Lynn R. Huber, Elon University

Lynn R. Huber is associate professor of religious studies at Elon University in North Carolina. She teaches New Testament and early Christian history and directs the Women’s and Gender Studies Program. Huber’s research revolves around metaphor, gender, and the Book of Revelation, and she has written about using art to teach biblical texts. Huber has been involved with directing undergraduate research since she has been at Elon and has mentored projects ranging from an analysis of popular feminist appropriations of Lilith traditions to a thesis that investigates some of the ways that the biblical stories of Babel and Pentecost are depicted in medieval and modern imagery and how these reflect assumptions about the relationship between text and image in Christian thought.

Learning Contracts: Background and Rationale

Undergraduate research (UR) involves an interesting pedagogical paradox: While UR assumes that students benefit from articulating and executing independent research projects, it also requires close collaboration between student and mentor. Academic independence stems from working closely with another, more experienced, academic partner. A successful UR experience for both student and mentor requires that the mentor be intentional about maintaining this balance, creating space for the student to develop her own ideas, and providing guidance so that the student can accomplish her desired outcomes. Maintaining this balance is further complicated by the fact that UR projects often require some form of assessment, as they generally are part of a program that asks the mentor to grade or evaluate the product and the process.

One tool for balancing the element of independence and student empowerment that characterizes UR with the need for direction is a learning contract. Useful within a wide range of learning settings (see Knowles for an indication of its breadth), a learning contract provides the context of UR a learning contract provides guidance for the student as she moves through an independent research project and a guideline for the mentor to assess the student’s research process. In fact, without a contract for assessing a student’s research process, separate from the final product, assessment is quite difficult and potentially arbitrary. In this article, I discuss elements that might be included in a UR learning contract, as well as attending to some of the pedagogical benefits associated with this tool. I approach this from the perspective of someone involved in directing multisemester UR projects within the context of my university’s various UR programs. These programs are part of a university-wide commitment to UR that involves educating faculty across the disciplines on strategies for mentoring successful research experiences. Much of what I discuss reflects what I have learned from other faculty at my institution.

In my institution, undergraduate research (UR) projects extend over multiple — usually three or four — semesters. Ideally, the mentor and student draw up a learning contract at or near the beginning of the project and/or at the beginning of one phase of the project. In addition to the student and mentor outlining a general plan of study for the project as a whole, at the start of each semester a new contract typically is outlined and agreed upon by both participants. Students sign up for “independent research” credit, ranging from one to four hours per semester, and the contract should reflect the amount of work appropriate for the student’s credit hours. In practice, students who are eager to do UR often want to “bite off more than they can chew” and sometimes have to be reined in by the mentor. Developing a contract together allows the mentor to help the student set realistic expectations — something your student will thank you for in the end!

Before sitting down with the student to outline the contract, I usually make contact via e-mail and encourage the student to start thinking about what he hopes we will accomplish together over the semester. Even if this is the first semester of working together, I have usually met with the student already to talk about his project and potential areas of research. Especially if you have worked with a student in the past, you might consider asking him to reflect upon where he has been, where he is, and where he wants to go in relation to the independent research project (Anderson, Boud, and Sampson, 18). Not only will answers to these questions provide a helpful starting point for your conversation, but the questions remind the student that his research can and should build upon what he has done in the past, either in other UR contexts or in coursework.

When drafting a learning contract with a student, I typically work from a form that I have developed based upon models from other faculty and the expectations of my institution’s UR programs. I have a blank version ready for the student and me to fill out together by hand (Boak, 44), although one of us eventually types up a formal copy for our records. The document includes three sections. In the top section, there are blanks for designating the student and mentor’s names, indicating the semester, year, and credit hours, the name of the project, and regular meeting time and place. More importantly, in the top section of the form there is space to indicate how many hours of work the student should expect to do each week. Generally, I ask that students complete three hours of work per week for each hour of credit. 

In the bottom third of the contract form, I have places for both the student and myself to sign and date the contract. This act signals both of our commitments to accomplish the goals and tasks outlined in the main part of the contract. While I am sure people differ on this, I do think that even after the contract is signed there remains an option to renegotiate it if the research project demands rethinking (Anderson, Boud, and Sampson, 25). Even though the contract represents the student’s and the mentor’s forethought and should be taken seriously, UR projects often involve dead ends and reformulations; thus, one is advised not to be beholden to the contract in itself. 

The central section of the contract includes places for learning objectives, specific learning outcomes, and assessment criteria. This part of the contract serves the important function of providing a guideline for the student as she works through the semester. Devising and articulating these elements requires thought and time and may require more than one meeting with the student; however, having these clearly articulated makes the research process move more smoothly. One way of organizing this information is to name the general objective and to identify a specific learning outcome or set of outcomes related to the objective, as well as describing how the outcome will be assessed and appropriate due dates (see below). In addition to outlining specific products for assessment, it can be helpful to explain to your student what type of work she needs in order to earn particular letter grades. For example, I typically inform students that satisfactory completion of the assignments for assessment are equivalent to a “B,” while work that pushes beyond these expectations will result in a higher grade.

Whether or not you organize the material in the manner described in this article, for a learning contract to be most effective it is important to think through objectives, outcomes, and assessment with your student. Allowing your student to participate in the process of articulating the undergraduate research (UR) learning goals and outcomes creates a sense of ownership in the student that increases the likelihood of the student completing these goals (Anderson, Boud, and Sampson, 10; Boak, 30). In addition, leading a student through the process of articulating objectives and learning goals models for and teaches the student how to conceive of a research project, or at least a portion of a research project. This is a helpful set of skills for students who are going to continue doing UR or who are considering graduate school. These skills are also transferable to a variety of professional contexts, since breaking down the outcomes necessary for completing a research project involves the same critical thinking and problem solving skills necessary for a wide range of projects. Each student, however, is different, and some students may need more guidance than others in articulating learning goals.

Some scholarship on learning contracts uses the language of “negotiating” to describe the process of developing the learning contract, as though this contract is a business or legal contract (e.g., Boak, 67 ff; Stephenson and Laycock, 29 ff). This language alludes to the fact that this process involves give and take between the student and the mentor, although the mentor clearly should have the final say on the goals, outcomes, and assessment by virtue of the mentor’s experience. George Boak reminds mentors that during this process they should aim at creating a contract that is “realistic, precise and clear, owned by the learner,” and appropriate to the UR program for which the contract is being designed (Boak, 68). Putting together a realistic learning contract requires listening closely to your student during the negotiation process. Ideally within this conversation or set of conversations you are able to assess your student’s knowledge of the subject, familiarity with research protocols, and overall commitment. All of these are important to know as you articulate the expectations for the project.

As I have indicated in describing the structure I use for learning contracts at my institution, there are times during the research process when the contract may need to be renegotiated. UR is not always a linear process and is often shaped by discoveries or setbacks in research. Renegotiations to the contract should be done together and written down as amendments to the contract. Some scholars suggest the possibility of developing a “progressive” or “serial” learning contract, which involves developing a sequence of contracts over time that support one or more overarching learning objectives or goals (Anderson, Boud, and Sampson, 120). 

When the research project or timeframe comes to an end, it can be beneficial for mentor and student to look over the contract together. Students are often surprised when they see “in black and white” what they have accomplished over the semester. If your student has not completed aspects of the contract, this can serve as an opportunity to discuss how these will impact the student’s evaluation or grade. More importantly, reviewing and discussing the contract together can provide another opportunity for thinking about the different ways of tackling a research project. You might ask your students to think about how the process, including the specific learning outcomes, shaped the research project, or even how different learning outcomes or assessment tools might have helped or hindered the process. In other words, completion of the contract allows for further reflection on the ins and outs of doing research. If you are working with a student over multiple semesters, these types of conversations are invaluable. 

A UR experience has the potential of being a life-changing learning experience for a student, as well as being a productive and enjoyable experience for a UR mentor. Learning contracts can facilitate this experience by empowering the student while allowing the mentor to have a hand in guiding the research experience.