by Marcos Luna
Geography Department

Marcos Luna, Geography Department

The theme of this edition of ASpect is undergraduate research. In addition to soliciting the contributions of faculty members of the School of Arts and Sciences (SOAS), the SOAS Communications Team endeavored to learn about undergraduate research activities amongst our various departments. The survey that the SOAS Communications Team put to Chairs of the various SOAS departments seemed simple enough but turned out to be more complicated than anticipated. We came to appreciate that there were at least two kinds of questions about our questions: 1) What do we mean by “research”? and 2) Is research all that we are really after?

What, then, is research?

The Council on Undergraduate Research describes undergraduate research as “an inquiry or investigation conducted by an undergraduate student that makes an original intellectual or creative contribution to the discipline.” How original is original? At what point does creativity constitute a contribution? Certainly, students perform a brand of research whenever they search for an answer to a question or employ some systematic methodology or approach – whether it is for a book report, term paper, oral presentation, or problem-solving process or exploration. Insofar as the student is concerned, the information “discovered” is likely to be new or unfamiliar whether it comes from primary sources or Wikipedia. Is this research? Most faculty probably frown on such a generic definition of research, preferring instead to reserve the title “research” for scholarly activities that require a greater degree of effort, creativity, originality or independent initiative. However, I believe (with some corroborating evidence) that most faculty do not restrict the “research” label to contributions that are in fact completely new to the world. Not only would many feel this to be too high an expectation, but they might be hard pressed to verify the originality of students’ work. Research, at least for most undergraduate students and their instructors, falls somewhere between routine homework and paradigm-shattering discovery (and probably closer to the former rather than the latter). Our own (unscientific) survey seems to support this perspective, though there are notable exceptions.

Within inquiry-based disciplines, particularly the sciences (whether physical, natural, social or applied), the meaning of “research” is fairly clear or at least well defined. But what about the arts and humanities? Is “research” common to all disciplines within the arts and sciences? Certainly we can speculate that students in all disciplines might do some form of research in the pursuit of greater mastery or understanding. However, I speculate that what we really want to know is: Is the process of research, or a research product, a significant end of a student’s journey in any discipline? There is no doubt that the learning and performing of research is a valuable experience and skill to which every student should be exposed. But when we ask about “research,” particularly for college-wide events like Undergraduate Research Day, is our purpose to highlight research per se? Or is our purpose instead to highlight a culminating, discipline-specific activity or product that is not necessarily focused on “inquiry or investigation”?

If not “research,” then, what?

In practice, we have been quite inclusive in our undergraduate research symposia, inviting a wide variety of contributions, including posters illustrating scientific observations or experiments, oral summaries of literary exploration, and visual arts and creative performances. This eclectic approach appears to be the norm. Indeed, the Massachusetts Statewide Undergraduate Research Conference specifically invites students to present work related to:

• Thesis research
• Creative work in the visual and performing arts
• Independent study
• Community service
• Study abroad

Certainly, among faculty in a liberal arts institution, we are flexible in our expectations of what constitute professional activity and achievement. Among faculty, we respect or at least acknowledge the variety of professional activities or products that mark accomplishment within a discipline or institution. Luckily for those who need tangible evidence, much of this accomplishment is achieved through familiar venues – publications or public performances. What the latter have in common is the public presentation of one’s work within some disciplinary community for the consideration and critique of one’s peers or the general public. The nature of that presentation varies, but the general purpose does not. It is to share something of value with the community, to demonstrate uncommon mastery or understanding of one’s subject, to participate in a conversation, and to invite feedback and reaction on that shared work – whether that is editorial or peer review, or public response through applause or purchase. Certainly these purposes are not unique to research, and research is not the culminating achievement of all liberal arts education. If not research, then what?

Even with the simplest definition of “undergraduate research,” we will be challenged to find agreement on its depth or limits. However, as a diverse community struggling to advance our educational mission and the collective good, we are forced to repeatedly confront the question of what it is that we share in common. Thus far, the word “research” has served as an ill-defined but accepted proxy for the varied demonstrations of accomplishment for our students. How else might we capture the diverse meaning of what we seek or what we do?