Mentoring Undergraduate Research in Statistics: Reaping the Benefits and Overcoming the Barriers

Figures & data

Table A1 Survey sample demographics.

Sample description	Count (%)
Institution type
Four year (with graduate degrees)
Public	57 .(48)
Private	25 .(21)
Four year (without graduate degrees)
Public	4 .(3)
Private	18 .(15)
2-Year	12 .(10)
Other	2 .(2)
Institutional offerings (categories overlap)
Major in statistics	50 .(42)
Major in data science	22 .(18)
Minor/concentration in either	74 .(62)
Other related majors (e.g., math, actuarial sci.)	14 .(12)
None of these	30 .(25)
Academic position
Professor	44 .(37)
Associate professor	32 .(27)
Assistant professor	21 .(18)
Other full-time	16 .(13)
Other part-time	6 .(5)
Mentored undergraduates (categories overlap)
Including juniors/seniors	70 .(58)
Including freshmen/sophomores	34 .(28)
During summers	46 .(38)
During regular semesters	54 .(45)
As part of classroom environment	35 .(29)

Table A2 Perceived benefits to students broken down by faculty characteristics.

Benefit	# of responses (%)	Faculty who have mentored UR (%)	Faculty who have not mentored UR (%)	Faculty at four year institutions (with graduate degrees)	Faculty at four year institutions (without graduate degrees)
S1: Breadth and depth of material	23 .(22)	20 .(29)	3 .(8)	15 .(21)	8 .(38)
S2: Skill development	12 .(11)	8 .(12)	4 .(11)	10 .(14)	2 .(10)
S3: Learning by doing statistics	44 .(42)	24 .(35)	20 .(53)	32 .(44)	7 .(33)
S4: Communication skills	15 .(14)	12 .(18)	3 .(8)	13 .(18)	2 .(10)
S5: Confidence as a statistician	12 .(11)	10 .(15)	2 .(5)	8 .(11)	3 .(14)
S6: Sense of professional belonging	29 .(27)	18 .(27)	11 .(29)	18 .(25)	6 .(29)
S7: Graduate school and career preparation	24 .(23)	14 .(21)	10 .(26)	16 .(22)	4 .(19)
S8: Statistical research exposure	26 .(25)	20 .(29)	6 .(16)	20 .(28)	4 .(19)

NOTE: There were 106 free text responses related to student benefits. If a single response spanned multiple themes then it was counted as a response for each theme.

Table A3 Perceived barriers to students broken down by faculty characteristics.

Barrier	# of responses (%)	Faculty who have mentored UR (%)	Faculty who have not mentored UR (%)	Faculty at four year institutions (with graduate degrees)	Faculty at four year institutions (without graduate degrees)
Perceived lack of interest	17 (63)	11 (65)	6 (60)	11 (69)	2 (40)
Access to opportunities	11 (41)	7 (41)	4 (40)	6 (38)	3 (60)

NOTE: Percentages computed from the total number of responses that mentioned a student barrier. If a single response spanned multiple themes then it was counted as a response for each theme.

Table A4 Perceived barriers to faculty broken down by faculty characteristics.

Barrier	# of responses (%)	Faculty who have mentored UR (%)	Faculty who have not mentored UR (%)	Faculty at four year institutions (with graduate degrees)	Faculty at four year institutions (without graduate degrees)
Time	54 (68)	34 (63)	20 (77)	39 (68)	12 (63)
Training and preparedness of students	25 (31)	17 (31)	8 (31)	19 (33)	5 (26)
Not valued toward tenure, promotion or reviews	17 (21)	11 (20)	6 (23)	12 (21)	5 (26)
Finding projects	8 (10)	6 (11)	2 (8)	4 (7)	3 (15)

NOTE: Percentages computed from the total number of responses that mentioned a faculty barrier. If a single response spanned multiple themes then it was counted as a response for each theme.

Table A5 Perceived barriers to institution broken down by faculty characteristics.

Barrier	# of responses (%)	Faculty who have mentored UR (%)	Faculty who have not mentored UR (%)	Faculty at four year institutions (with graduate degrees)	Faculty at four year institutions (without graduate degrees)
Compensation	23 (70)	15 (71)	8 (67)	20 (71)	2 (50)
Staffing in statistics	10 (30)	6 (29)	4 (33)	8 (29)	2 (50)

NOTE: Percentages computed from the total number of responses that mentioned an institutional barrier. If a single response spanned multiple themes then it was counted as a response for each theme.

Fig. 1 Survey responses to the question “If the barriers you mentioned were removed, how might that change your involvement in Undergraduate Research in Statistics?” broken down by whether or not the respondent had previously mentored undergraduate research.

Table A6 Survey responses to the question “If the barriers you mentioned were removed, how might that change your involvement in Undergraduate Research in Statistics?” broken down by whether or not the respondent had previously mentored undergraduate research.

	Change in involvement if barriers are removed
		No change in likelihood of involvement (%)	Somewhat likely to be more involved (%)	Extremely likely to be more involved (%)
Mentored undergraduate research?	No	7 (18)	19 (48)	14 (35)
	Yes	21 (29)	33 (45)	19 (26)

Fig. 2 Undergraduate research mentorship rates based on whether or not their institution uses one of these incentives to encourage faculty participation.

Table A7 Undergraduate research mentorship rates based on whether the faculty perceive their institution uses one of these incentives to encourage faculty participation.

		# of responses who mentored undergraduate research (%)
		Is an institutional incentive	Is not an institutional incentive
Incentives	Reduced teaching load?	8 (73)	68 (63)
	Additional salary?	20 (95)	56 (57)
	Valued toward tenure and promotion?	45 (76)	31 (52)
	Additional research funds?	9 (82)	67 (62)