Can a college built on outstanding teaching also build a thriving research culture? I believe it can, and our college is better placed to do it than many people think.
Growing research in a teaching-focused college is the heart of my new role as Arthrex Director, Research & Career Readiness, in the Marieb College of Health & Human Services at Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU). Our university has set its sights on R2 status. This Carnegie designation goes to universities that spend at least $5 million a year on research and award at least 20 research doctorates a year.1 Because the status goes to the whole university, every college, ours included, has a part to play. This post opens a series on building that research culture on the road to R2, and my starting point is simple.
Our teaching, clinical, and mentoring strengths are the foundation of our research culture, not a barrier to it.
| Objective | Outcome |
|---|---|
| Why our existing strengths matter | See how teaching, clinical practice, and mentoring feed research |
| How students can power research | Learn what course-based research offers, and its limits |
| Which supports help faculty start | Know the first steps we can take together |
Research Culture Starts With What We Already Do
Faculty in a health and human services college ask research questions every week. A clinician wonders why one patient recovers faster than another. An instructor notices which approach helps students master a hard concept. A mentor sees a student come alive during a capstone project. Each of these moments is the seed of a study. Because our programs sit side by side, these questions also cross fields, so interprofessional collaboration is a natural place to start building a research culture.
In practice, turning everyday questions into a research culture depends less on individual effort than on the system around people. A systematic review of research capacity frameworks in allied health found three linked themes: supporting clinicians in research, working together, and valuing research.2 Similarly, a scoping review of nursing and midwifery schools pointed to academic identity, change in how the school is run, leadership, and skills.3 Shared themes help too. When one university linked several courses to common faculty research interests, the faculty involved saw large gains in research output.4
A research culture grows when the whole college moves together, not when individuals work alone.
Undergraduate Research as an Engine for Faculty Research
| Approach | What it gives faculty | What to plan for |
|---|---|---|
| Course-based research projects | Pilot data and research-ready students | Follow-up work before class data can be published |
| Mentored student researchers | Extra hands and fresh questions | Time to train and supervise |
| Funded student training, such as NIH R15 awards | Funding built around student involvement | A focused, competitive proposal |
Our students may be our greatest research asset, which is why research mentoring sits at the centre of the research culture we are building. Course-based undergraduate research experiences, often called CUREs, bring a real research question into a regular class. In fact, in one collaborative series of such courses, more than three in four students went on to research projects of their own.4
Research funders also value student involvement. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Enhancement Award (R15) supports research at schools that have in the past received little NIH funding. One of its stated aims is to give students research experience. One R15-funded study of metabolic health in young adults, for example, was built around training student researchers.5
Course-based research does have limits. A national survey found that turning class data into publications is hard. Projects need follow-up data, novice results can be hard to reproduce, and faculty need time to write.6 For this reason, course-based research works best as a pipeline into mentored projects, where students and faculty grow a question together over several semesters.
Teaching and research strengthen each other when student projects feed faculty questions.
First Steps: Time, Mentoring, and Shared Resources
As research expectations grow across the college, practical support matters more than encouragement. A systematic review of 30 studies on building research capacity among health professions educators found four common ingredients. They were protected time, mentorship or collaboration, departmental and institutional commitment, and financial support.7 In particular, writing time stands out. At one teaching institution, faculty who kept weekly protected writing sessions produced more papers, proposals, and grants, and felt part of a research community.8
Limited resources call for sharing. Seven Western states formed an alliance to share research core facilities. Three of its networks estimated savings of $27.6 million over one five-year funding cycle.9 Likewise, partnerships and shared research infrastructure across our campus and region can work the same way, so no single program has to build everything alone. Over time, these steps prepare faculty to compete for extramural funding, and that grant activity adds to the research expenditures counted toward R2.1
Support comes first; a research culture and research output follow.
Takeaway
Building a research culture in our college is a shared project, and it starts with strengths we already have. When a college agrees on achievable, tangible targets, research becomes a shared vision rather than a demand on individuals.10 In this series, I will share our progress, lessons, and milestones, so please follow along and share it with colleagues. And if you have a research idea, a clinical question, or a promising student project, I would love to hear about it.
“Research is not a second job added to teaching. It is what our classrooms, clinics, and students can grow into.”
Daniel Credeur, Arthrex Director, Research & Career Readiness
Leave a Reply