Courtesy of Amelia Racicot ’27
As a first-generation college student, my educational experience was transformed by an invitation by a faculty member to become involved in her research project. The work was fascinating and empowering, giving me both the direction and confidence to conduct a senior thesis, pursue graduate study and eventually mentor undergraduate researchers of my own. Since then, I have continually witnessed the powerful role of research in undergraduate education.
The current national conversation around the loss of research funding has focused on the fallout for large research universities, and with good reason. These institutions drive major scientific breakthroughs and contribute significantly to our economy, public health and national competitiveness. Yet the cascading impact of funding withdrawals on smaller, teaching-focused colleges like mine should not be forgotten.
Liberal arts colleges and other primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs) may not have the expansive research infrastructure of large graduate programs, but they offer something equally valuable: early and direct access to faculty-led research. Undergraduate research opportunities are examples of immersive, integrated experiential learning at its best. For first-generation students and those from historically underrepresented backgrounds, an undergraduate research opportunity can provide an unexpected glimpse into a future that was previously unknown, such as graduate school or a research career.
At PUIs, faculty members are teacher-scholars. While the majority earn their graduate degrees at large, research-focused universities, they chose a career at a PUI because they value teaching, mentoring and integrating their research with undergraduate education. Their research informs their teaching, and their teaching sparks student questions that lead to new research pursuits. It is an ecosystem of learning and discovery that benefits society at large.
While the research grants that PUIs receive are modest compared to those that flow to R-1 institutions, the impact can be significant. A $50,000 grant can support multiple students, seed a new line of inquiry and even launch a student’s future. At Connecticut College, a $250,000 National Science Foundation grant that funded a scanning electron microscope greatly improved undergraduate research opportunities and the curricula in botany, chemistry, environmental science and anthropology.
Another NSF grant enabled students to present their research at national conferences alongside graduate students from larger universities. Experiences like these do more than polish résumés; they open doors, expand networks, build confidence and contribute positively to educational outcomes.
Small colleges (those with less than $1 million in total research and development expenditures) collectively receive just 0.1 to 0.2 percent of total U.S. federal and private R&D funding; yet several PUIs consistently rank among the top 10 in per-capita production of science and engineering doctorates. Research also shows that students who engage in faculty-mentored research are more likely to stay in college, graduate on time and pursue advanced degrees.
When Jonathan Wai and Stephen Hsu collaborated on research exploring the undergraduate origins of all Nobel Prize winners from 1901 to 2015, they found that two small U.S. liberal arts colleges ranked among the top 10 global producers of laureates per capita. The seeds of discovery are often germinated in smaller plots of possibility, starting with a question asked in a classroom, a moment of encouragement from a professor or a first look through a microscope.
It’s their smaller scale and quieter advocacy, rather than the impact of their work, that keeps PUIs out of conversations around shifting federal research priorities. That needs to change. Federal support for undergraduate research is not charity. It is an investment in future discovery and the next generation of scholars, scientists, teachers and public servants. If we are serious about investing in innovation, equity and the nation’s future talent pipeline, we cannot afford to overlook the places where many researchers are made. For the thousands of students who thrive at small colleges, for the faculty who ignite their potential and passion for inquiry, and for the future of research and innovation in this country, we must keep those doors of possibility open.
