To belong to a network of scientists with such passion for their work and
dedication to their students is invigorating and inspiring.”
Resilient and resourceful A personal quality of the ability to respond in a variety of
ways to novel situations and have the mental toughness to
be able to contend with the unplanned outcomes and
experiences of scientific research.
“My goal as a faculty is to be knowledgeable, confident in what I do and do
not know, and flexible to be able to pivot or adapt to changing conditions.”
Pride in students The sense of personal satisfaction and accomplishment
with student scientific and educational development and
successes.
“I am >30 years into my career as a University Professor. I have never been
involved in a program that has given me so much joy from the student
perspective. To get to watch in real time the growth and development of
these young scientists is a reason I get up in the morning and still put in 60 h
a week. What I love doing in thinking up creative ways to make the
challenge of research more approachable.”
Multi-skilled A personal quality of being able to function in a wide range
of different roles required in order to manage a course-
based research lab
“All of us are a jack of all trades, meaning that we do most all of the prep,
teaching, grading and engagement of the course.”
Valued A sense that the educational and scientific work that the
instructor performs is appreciated and respected by the
students and broader scientific community.
“We are valued for what we bring to the community in both the education
and scientific areas. There is shared ownership of discoveries.”
Community member The sense that one is a participating, contributing and
valued member of a community of researchers.
“I strongly believe that I am functioning in an environment where I am on
the same team with my students - we are in the research process together,
neither of us knowing the outcome of the discoveries to unfold and all
excited as we anticipate the next steps. I feel so comfortable within the
community of SEA-PHAGES faculty.”
Responsible The personal quality in which the instructor feels
accountable for the student’s research and development.
“I feel a demanding sense of responsibility for student success, desiring to
keep everyone engaged in the research process, and at times I blame myself
when things go wrong.”
Overworked The sense that the work and responsibilities of an
instructor in a CRE are extensive and can feel
overwhelming.
“Stress and frustration was more apparent in earlier days in the semester, as
I had to re-calibrate my expectations of students at this level and encourage
them to be patient and accommodating to changes that were bound to come,
and to encourage them to enjoy creativity, exploring the unknown, and to
take reasonable risks in presenting their ideas about their experimental
outcomes.”
Degree of community support - 85.72%.

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 10 frontiersin.org
every student. If they see themselves to be dedicated, resilient, valued
and multiskilled, they are going to go beyond the usual parameters of
what is expected for instruction in typical undergraduate
STEM education.
These values, roles, and sense of self for instructors in the context
of their CREs may also underlie the equitable outcomes observed for
students across diverse demographics (Hanauer et al., 2017, 2022a).
To explore the ways in which this professional identity manifest as
inclusive education, that is actions and pedagogy by the instructor that
promotes the success of all students engaged in a CRE, the full set of
weekly reflections were analyzed by groups of instructors to exemplify
diverse ways in which they were manifesting inclusive education in
their CRE classroom. Four examples are presented below as vignettes
from reflective diary entries.
Vignette 1: Accommodating disability
“I found out today that I have a student who is deaf and will
require special accommodations (interpreters and note-taker). I know
I can do this in the lecture, but I am 100% sure I cannot do this in the
SEA-PHAGES lab. We are masked--how do I deal with this? How do
I have interpreters on the Zoom screen and still let the student do the
work independently? How do I ensure she is safe? How much can her
lab partners participate in this journey? How do I manage the lab to
be sure she does not stand out from the group? I called her advisor and
special services to figure out who put her in this class. As I think about
it, I am excited. Maybe this is the spark she needs to figure out her
passion. This is my job to help her use this experience to do just that!
Thoughts: At first, I found myself angry that the student was taking
the course because she is not a biology major. This is a lot of work to
set up the lab. It is my job is to ensure equal access to science and these
emotions are not in line with what you believe or are charged with.
You state that you fully believe in equity and inclusion, and yet you feel
this way. You better dig deep and find a way to make it work for the
student, no matter the “amount of work” it takes on your part.
You believe in the outcome, and you believe in education. You know
this experience is good for the bio majors, so why not for her? Dig
deep. It all worked out in the end- she passed, she persisted- she did
not choose biology as a major, but it helped her FEEL successful as a
student. She told her advisor she liked the class and me (was I worried
she would not like me?). I know that I grew as an educator because of
this experience.”
This brief reflective diary entry provides an example of how
inclusive education is put into practice by the instructor and how
professional identity plays a role in this thought process. The presence
of a deaf student in the lab raises serious concerns for the instructor.
These include an increased workload, worries about the student’s
safety, and changes to the core design of authentic research practices
like collaboration with peers. But the professional identity of the
instructor in the context of their CRE classroom includes the belief in
the importance of having a student find a “passion” for science and
that the authentic research experience is the way to achieve this.
Furthermore, clearly this instructor sees this as part of their position.
The instructor connects this to the ideas and beliefs in inclusive
education which then translated into a set of behaviors, supports and
practices which allowed this student to be successful (and enjoyably)
complete her research experience. In this reflective entry, inclusive
education emerges from the professional identity of the instructor in
the context of their CRE classroom, with the values, roles and sense of
self that this entails.
Vignette 2: Overcoming educational
discrepancies
“I was once again surprised at how little my students understood
about the nature of science at the beginning of the semester even
though I had taught this many times before. But I knew I needed to
really empathize with them and get into their frame of mind in order
to teach effectively. The specific experience that triggered this feeling
was how students said that they never saw a single piece of equipment
in the room before and, even after doing the reading, had no idea
about the process of science or research. One student asked “is this a
science lab? Is this what they look like?” Our program takes only
students from underserved backgrounds so this made me feel that
we do have a very critical role in making these students feel like they
belong - and that this is an uphill struggle sometimes. I re-felt this very
strong feeling about the level of knowledge of these students (and how
unfair our educational system is that would give some students strong
backgrounds and other students virtually nothing). Even though my
story was about one student, this was not a single experience – it was
15 students all expressing doubt and asking questions and being
nervous about everything they saw in a “science Lab” and wondering
how I was going to make them feel like they belonged in this
environment. My emotion was “how am I going to get all 15 students
from underserved backgrounds to become truly engaged in this
process and understand and love what they are doing.” But given that
we successfully completed the year and now I know that half the class
wanted to be a TA the following year so I now know it turned out
OK. But still recall how daunting the feeling was – that I would never
be able to engage them the way I wanted. I still feel this sense of “how
do I make them love this and develop identity as scientists?” at the
beginning of every year.”
In this excerpt, the instructor reflects on the challenge of working
with students who have very little if any of the expected scientific
knowledge and experience prerequisites to complete a lab course. As
seen in the excerpt very basic assumptions like knowing what a lab
looks like were absent for some students who came into the instructor’s
CRE classroom. As expressed here the professional identity of the
instructor includes values of student success, persistence, the role of
building community and the deep desire to help these students to
become scientists. Importantly the faculty member sees the lab setting
within the broader construct of the way society constructs educational
inequities and considers their classroom the setting which could help
reverse such inequities. This aim goes beyond just addressing scientific
knowledge and includes a sense of belonging and even love for science
and research. The professional identity of the faculty member as a
scientist and as an educator within a research community creates a
conceptual framework that sees the educational backgrounds of the
students not as a deficit and a precursor for failure, but rather as a
significant societal task that needs to be and can be addressed through
an authentic research experience.
Vignette 3: Overcoming failure
“Approximately Week #3 into the Phage Discovery portion of the
course, folks were having success in getting phage doing serial
dilutions, picking a plaque…but one student was only getting empty
plates. Just nothing. She was very frustrated. “Failure, Failure, Failure’.
However, she kept trying, not saying too much, coming in on
off-times, both weekends of the semester…nothing. I would check her
plates ahead of time. …I even was doing isolation alongside and
I would get plaques, but not her. Crappy sample? We even went back

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 11 frontiersin.org
to the sample bag and we even collected different samples. Still
nothing. All the time…nothing…but her face was hard to look at.
I could see her frustration; especially with her classmates moving
forward in the isolation process. I felt terrible for her. She was not
having a good experience, first semester in school, first in her family
to go to college. I felt her pain and would often take her pain home
with me, trying to develop a Plan B, Plan C. Plan D…to get her virus.
One day, at the beginning of Week #4. … I checked her plates and saw
phage!! LOTs of them. It was also on Gordonia instead of the host most
of the class was working with. I was so excited and simply could not
wait until she came in to check her plates. She came in, went to the
incubator, held her plates to the window as usual…expecting nothing
again…. I watched her. She stood at the window longer than usual. She
glanced around to I guess see if somebody was watching….then got
her phone out to snap some photos. Then she came over to show me.
She was positively glowing!! “It worked’!! She said ‘Finally, I have
something positive to write in my lab data book.” She then showed me
the ones she wanted to pick and isolate further. I left her alone and
about 1 min later, I came back to see how she was doing….she had not
started. She was busy sending her mother the photo of her plaques.
Apparently her mother had been asking, not understanding about
phages or anything science, but she knew her daughter was worried
about not getting virus and kept asking her how things were going.
The student then asked if she could snap a selfie picture of the two of
us with her plate of phages. Never had that happen before, but it was
just the best! I felt relieved. Also, most happy. Together, we had made
a wonderful day! Reflecting on that….I think the one-on-one
attention, extra time off-class time and on the weekends…listening to
Spotify while working in the lab, me showing her alongside helped.
These are the times I enjoy being a teacher. Showing students
one-on-one…it is how I learned and I was able to pass that on.”
In this excerpt, the instructor presents a case of working as a
mentor with one student who was struggling with her failure to find
a phage and have a positive result to report. Several different actions
were taken by the faculty member including devising different ways
of achieving a positive result, mentoring the student one-on-one,
working weekends and out of class with this student. What would
motivate an instructor to go to these lengths to support student
success? The instructor’s professional identity and her core sense of
dedication helps her to go way beyond usual lab practices. This
instructor was working side by side with this student allowing her to
continue and get past failure. The reward for the student in terms of
a sense of ownership, confidence and just joy at science is evident in
the description. What could have been an experience that led to the
decision to leave STEM, was transformed into a moment of deep
pride that needs to be shared with her family. The sense of closeness
between the student and faculty member is clear and the value the
instructor gets from this experience reinforces her dedication to her
profession and why she instructs a CRE.
Vignette 4: Persistence through authentic
science
“My third entry occurred in the middle of the second semester of
bioinformatics. I have all the same students from the first semester
plus a few more from a different section. This entry was about playing
the long game with students, meaning the things we do to support
students daily often do not come to fruition until much later. On this
day I was assessing student annotations over spring break. Every single
student in my class had turned in annotations for all of their assigned
genes. This was a remarkable moment that I celebrated because two of
these students had had major difficulties in the first semester. They
had plagiarized their final paper in the first semester, were dishonest
at times, skipped classes and were overall unengaged. These students
were also struggling in their other classes and were on university
probation. But on that day, these students had completed their work
on time and handed in high quality annotations with notes that
demonstrated maximum effort. They had not missed any classes and
when I reviewed attendance records at our daily mentoring program
(for Phage students) they each had attended at least once weekly. They
had also written in their learning journal how much they valued the
support in [the daily mentoring program] when they felt intimidated
on an assignment. These two students went on to play major roles in
the writing of two of the MRA papers that we published this summer.
I know that you cannot recruit every student to the mission, but it is
worth it to continue to give students what they need and not
necessarily what they deserve, even when they make very big mistakes
because they just might have the capacity to make the changes they
need for successful learning when given the chance.”
What is remarkable in this excerpt from the reflective journal of
an instructor is the transition of a pair of students from university
probation for scholarly misconduct to published scientists
contributing to the research community. The instructor speaks of the
“long game” and believing in the value of supporting students. This
transformation is situated in the nature of the CRE which directs
students to produce scientific knowledge. There are several
components of professional identity that play a role here. Being a
scientist combined with the understanding that students need to
be mentored, motivated and supported with the aim of allowing
science to emerge allowed the forbearance in relation to earlier
transgressions of the students. The students responded to the
authenticity of the research by changing their behavior and really
doing the science. It is unclear from the description exactly which
practices supported this transformation, but what the instructor’s
professional identity facilitated is resilience and a clear understanding
of what being a scientist involves.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to explicate the professional identity of
STEM faculty who instruct a CRE through an iREC and to consider
the ways in which this identity contributes to the outcomes of these
education reform efforts. The collective identity of instructors in the
SEA program, as explicated in this study, consists of values related to
scientific achievement and student success, which are facilitated by
roles that include being a scientist, a mentor and an advocate, and a
sense of self that allows for commitment and flexibility in working
toward the success of every student. These features of the professional
identity of STEM faculty in the context of their CRE classroom clearly
explain the rich suite of facilitation that characterize CRE instruction
and consequently the positive outcomes observed for students across
diverse demographics (Hanauer et al., 2017, 2022a, 2023).
The interconnectedness of instructor identity, their pedagogy, and
student outcomes is exemplified in the analysis of the reflective diary
vignettes presented here. In each vignette, the instructor is faced with a
challenge and a series of decisions that need to be made. The

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 12 frontiersin.org
positionality of the instructor, conceptualized through professional
identity, is the intervening factor that directs the way the faculty member
acts. In one case, the instructor makes all relevant accommodations to
support a deaf student, in another the instructor works one-on-one on
weekends and after class to help a student to discover a bacteriophage,
and in another case the instructor “plays the long game” and transforms
students who are failing and under university probation into publishing
scientists contributing to science. It is the professional identity of the
instructor in the context of their CRE classroom that drives the extended
commitment and effort that these instructors evidently put into their
work with students. The outcome of this increased effort is an
educational experience that is rich for all students, and which also
contributes quality data that advances science.
We infer that the professional identity of STEM faculty described
in this study is fostered by particular features of a CRE and iREC. In a
CRE, the centrality of authentic research positions faculty and students
as researchers working together toward a shared goal of producing
scientific outputs of value for the broader community. Consequently,
in the role of the experienced scientist, instructors go beyond quality
instruction and to also serve as a research mentor who works with
each student toward their collective success. These aspects of
professional identity are further reinforced through the iREC, which
is designed to support each instructor in their role as a researcher and
a research instructor and which affords them multiple opportunities
to meet and collaborate with other members who share the goals and
mission of the broader iREC community (Monti et al., 2024). Features
of a CRE and iREC, which foster the professional identity of STEM
faculty described in this study, therefore underpin the success of the
SEA program and CRE instruction more broadly.
The analysis presented here, at least as it relates to CRE instructors
with the SEA program, also offers a perspective into the tension between
being a researcher and a teacher in STEM that was described by Brownell
and Tanner (2012). As uncovered in this current study, teaching, per se,
is not undervalued by STEM faculty in relation to research. Rather,
STEM faculty value teaching when it resembles how learning and
development occur for those in the profession; that is, when scientific
content, concepts, and skills are taught and learned in the context of
engaging in and advancing authentic research. This is true for STEM
faculty in the context of graduate education and, as described here, can
also be true in undergraduate science education (Feldon et al., 2015).
We therefore postulate that STEM faculty have historically undervalued
teaching in undergraduate science education, in part, because the
undergraduate science curriculum does not reflect how learning and
development occur for those in the profession and because it does not
contribute toward advancing science. When there is synergy between
teaching and research, as in graduate education or a CRE, faculty are
evidently committed teachers. Indeed, as described in Monti et al. (2024),
STEM faculty in the SEA program are motivated to iteratively advance
their pedagogy to support their students to engage productively in their
classrooms. We therefore hypothesize that the current undergraduate
science curriculum, which does not center authentic research, shapes
both teaching and the learning experience in ways that fundamentally
underpin the low persistence of undergraduate students in STEM.
Limitations
The central limitation of the current study is that all the
instructors who participated in this study came from the same
program, thereby reflecting a form of selection bias. The
SEA-PHAGES program has an extensive network of instructors and
schools and, as an iREC that is supported by funding from the
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, has extensive interaction between
instructors. This networked aspect of this program may have a
facilitative aspect to the construction of a particular type of
professional identity. It is unclear from the present study if instructors
of CREs beyond the SEA-PHAGES program have a similar construct.
This will need to be addressed in future research. A second limitation
of the current study relates to the way the data were collected and
analyzed. The process of data collection and analysis involved
multiple stages of large group discussion and explication. This process
can in itself lead to a higher degree of convergence than might
happen with other data elicitation methods. While this is conducive
for explicating shared identities that are agreed upon, it is does not
lend itself to the divergences which may be present.
Conclusion
As exemplified in this study of professional identity, the way
STEM faculty see themselves in the context of their classroom shapes
their instruction and the corresponding educational experience and
outcomes for their students. What this study makes clear is thus the
value, if not necessity, of committing to STEM faculty in ways that
affirm the type of professional identity described in this study. STEM
faculty who are supported to engage in pedagogy that reflects this
professional identity will afford their students rich educational
experiences and outcomes. The traditional lab and lecture formats do
not support this identity; the SEA iREC and the SEA-PHAGES CRE
do, and serve as frameworks and examples for the types of resources
and classrooms that should be afforded to all STEM faculty, as
described in Hanauer et al., 2017 and Monti et al., 2024, under review.
In particular, STEM faculty should be supported to integrate the roles
as a researcher and as an educator, and to operate in communities that
share such an integrated identity, be that within their departments,
programs, various scientific organizations, and institutions. As seen
here, such an integrated professional identity is not only possible but
is also a far more positive identity position for faculty to occupy.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in
the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed
to the corresponding author/s.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by the Institutional
Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects Professor of
Criminology, Indiana University of Pennsylvania. The studies were
conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional
requirements. The participants provided their written informed
consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent was
obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially
identifiable images or data included in this article.

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 13 frontiersin.org
Author contributions
DavH: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Formal analysis,
Investigation, Methodology, Validation. RiA: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. PA: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. CBa: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. KB: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. SeC: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. KC: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. ParC: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. StC: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. PamC: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. BC: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. MD: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. ED: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. DE: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. CF: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. AF: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. VF: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. MaG: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. UG: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. NG: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. SG: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. AJ: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. KJ: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. KKK: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. JL-S: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. HL: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. MMa: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. JuM: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. JoM: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. SaM: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. FN: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. JN: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. TP: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. NP: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. SuP: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. RP: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. MP: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. GR-A: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. MS: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. AS: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. CS: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. DT: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. ST: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. VW: Data curation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. YS: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. ReA: Writing – original draft, Writing – review &
editing, Validation. JA: Writing – original draft, Writing – review
& editing, Validation. MA: Writing – original draft, Writing –
review & editing, Validation. MB-F: Writing – original draft,
Writing – review & editing, Validation. DBa: Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. FB: Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. EB: Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. AB: Writing –
original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. SB: Writing
– original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. LB: Writing
– original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. DBr:
Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation.
CBy: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. ID: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. AG: Writing – original draft, Writing – review &
editing, Validation. MH: Writing – original draft, Writing – review
& editing, Validation. RH: Writing – original draft, Writing –
review & editing, Validation. LH: Writing – original draft, Writing
– review & editing, Validation. JK: Writing – original draft, Writing
– review & editing, Validation. KaK: Writing – original draft,
Writing – review & editing, Validation. SeM: Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. AM: Writing –
original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. MMu:
Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation.
HN: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. IN: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. ShP: Writing – original draft, Writing – review &
editing, Validation. JP: Writing – original draft, Writing – review
& editing, Validation. JR: Writing – original draft, Writing –
review & editing, Validation. SS: Writing – original draft, Writing
– review & editing, Validation. KT: Writing – original draft,
Writing – review & editing, Validation. MV: Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. QV: Writing –
original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. CW:
Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation.
DW: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Validation. EW: Writing – original draft, Writing – review &
editing, Validation. WB: Writing – original draft, Writing – review
& editing. SGC: Writing – original draft, Writing – review &
editing. MJG: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
GH: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DanH:
Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DJ-S: Writing
– original draft, Writing – review & editing. DM: Writing –
original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation. PR: Writing
– original draft, Writing – review & editing. DR: Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing. VS: Conceptualization, Project
administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – original draft,
Writing – review & editing.

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 14 frontiersin.org
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the
research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This research
was funded by a grant awarded to DavH by the Howard Hughes
Medical Institute (GT#12052).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member
of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer
review process and the final decision.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers.
Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may
be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by
the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary material for this article can be found online
at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306/
full#supplementary-material
References
Auchincloss, L. C., Laursen, S. L., Branchaw, J. L., Eagan, K., Graham, M.,
Hanauer, D. I., et al. (2014). Assessment of course-based undergraduate research
experiences: a meeting report. CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 13, 29–40. doi: 10.1187/
cbe.14-01-0004
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., and Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on
teachers’ professional identity. Teach. Teach. Educ. 20, 107–128. doi: 10.1016/j.
tate.2003.07.001
Bourdieu, P. (1993). Bourdieu: Critical perspectives. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
Brewer, C. A., and Smith, D. (Eds.). (2011). Vision and change in undergraduate biology
education: A call to action. American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Brownell, S. E., and Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: lack
of training, time, incentives, and tensions with professional identity? CBE Life Sci. Educ.
11, 339–346. doi: 10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163
Cameron, C., Lee, H. Y., Anderson, C. B., Trachtenberg, J., and Chang, S. (2020). The
role of scientific communication in predicting science identity and research career
intention. PLoS One 15:e0228197. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228197
Chang, H., Ngunjiri, F. W., and Hernandez, K.-A. C. (2013). Collaborative
autoethnography. 1st Edn. (New York: Routledge). p. 200.
Chen, J. L., and Mensah, F. (2022). Toward socially just science teaching through
professional development: the science teacher identity development and agency of two
elementary teachers of color. Sci. Educ. 106, 385–411. doi: 10.1002/sce.21699
D’Arcy, C. E., Martinez, A., Khan, A. M., and Olimpo, J. T. (2019). Cognitive and non-
cognitive outcomes associated with student engagement in a novel brain chemo
architecture mapping course-based undergraduate research experience. J. Undergrad.
Neurosci. Educ. 18, A15–A43. doi: 10.1101/7684651
Elgin, S. C. R., Hauser, C., Holzen, T. M., Jones, C., Kleinschmit, A., and Leatherman, J.
(2017). Genomics education partnership. The GEP: crowd-sourcing big data analysis
with undergraduates. Trends Genet. 33, 81–85. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2016.11.004
Feldon, D. F., Maher, M. A., Hurst, M., and Timmerman, B. (2015). Faculty mentors’,
graduate students’, and performance-based assessments of students’ research skill
development. Am. Educ. Res. J. 52, 334–370. doi: 10.3102/0002831214549449
Feser, M. S., and Haak, I. (2023). Key features of teacher identity: a systematic meta-
review study with special focus on teachers of science or science related subjects. Stud.
Sci. Educ. 59, 287–320. doi: 10.1080/03057267.2022.2108644
Gee, J. P. (2002). “Literacies, identities, and discourses” in Developing advanced
literacy in first and second languages: Meaning with power. Eds. M. J. Schleppegrell and
M. C. Colombi (Routledge), 159–175.
Graham, M. J., Frederick, J., Byars-Winston, A., Hunter, A.-B., and Handelsman, J.
(2013). Increasing persistence of college students in STEM. Science, 341, 1455–1456. doi:
10.1126/science.1240487
Hanauer, D. I., Graham, M. J., Arnold, R. J., Ayuk, M. A., Balish, M. F., Beyer, A. R.,
et al. (2022b). Instructional models for course-based research experience (CRE)
teaching. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 21, 1–14. doi: 10.1187/cbe.21-03-0057
Hanauer, D. I., Graham, M. J., Betancur, L., Bobrownicki, A., Cresawn, S. G.,
Garlena, R. A., et al. (2017). An inclusive research education community (iREC): impact
of the SEA-PHAGES program on research outcomes and student learning. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA 114, 13531–13536. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1718188115
Hanauer, D. I., Graham, M. J., Jacobs-Sera, D., Garlena, R. A., Russell, D. A.,
Sivanathan, V., et al. (2022a). Broadening access to STEM through the community
college: investigating the role of course-based research experiences (CREs). CBE—life
sciences. Education 21:ar38. doi: 10.1187/cbe.21-08-0203
Hanauer, D. I., Zhang, T., Graham, M. J., Adams, S. D., Ahumada-Santos, Y. P.,
Alvey, R. M., et al. (2023). Models of classroom assessment for course-based research
experiences. Front. Educ. 8:1279921. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1279921
Hancock, S., and Walsh, E. (2014). Beyond knowledge and skills: Rethinking the
development of professional identity during the STEM doctorate. Stud. High. Educ. 41,
37–50. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2014.915301
Hernandez, P. R., Woodcock, A., Estrada, M., and Schultz, P. W. (2018). Undergraduate
research experiences broaden diversity in the scientific workforce. Bioscience 68,
204–211. doi: 10.1093/biosci/bix163
Hodkinson, H., and Hodkinson, P. (2004). Rethinking the concept of community of
practice in relation to schoolteachers’ workplace learning. Int. J. Train. Dev. 8, 21–31.
doi: 10.1111/j.1360-3736.2004.00193.x
Hurley, A., Chevrette, M. G., Acharya, D. D., Lozano, G. L., Garavito, M., Heinritz, J.,
et al. (2021). Tiny earth: a big idea for STEM education and antibiotic discovery. MBio
12. doi: 10.1128/mBio.03432-20
Ibarra, H., and Obodaru, O. (2016). Betwixt and between identities: liminal experience
in contemporary careers. Res. Organ. Behav. 36, 47–64. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2016.11.003
Jordan, T. C., Burnett, S. H., Carson, S., Caruso, S. M., Clase, K., DeJong, R. J., et al. (2014).
A broadly implementable research course in phage discovery and genomics for first-year
undergraduate students. MBio 5, e01051–e01013. doi: 10.1128/mBio.01051-134
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Kogan, M. (2000). Higher education communities and academic identity. High. Educ.
Q. 54, 207–216. doi: 10.1111/1468-2273.00156
Kuh, G. D., and Whitt, E. J. (1986). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American
colleges and universities (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, No. 1). Washington:
The George Washington University.
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation:
Cambridge University Press.
Lundell, D., and Collins, T. G. (2001). “Towards a theory of developmental education:
the centrality of discourse” in Theoretical perspectives in developmental education. eds.
D. Lundell and J. L. Higbee (Minneapolis: Centre for Research on Developmental
Education and Urban Literacy, General College, University of Minnesota), 3–20.
Mendoza, P. (2007). Academic capitalism and doctoral student socialization: a case
study. J. High. Educ. 78, 71–96. doi: 10.1080/00221546.2007.11778964
Monti, DL, Gill, JC, Adair, TL, Adams, SD, Ahumada-Santos, YP, Amaya, I, et al.
(2024). An inclusive research education community (iREC) model to facilitate
undergraduate science education reform. Front. Educ. 9:1442318. doi: 10.3389/
feduc.2024.1442318
Nadelson, L. S., McGuire, S. P., Davis, K. A., Farid, A., Hardy, K. K., Hsu, Y. C., et al.
(2017). Am I a STEM professional? Documenting STEM student professional identity
development. Stud. High. Educ. 42, 701–7202. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.10708191
O’Leary, N., and Cantillon, P. (2020). Why shouldn’t we do that on placement if we’re
doing it in the real world? Differences between undergraduate and graduate identities
in speech and language therapy. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 25, 781–797. doi: 10.1007/
s10459-020-09955-0
Pérez Gracia, E., Serrano Rodríguez, R., and Pontes Pedrajas, A. (2019). Analysis of
science and technology pre-service teachers’ beliefs on the construction of the teachers’

Hanauer et al. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1442306
Frontiers in Education 15 frontiersin.org
professional identity during the initial training process. Eur. J. of Math. Sci. Technol.
Educ. 15:em1756. doi: 10.29333/ejmste/1030641
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2012). Report
to the president on propelling innovation in drug discovery, development, and evaluation.
Available at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast/
docsreports
Raste, S. A., and Murthy, S. (2024). Professional identity development in bioscience
education: A systematic review of the literature. Educ. Res. Rev. 19, 13–25. doi: 10.5897/
ERR2023.4384
Rhoades, G. (2007). “The study of the academic profession” in Sociology of higher
education. Contributions and their contexts. ed. P. J. Gumport (Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins University Press), 113–146.
Rodenbusch, S. E., Hernandez, P. R., Simmons, S. L., and Dolan, E. L. (2016). Early
engagement in course-based research increases graduation rates and completion of
science, engineering, and mathematics degrees. CBE— Life Sci. Educ. 15:ar20.
doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-03-011
Rodrigues, F., and Mogarro, M. J. (2019). Student teachers’ professional identity: a
review of research contributions. Educ. Res. Rev. 28:100286. doi: 10.1016/j.
edurev.2019.100286
Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., and McCullough, T. (2007). The pipeline: benefits
of undergraduate research experiences. Science 316, 548–549. doi: 10.1126/
science.1140384
Shaffer, C. D., Alvarez, C., Bailey, C., Barnard, D., Bhalla, S., Chandrasekaran, C., et al.
(2010). The genomics education partnership: successful integration of research into
laboratory classes at a diverse group of undergraduate institutions. CBE Life Sci. Educ.
9, 55–69. doi: 10.1187/09-11-0087
Shahabi, M., Mohammadi, N., Koohpayehzadeh, J., and Arabshahi, S. K. S. (2020).
The attainment of physician’s professional identity through meaningful practice: a
qualitative study. Med. J. Islam Repub. Iran 34:16. doi: 10.47176/mjiri.34.16
Shwartz, G., and Dori, Y. J. (2020). Transition into teaching: Second career
teachers’ professional identity. Eur. J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 16:8502. doi:
10.29333/ejmste/8502
Wald, H. S., White, J., Reis, S. P., Esquibel, A. Y., and Anthony, D. (2018). Grappling
with complexity: medical students’ reflective writings about challenging patient
encounters as a window into professional identity formation. Med. Teach. 41, 152–160.
doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1475727
Wallenburg, I., Hopmans, C. J., Buljac-Samardzic, M., den Hoed, P. T., and
IJzermans, J. N. (2016). Repairing reforms and transforming professional practices: a
mixed-methods analysis of surgical training reform. J. Profess. Organiz. 3, 86–102. doi:
10.1093/jpo/jov012
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity:
Cambridge University Press.
Copyright © 2024 Hanauer, Alvey, An, Bancroft, Butela, Coleman, Clase, Collins,
Conant, Connerly, Connors, Dennis, Doyle, Edwards, Fillman, Findley, Frost, Gainey,
Golebiewska, Guild, Gusky, Johnson, Johnson, Klyczek, Lee-Soety, Lindberg,
Mastropaolo, Merkle, Mitchell, Molloy, Nieto, Nissen, Perez Morales, Peters, Pfeifer,
Pollenz, Preuss, Rosas-Acosta, Saha, Sprenkle, Sunnen, Tobiason, Tolsma, Ware,
Ahumada-Santos, Alvarez, Anderson, Ayuk, Báez-Flores, Bailey, Baliraine, Behr,
Beyer, Bhalla, Bono, Breakwell, Byrum, Duffy, Gleichsner, Harrison, Ho, Hughes,
Kagey, Kohl, McClory, Moyer, Mussi, Nance, Nsa, Page, Parra Unda, Rocheleau,
Swerdlow, Thoemke, Valentine, Vega, Ward, Williams, Wisner, Biederman, Cresawn,
Graham, Hatfull, Heller, Jacobs-Sera, Monti, Ramakrishna, Russell and Sivanathan.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums
is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited
and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted
academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not
comply with these terms.
