Evaluation design
CURE Evaluation Plan
A comprehensive mixed-methods plan for measuring the effectiveness of Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences at Arapahoe Community College.
5
CURE resources / year
50%
repository lessons reused by others
60+
faculty trained (3 years)
Pre / Post
student gain measurement
Evaluation framework
A mixed-methods approach
The evaluation combines rigorous quantitative measurement with qualitative process documentation to show whether CUREs work — and how.
Mixed-methods design
- Combines quantitative outcome measurement with qualitative process documentation.
- Pre/post gain measurement is the core — it shows student growth without relying on a comparison group.
- Where non-CURE comparison data can be collected, group comparisons add further evidence.
- Process evaluation ensures implementation fidelity and surfaces best practices.
Statistical analysis methods
- Paired-sample t-tests — compare each student's pre- and post-scores (normal data).
- Wilcoxon signed-rank tests — compare pre/post gains when data isn't normally distributed.
- Effect sizes — gauge the magnitude of pre-to-post gains against benchmarks.
- Disaggregated analysis — separate results for under-represented student populations.
- Group comparisons (independent t-test / Mann-Whitney) when non-CURE comparison data is available.
Data collection strategy
- Pre/post Likert surveys of student confidence and STEM abilities.
- PD participation logs and post-training evaluations.
- Faculty surveys on preparation and resource adequacy.
- CURE curriculum repository usage tracking.
- Transfer and retention data from institutional records.
- Research presentation and symposium participation records.
The three goals
What we're measuring
Goal 1 — Faculty research integration
- Objective 1.1: more STEM faculty feel prepared and resourced to integrate research.
- Train 60 faculty, 3 lab-prep staff, 6–15 tutors, and 4–8 advisors over 3 years.
- Create the CURE task force with paid STEM STARS trainers and advisors.
- Measure via PD logs, pre/post faculty confidence surveys, and sustained engagement.
Goal 2 — CURE curriculum library
- Objective 2.1: at least 3 wet-lab and 2 dry-lab resources developed each year.
- Build lessons with guides, training resources, and recorded skill demonstrations.
- Support in-person, virtual, and hybrid delivery.
- Targets: 5 resources by Year 1, 10 by Year 2, 15 by Year 3.
Goal 3 — Student STEM pathways
- Objective 3.1: student comfort and confidence with research and STEM abilities rises after a CURE course.
- Survey students with validated Likert instruments before and after the CURE.
- Where possible, invite non-CURE students to take the post-survey for comparison.
- Students present research at symposiums; track progress over time.
- Analyze pre/post gains with paired tests; add group comparisons when comparison data is available.
Comprehensive strategy
Built for evidence and for scale
Rigorous research design
- Pre/post gain measurement with appropriate statistics and effect-size analysis.
- Produces statistically valid, credible evidence of student growth and CURE effectiveness.
- Strengthened by non-CURE comparison data whenever it can be collected.
Implementation & sustainability
- Balances outcome measurement with process evaluation — not just whether CUREs work, but how.
- Produces actionable insight for scaling and sustaining CUREs beyond the grant.