600_edited.png)
Undergraduate Research: A Pipeline to Advanced Degrees - and More. Reflections on Its Past and Future
- Kelly Kistner, PhD
- Dec 4
- 14 min read
Updated: 7 days ago
A few weeks ago, Will, a former UCLA student of mine, reached out while writing a piece for The Daily Bruin. His focus was on the state of undergraduate research at UCLA and the broader U.S. higher education environment, especially in light of recent budget reductions, federal research cuts, and political uncertainties.
I'm grateful for Will's initiative and coverage. Too little attention has been given to how undergraduates are experiencing these cuts and the potential long‑term impact on their learning, personal development, and the pipeline of future scientists and scholars. (Though, shout out to PBS News for also bringing undergraduate concerns into the discussion in it's recent PBS News Hour segment featuring UCLA - and Another Degree mentor Amy!)
Will’s questions gave me a lot to think about. I knew he didn’t need nearly as much as I responded (academic habits of answering prompts with extensive detail and historical context die hard), but it was a meaningful opportunity to reflect on my years supporting undergraduate researchers, my concerns about the current landscape of undergraduate research, and my perspective on how higher education might evolve in the face of budget cuts and uncertainty. It also helped me recognize the experiences and motivations that underlie Another Degree, some of which I’ve documented in earlier posts: From Scholarship to Mentorship, From Cutbacks to Community, and Why Choose Another Degree.
You can read Will's thoughts and reporting at: Student researchers need to stand up for themselves politically.
Here, I’m sharing the full extent of my responses - both UCLA‑specific and broader reflections - to help students understand and prepare for the changing landscape of higher education, and to open dialogue with others thinking about the future of higher education, and in what ways Another Degree can support it. It's a long one, so here's a summary of my main points:
Undergraduate research is a critical pathway for future scholars and scientists, but its value extends far beyond academia and it should be recognized as such.
Undergraduate research is among the most accessible co‑curricular and experiential opportunities for mentored and individualized learning.
The traditional resource-intensive model of a lot of undergraduate research programming needs to adapt. Real research experience needs to be embedded into innovative course-based curriculum, or with other co-curricular programming and experiential learning like internships, study abroad, and community engagement. There are also opportunities through outsourcing and remote learning to scale programmatic support to reach more students who might otherwise not have access to the opportunities. This has the potential to broaden opportunities for more students at less-resourced institutions, or those not currently at institutions at all.
Student demand for undergraduate research has been increasing, making recent budget cuts especially problematic.
While institutions may be slow to act, students themselves can be powerful voices and instruments of change.
Q: Why would you say undergraduate research is important for a university to have?
First, it’s a critical pipeline for future scholars and scientists. Graduate programs increasingly expect applicants to have research experience, and students without it are often shut out of those opportunities - and the careers they lead to.
Second, it deepens the learning experience. It’s one thing to consume knowledge or analyze others’ arguments; it’s another to produce knowledge yourself - to identify gaps, test and refine theories, and contribute something original. That process also transforms and enhances how students understand classroom material. It can lead to more engaging discussions and insights.
Third, it prepares students for a wide range of careers. In research I’ve been part of, we found that UCLA students who pursued undergraduate research in the humanities and social sciences reported more of the skills and dispositions sought by employers (critical thinking, problem solving, oral and written communication) at the time of graduation than a quasi-experimental sample of similarly matched peers who did not pursue undergraduate research (Kistner et al., 2021). In follow up surveys and interviews with research alumni (Arnold et al., 2023), most respondents indicated their research experiences came up in cover letters, interviews, and professional settings. It signals initiative, self-direction, and the ability to navigate ambiguity - skills that are valuable far beyond academia.
Fourth, it diversifies who gets to create knowledge. Academia can be opaque, with hidden norms and accumulated advantages to those who know the expectations and how to navigate it. Undergraduate research, when supported equitably, opens doors to students who might not otherwise see themselves as knowledge producers.
Finally, it helps students see the value of the modern university itself - something I’m especially attuned to as a sociological historian of science and knowledge. When students are part of the process of asking questions, gathering evidence, designing studies, presenting arguments and findings and getting feedback, they begin to understand how knowledge is built, vetted, and shared. That’s a powerful shift in perspective, and incredibly important in this era when the value of higher education is under attack and years of hard fought knowledge produced through careful and iterative processes and the consideration of varied perspectives, is too often diminished and distorted and pitted against politicized opinions or absolutist statements.
Q: What are some of the biggest benefits of undergraduate research programs to students?
One of the biggest benefits of undergraduate research is mentorship. That kind of personalized guidance from a faculty member or senior researcher can help students clarify their academic interests, graduate school goals, and career paths. Not to mention a connection to faculty personal and information networks. Our alumni study also found that mentorship often lasted beyond graduation, with especially strong benefits for students from minoritized groups - including statistically significant benefits through the emotional support of their mentors.
Another major benefit is accessibility. When we think about experiential learning - things like internships, study abroad, community engagement - undergraduate research is often the most accessible option. Most projects don’t require students to leave campus or take on significant financial costs, which makes it more feasible for a broader range of students.
In programs with a cohort model, there’s also a strong sense of peer support. That community can make the research process less isolating and more collaborative, especially for students who are new to academic spaces (Toven-Lindsey et al., 2024). I previously mentioned our research on the professional advantages of undergraduate research in the humanities and social sciences, but another finding was the deep personal growth students experience. Confidence was the most commonly reported outcome, along with greater intellectual curiosity, independence, and improved time management.
Finally, research allows students to personalize their education. Many of the students I’ve worked with pursued projects that were deeply meaningful to them or their communities - often exploring questions that weren’t being addressed in their coursework. It gave them a chance to connect disciplines, challenge assumptions, and contribute something original. That kind of agency is transformative.
Q: What is needed most for schools to host undergraduate research programs (e.g. money, faculty, technology, etc.)?
All of those things - money, faculty, technology - can absolutely help support more undergraduate research programs. Fortunately, at R1 institutions like UCLA, many of the core resources are already in place: libraries, archives, datasets, labs, statistical consultants, and research software. These are largely designed for faculty, research staff, and graduate students, but they can be more fully leveraged to support undergraduate research - taking some of the burden off faculty mentors and instead woven into programs that serve students across campus. That said, I do worry about funding cuts hitting those areas and stymying growth.
But I also want to use this question to reflect on the history and sustainability of the program-based movement in undergraduate research, which has really only gained traction in the last 25–35 years. Before that, and certainly when I was an undergraduate, research opportunities were typically limited to students personally invited by faculty. That model often excluded students who didn’t know research was an option, didn’t have the time or confidence to cultivate faculty relationships, or couldn’t afford to take unpaid research for credit - not to mention risks of reproducing implicit and systemic biases. The “program turn” was a response to those inequities, and I think it’s been an impactful one.
Still, many programs are resource-intensive and vulnerable to budget cuts. Co-curricular undergraduate research and even some honors programs often lack permanent funding and are easy targets in budget crunches, no matter their impact. Even donor- or grant-funded programs can be on shaky ground when funders face pressure to redirect money to fill stopgaps elsewhere. And ironically, some programs have become victims of their own success, they’re so associated with prestige and competitiveness that many of the students who get in are already highly prepared and may not need the additional support. Meanwhile, students who would benefit most from structured guidance are often left out.
So in many ways, I think the time is ripe to rethink what’s sustainable in undergraduate research programming. I hope the future lies not just in expanding programs, but in rethinking delivery and reaching as many students as possible. Two promising paths forward are embedded integration and outsourcing.
By embedded integration, I mean weaving research into the curriculum - through general education requirements, course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs), or major-specific capstones. These models are especially effective and equitable when they expose students to research early, without requiring separate applications or extra time commitments. There’s been some movement in this direction at UCLA, particularly through the current GE review and new Teaching and Learning Center initiatives, but I’ve seen even more concerted efforts at other institutions that are already structurally scaling research practice across their curriculum.
Outsourcing, meanwhile, is gaining traction and I think it will especially grow in the wake of national budget cuts. It may not be as ideal as extensive in-house programming, but it offers real benefits in terms of flexibility and reach. With remote learning infrastructure now widely available, mentorship, workshops, and research support can be accessed across institutions. This allows for better calibration and customization of programming to meet students where they are - whether they need intensive structure or more supplemental support. It’s a promising model for colleges and universities that lack the research infrastructure of an R1, or for small departments that don’t have the scale or demand to justify a full-time program director or faculty buyouts, but still have promising students who would thrive with the right support. It also opens the door to more collaborative and distributed research opportunities - where students can contribute remotely, join cross-institutional teams, or participate in research travel programs. That’s part of what I’m building through my company, Another Degree: broad, scalable co-curricular support for research engagement and graduate school preparation, accessible online across institutions.
Ultimately, while the current funding landscape is challenging, I believe these are viable paths forward that can make undergraduate research more accessible, more sustainable, and more impactful.
Q: What was the state of undergraduate research at UCLA before the recent cuts?
UCLA has always had strong undergraduate research opportunities - both in number and quality - and strong demand from ambitious and intellectually curious students. It’s unique with its two undergraduate research centers. In most universities and colleges, if they have units dedicated to undergraduate research, the focus is on STEM fields. That’s because there’s often a need to have a centralized unit to coordinate major grants and initiatives tied to STEM programs.
However, the needs and experiences of students in the humanities, arts, and social sciences are usually very different. These are fields where undergraduate research is often independent, student-driven, and less embedded in faculty-led labs. A few years ago, when some students and I looked at the data, we found that 96% of URC-HASS participants were pursuing original research questions they’d developed themselves, with guidance from faculty mentors. That’s a very different model from STEM, where students typically contribute to ongoing faculty projects.
There aren’t always built in supports or pipelines to assist students interested in research in those north campus fields [humanities, arts, and social sciences], nor are there many incentives for faculty to mentor, or disciplinary norms and structures that are as naturally amenable to training undergraduates in original research in humanities and social sciences. It puts a greater lift on the students themselves to develop a research proposal and pitch it to faculty, and that’s a lot harder and intimidating without scaffolds and pipelines - which also help students build confidence and gain reassurance - and that can be huge for first-generation students and students from traditionally minoritized and under-resourced groups. Larger departments are able to build and maintain robust honors programs, but having a Center and specialized staff that can offset departmental variations in that support and scaffolding is huge. That additional support, along with URC outreach to departments, compelled more faculty to take on undergraduate research students - knowing that the students have access to URC scholarship funds which can mean more time to dedicate to research over working, extra resources and mentorship through URC programming, or that they already had some preparation in the form of pipelining programs like Research Revealed or working on undergraduate research journals.
During my time with URC-HASS, I saw significant growth in both the quantity and quality of student research - growth I believe was largely driven by the expansion of preparation programs. Still, even before this year’s cuts and political uncertainties, the pace of opportunity hadn’t been keeping up with rising student demand. That’s despite what seems like more faculty than ever taking on undergraduate mentees and research assistants - or taking on more mentees than previous years - in a way that I worry wasn’t sustainable in the long run and wasn’t always well rewarded by their departments. When I first joined URC-HASS, we could confidently say that any student who wanted to do research could find a faculty mentor. But in the last 2–3 years, that was no longer true.
That was especially disappointing because the rising demand wasn’t purely instrumental - though undergraduate research is certainly a kind of currency for letters of recommendation and graduate school applications. Increasingly, I was meeting students who were drawn to research for its own sake and recognized its value, even if they weren’t necessarily interested in academic careers - I altered my classes and programs and re-launched a summer program to better accommodate those interests. Many were and are choosing UCLA for its research profile and arriving well-prepared to engage in research.
I was already concerned about the sustainability and accessibility of undergraduate research before the recent cuts, but those concerns have become far more pronounced. The gap between student demand and institutional capacity is widening, and without thoughtful strategic coordination, we risk losing momentum and maintaining broad access to research experiences.
Q: How have you personally been impacted by the cuts?
My role and several of the programs I led and founded were cut. While I always understood that, as an academic administrator and faculty member in a non-tenure-track position, my role was technically contingent, the decision was still unexpected. I was even in the process of being advanced for a promotion. I also worry this is just the beginning, and that similar cuts will continue across the UC system and beyond, as we’re seeing nationally.
I channeled my concerns - both about what’s being lost and about longstanding issues of access - into founding Another Degree. It’s currently in a soft launch phase, with about 30 incredible mentors offering guidance and programming on graduate and professional school admissions, research and dissertation coaching, editing, and career development. In many ways, it replicates the kinds of support that would be freely available to students through their institutions but are now being reduced or eliminated.
I’m glad that Another Degree allows me and other mentors to serve students across institutions and geographies. At the same time, I’m deeply concerned that what used to be broadly accessible is now becoming a paid service that not all students can afford. I’m designing several initiatives to help address that - diverting a share of revenue to support low-income students, reserving seats in online classes for students in diversity-initiative programs, and creating freely accessible content to assist all learners.
My hope is that Another Degree can also serve as a resource for colleges and universities - offering customized, outsourced programming or filling gaps where internal resources are limited. Ideally, it can help reduce disparities between more- and less-resourced institutions and ensure that a broad range of students continue to have access to the guidance they need to succeed.
Q: What can UCLA as a school do at this time to best support students during the cuts and uncertainty?
Now being on “the outside,” and in conversation with many others who’ve also been impacted by the cuts, I think we’re seeing signs of monumental change ahead in higher education. From that vantage point, it seems like many institutions, including UCLA, are hoping for the best, but then have to reckon with the worst. That leads to decisions that, to borrow the phrasing of a friend and colleague, feel tactical rather than strategic. While that may offer short-term budgetary relief, it often creates bigger problems in the long run. I sense students see that too. They’re not looking to be reassured that everything is business as usual - they’re looking for leadership that acknowledges the moment and plans boldly for what’s next.
One promising path is curriculum innovation. UCLA should expand course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) as part of major and GE requirements. Strong models already exist in Digital Humanities, Labor Studies, and Life Sciences, and there’s momentum to build more.
I also hope UCLA fosters collaboration across experiential learning units - Study Abroad, Community Engagement, Internships, StartUp, and Undergraduate Research among others. I remember once hearing a colleague referring to another UCLA unit focused on experiential learning as a competitor, which is exactly the wrong way to think about it, but I could also see how they felt pitted against them for resources and student interest. This is the time to align strengths and create layered, high-impact opportunities through the external relationships built by those units. For instance, fostering research exchanges abroad, expanding opportunities for participatory action research with community groups, creating citizen science initiatives, working with industry to develop more research-centered internship programs.
I also hope UCLA will consider outsourcing some of the student supports that have been cut. That's not a bias because it's what Another Degree offers; rather, Another Degree offers it as a response to what I saw as a mismatch between student needs and institutional capacity. Students aren’t always available when advisors are, and many need flexible, asynchronous support. Outsourced services can help meet that demand while easing pressure on internal teams.
Finally, I really hope UCLA and other institutions are actively using and expanding their channels for gathering student feedback and hearing student voices. Pausing to listen can be difficult in moments like this, but it’s essential for staying responsive, adaptable, and aligned with what students actually need. Meaningful change starts with understanding how students are experiencing these shifts, and being willing to adjust course accordingly.
Q: What can students eager to do research despite the setbacks do at this time?
Students eager to do research right now should focus on keeping their skills sharp and staying engaged with available tools. UCLA’s libraries and other units like IDRE, HumTech, and OARC offer access to research software, databases, and workshops that help students build foundational skills and learn how to use an ever-growing array of tools for developing, organizing, and analyzing data and sources. (I recommend using the UCLA workshop portal to see what trainings are coming up). I’ve even seen students go on to teach faculty how to use these tools in their own research. Major technological shifts, like the rise of generative AI, often open new ways of studying old questions and make studying entirely new questions feasible. Undergraduates are often well-positioned to spot those possibilities.
In any field, strong research can begin with annotated bibliographies or critical literature reviews. These are excellent ways to deepen expertise, support faculty projects, and develop future research proposals.
Students should also consider exploring work outside their primary discipline - especially text-based or policy-oriented research. During the pandemic, we saw pre-med students collaborating with philosophy faculty and molecular biologists engaging in policy analysis. These kinds of cross-disciplinary projects can be both meaningful and accessible.
Just as UCLA can leverage its external partnerships to create more research opportunities, students can think creatively about ways to gain experience beyond traditional campus settings. That might include citizen science initiatives - not just data collection, but contributing to analysis - or participatory action research with community groups. It could also mean offering research assistance as an intern in industry or museums or non-profits. There may be pathways for SRP 99 or other course options to arrange credit for these kinds of initiatives.
In a lot of ways, students can act as bridges - bringing research beyond the campus and into communities, industries, and global conversations where it can have real impact.
I want to hear from you! Do you have feedback, comments, or follow‑ups on this article? Join the discussion on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, and Reddit.
Ready to book?
References
Arnold, W., Kistner, K., Sparck, E.M., & Levis-Fitzgerald, M. (2023). Academic Growth and Professional Development through
Undergraduate Humanities Research. Profession.
Kistner, K., Sparck, E.M., Liu, A., Whang Sayson, H., Levis-Fitzgerald, M., & Arnold, W. (2021). Academic and Professional
Preparedness: Outcomes of Undergraduate Research in the Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences. Scholarship and Practice of Undergraduate Research, 4(4), 3–9.
Toven-Lindsey, B., Sparck, E.M., Kistner, K., Ardam, J., Levis-Fitzgerald, M., & Arnold, W. (2024). Undergraduate Research in
Humanities, Arts & Social Sciences (HASS): Helping Students Navigate Uncertainty and Build Community Through a Structured Cohort-Based Program. Scholarship and Practice of Undergraduate Research, 7 (2): 15-24.