LESSONS FROM THE KECK GEOLOGY CONSORTIUM: BENEFITS AND COSTS OF LARGE COLLABORATIONS

The Keck Geology Consortium has sixteen years experience in running collaborative, undergraduate research projects, creating a thriving community that sustains a strong program. This success, however, comes with a price tag. The purpose of this abstract is to present a cost-benefit analysis of our program from the student, faculty, and program perspectives.

Students benefit from the program in four ways: (1) access to more flexible student research opportunities, (2) intellectual ownership of the problem, (3) exposure to group problem solving, and (4) cross institutional interaction with students and faculty. Benefits to project faculty are professional development. Collaborative projects increase opportunities to work with colleagues, learn new teaching techniques, and develop research funding. Faculty also benefit from support offered by the Consortium administration (e.g., organized student placement process, central clearinghouse for distribution of information). From a larger perspective, the program is enriched by increased diversity of participants and project topics, and expanded scope for funding.

Costs of the program parallel the benefits. For students and faculty, the group experience brings loss of independence and the need to balance personal goals with the needs of a diverse group of participants. For faculty directing projects, the physics of scale applies: large projects take more time to plan, faculty spend more time dealing with logistical matters, personnel management becomes more complex, and overall project management takes more time. Finally, a large program requires a relatively inflexible and formal administrative structure (e.g. codified policies and procedures, safety and health issues addressed in context of liability as well as participant well being). The administrator becomes distant from the educational processes. Administrative expenses rise, and the question of who pays becomes an issue.

Continuing enthusiasm of Consortium students and faculty indicates that the benefits of the Consortium program far outweigh the costs. Lessons to be learned from the Consortium include the need to (1) identify and weigh realistically the costs and benefits before detailed program design begins and (2) design the program so that benefits exceed costs for all partners.