Well everyone does well when mentored. People should be taught of how to do things well then left alone.

Like when you want your children to learn swimming, one does it by himself and the other get a trainer to train him, I think 90% of a success story will be for the one who was trained.

Doing research is like dumping someone in a swimming pool

Fabrizio, in my opinion, doing research during undergraduate studies without a mentor is really a challenging task. Even more if you try to publish your results in a refereed journal.You need to know how scientific system works and this is not a minor question. Writing a paper is a very difficult task for an unexperienced guy.

The only exception could be that you already were involved into a complete scientific project before. Then you could have experience enough for doing it by your own means.

I have experience mentoring students doing real research during the very begin of their academic undergraduate studies and it is very interesting but I think that making this alone without a mentor, is quite a challenge.

Thank you for your answer.

Yes, the big problem with undergraduate research is when the undergrad in question happens to have almost no experience with publications.

Would it be a good thing, then, to work with research topics for which they can find mentors, even if that is not what they intended to study, if only to learn how it's done for when they want to do something on their own?

Yes, I think this is the best way for going on.

Nevertheless, being an independent researcher is not a minor problem, too.

There is a possibility for being involved into a special topic that you do not have people working on it at your university. Nowadays, a lot of research is performed by groups, including people from different universities or research institutes. The collaborative approach is the way you could be involved into the state of the art in science and technology.

I am beginning to see non-mentored undergraduate (and even postgraduate) research as not only a challenge but a serious risk for bad learning. The process of research is a lot more than reading a few papers, setting up some bench-top experiments and putting your results on a report. The whole exercise of being a scientist, a researcher and an academic needs to be practiced and learned from others. You can't read on how to be a scientist: you have to see one in action to learn what to do (and what not to do, that too).

In my experience, it is very rare to find an undergrad with research interests so clear and so narrow that they can't adapt to the expertise of the supervisors available. It is also easier for experienced researchers to expand their own research interests to accommodate the excitement of an inexperienced undergrad.

In my opinion, undergrads need to be closely mentored throughout the scientific process, but the supervision of the research specificities can be shared by a distant mentor/s. It can be very useful to have an external supervisor who oversees some part of the research that might be further from the on-site's supervisor expertise.

I see. Well, the main problem is when the available mentors don't really care that much about the subject the student would like to research.

Of course, you seem to be implying that the scientific method is a guild rather than a discipline, which I don't exactly agree with, but I understand where you come from. Unassisted undegraduates might lack the necessary scientific maturity that is required for making fruitful scientific advances on their own.

mmm... not sure I explained myself clearly. What I was trying to say is more that the scientific method is a discipline per se that students need to learn, on top of the particular field they are researching on, and that senior researchers should be able to mentor students through that process even if their research interests are not so overlapping.

As you mention, it is a problem when students want to do research in something that the mentors are not really interested in, but then the student that has his/ her research interests so clear and doesn't want to accommodate to the expertise of the supervisors around should have looked for an institution where an expert in his/ her field of interest can mentor them.

It's always a compromise, but it shouldn't be impossible to find some common ground where mentor and student have a high level of enthusiasm taking into account the research topic and the personal experiences that accompany such kind of student-mentor interaction.

I hope I make more sense this time.

As stated previously, without a mentor undergraduate research is a highly challenging task. However, if the student is willing to put the work in, it is certainly possible. My advice is extended preliminary study with non-stop review of related publications. Get on ResearchGate and post as many questions as you can to help further your understanding on the topic; introduce yourself to PIs of neighboring universities in your field of study even. Without a mentor you have to collect, analyze, and understand the topic of your study without assistance and that means you have to go out and find it or read it yourself.

Even at the point of understanding the topic, the researcher needs the supplies and environment to conduct the study. This has everything to do with the undergraduates institution and available resources so contact with the faculty and administration are a must.

This was a very interesting topic - thank you for posting.

The undergrads do well on their task if mentored carefully. I have experienced my students getting engaged in research work very early in their medical school and they published well. I trust the undergrads should be encouraged and involved in active research. This will definitely help developing a 'Research Culture' in medical schools.

I agree to the point that senior professors are usually not available for mentoring the youngsters. But relatively younger professors who have recently completed their research work can better play their part in guiding the students to put them on the track! Without a mentor there are chances the novice researchers may be lost on the way.

Well everyone does well when mentored. People should be taught of how to do things well then left alone.

Like when you want your children to learn swimming, one does it by himself and the other get a trainer to train him, I think 90% of a success story will be for the one who was trained.

Doing research is like dumping someone in a swimming pool

Dear Fabricio Kolberg, In my opinion, a bit mentoring will encourage undergraduates in scientific research, will expose them for different fields and laboratory research, will encourage them for interacting with PG students and will expose them of scientific questions outside the classroom.

my case.

If I was in such a situation, I repeated it " I shall either find a way or make it". If there is not a research program, prove her/his ability and interests to a supervisor and convinces the supervisor for accepting her/him as a member of her/his group just like many powerful scientific groups consist of graduate and under graduate students. Even if it is not possible, she/he can find such supervisor in another university; however, this needs a time management.

Best Regards Fabricio Kolberg