Skip to main content

You are here

An Introduction to the Squirrel-Net Teaching Modules

Luanna Prevost, Course Editor


Although course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are gaining popularity in biology, most are designed for benchwork-based laboratory courses while few focus on field-based skills. Many barriers to implementing field CUREs exist, including the difficulty in designing authentic research that can be accomplished in a limited lab timeframe, permitting and liability issues, and problems gathering sufficient data to meaningfully analyze. Squirrel-Net ( is a consortium of mammalogists from eight different institutions who have worked to overcome these limitations through four field-based CUREs focused on sciurid rodents (e.g., squirrels, chipmunks, marmots, prairie dogs). Each module is linked to a national dataset, allowing for broader and more complex hypotheses and analyses than would be possible from a single institution. Modules have been field tested at different institutions and are easily implemented and highly flexible for different courses, levels of inquiry, habitats, and focal species. Beyond the basic lesson plan, each module also provides suggestions for adaptation at different levels of inquiry and scaffolding across a course or an entire curriculum. Moreover, our website provides templates to help lower barriers to CURE implementation (e.g., selecting a field site and writing institutional animal care protocols). Here, we introduce Squirrel-Net and give an overview of the four CURE modules. Additionally, we demonstrate how the modules can be used singly or together to provide authentic research experiences to a diversity of undergraduates.

Primary image: Students engaging in observations of squirrel behaviors in a natural area near Grand Junction, CO.

Squirrel-Net Teaching Modules:


Dizney L, Connors PK, Varner J, Duggan JM, Lanier HC, Erb LP, Flahertry EA, Yahnke CJ, Hanson JD. 2020. An introduction to the Squirrel-Net teaching modules. CourseSource.

Article Context

Course Level: 
Upper Level
Life Sciences Major
Non-Life Science Major
Non-Traditional Student
2-year College
4-year College
Class Size: 
Bloom's Cognitive Level: 
Application & Analysis
Key Scientific Process Skills: 
Asking a question
Formulating hypotheses
Designing/conducting experiments
Predicting outcomes
Gathering data/making observations
Analyzing data
Interpreting results/data
Displaying/modeling results/data
Communicating results
Pedagogical Approaches: 
Collaborative Work
Reflective Writing
Pre/Post Question
Key Terms: 
Scientific Process
Class Type: 
Lesson Length: 
One class period
Multiple class periods
One term (semester or quarter)
Principles of How People Learn: 
Motivates student to learn material
Develops supportive community of learners
Vision and Change Core Concepts: 
Vision and Change Core Competencies: 
Ability to apply the process of science
Ability to use quantitative reasoning
Ability to tap into the interdisciplinary nature of science
Ability to communicate and collaborate with other disciplines


Hands-on research experiences are crucial opportunities for students to learn about the nature of inquiry, gain confidence in solving problems, and gain self-identify as scientists (1-4). However, most traditional undergraduate research opportunities only benefit a small number of well-prepared students. In contrast, course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) introduce many more students to authentic research experiences. They can therefore increase inclusivity for students who are financially or time-limited (5) and provide equitable access to research experiences early in a college career (6).

Although many excellent CUREs have been developed for laboratory courses in cellular and molecular biology (see CUREnet for examples; 7), CUREs that engage students in field sciences such as ecology are rare (8-10). Nevertheless, they are critically important for several reasons. First, they help prepare students for the workforce by teaching them hard skills used in wildlife and conservation fields. Secondly, they train students in soft skills that employers highly value, such as problem-solving, teamwork, and written communication (11). Third, they allow students to work on authentic data with unknown results, which improves data literacy (12,13). Lastly, they expose students to ecological and environmental threats, as well as how scientists approach investigating and managing these issues.

In spite of these many benefits of field-based CUREs, instructors can be reluctant to develop them. They can be time consuming to establish and maintain, and do not always fit within the time available for a lab section. Working with vertebrates poses additional challenges because of difficulty obtaining Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) approvals and/or institutional support for liability issues (14). Furthermore, adequate amounts of ecological data can be time-consuming to collect, resulting in insufficient data to analyze for many classes that attempt to incorporate field studies (15).

Squirrel-Net (, is a group of mammalogists from eight institutions across the U.S. who wanted to integrate meaningful, field-based CUREs into undergraduate biology education. We have designed a series of inquiry-based lessons that engage students in authentic research by examining the ecology of squirrels, a widely distributed, highly visible, and charismatic group of mammals (16,17; Figure 1). These modules are designed to broaden the availability of field-based CUREs and minimize challenges that often hamper their implementation. First, participating students use the same protocols to collect data, which they submit to a multi-institutional database, alleviating the pressure to collect sufficient data in a single course or at a single institution. By combining data across geographic regions, students can evaluate more variables and therefore test a wider range of hypotheses than would be possible in a single class period.  This in turn leads to more creativity and control over a project, with the potential to increase student learning gains in scientific communication, persistence in science, self-confidence and self-efficacy (4). The combined datasets also provide ready-to-analyze data for times when individual classes are unable to collect their own data (e.g., due to inclement weather or lack of animal activity), permit inclusion for students with physical disabilities, and can form the basis for activities that focus on data analysis and management. In addition, Squirrel-Net provides templates for institutional approvals (e.g., IACUC, Animal Use Protocols). Furthermore, we have tested each module at different institutions in different semesters and have found they are easily integrated into a wide range of undergraduate courses and can be combined with other Squirrel-Net modules across a curriculum to provide an integrated set of research activities. We offer suggestions on how each module can be used independently or networked with other modules throughout an entire curriculum.

Figure 1. Why study squirrels?

Figure 1. Why study squirrels?

Not only do our modules lower barriers for using field-based CUREs, they also encourage student engagement. Studying animals is intrinsically interesting and compelling for many students. Specifically, observing live animals can foster strong personal connections with science and nature in students from urban settings, who may be less familiar with wildlife (21). Behavioral ecology studies therefore provide unique opportunities to engage students in the scientific process, from generating and testing hypotheses to strengthening quantitative skills and drawing conclusions from data (22). Furthermore, a sense of belonging to a community is a strong predictor of persistence in science, and this may be particularly important for underrepresented groups (23). Our modules provide this sense of community through increasing collaboration with peers, working more closely with teaching assistants and professors, and providing opportunities to be part of a larger scientific network (24).

Below, we briefly summarize each of the four CURE modules and suggest ways that they can be adapted to different levels of inquiry to be used singly or together in a curriculum.


Squirreling Around for Science: Observing Sciurid Rodents to Investigate Animal Behavior

The first module in our series engages students in behavioral observations (Figure 2A) to examine how trade-offs influence the time spent in different behaviors (25). In this CURE, students work in pairs to observe a focal squirrel for 5 minutes each, recording its behavior at 20 second intervals. These data are then tallied to determine what proportion of time squirrels spend in various behavior states (e.g., vigilance or foraging). Additional data such as habitat type, weather, and proximity to humans are also collected, allowing students to test hypotheses about how extrinsic factors influence behavior or questions such as how sociality or urbanization affect squirrel foraging decisions. One advantage of this module is that it requires no specialized equipment (although binoculars or video-recording mobile devices may be helpful). Finally, as student observers are not influencing squirrel behavior, most institutional IACUCs do not consider the module as requiring any assurance or approval.

Figure 2. Students enjoy participating in Squirrel-Net research.

Figure 2. Students enjoy participating in Squirrel-Net research. Students from Colorado Mesa University and California State University Monterey Bay participate in (A) Squirreling Around for Science (25), (B) Sorry to Eat and Run (26), (C) How Many Squirrels Are in the Shrubs (30), and (D) Squirrels in Space (31).

Sorry to Eat and Run: A Lesson Plan for Testing Trade-offs in Squirrel Behavior Using Giving Up Densities (GUDs)

This lesson plan assesses squirrel foraging trade-offs by measuring giving up density (GUD), or the amount of food left when an animal abandons a patch (26). The concept of GUD is based on optimal foraging theory and represents the point at which foraging benefits no longer outweigh foraging costs (27). Therefore, a lower GUD indicates either a lower cost of foraging (e.g., a safer patch or food that is easier to handle or digest), a higher benefit (e.g., nutrient-rich food), or both. In this module, students place trays filled with a known quantity of seeds and sand at varying distances from safety (Figure 2B), collect them at the end of the day or night, and then reweigh seeds to determine GUD. Students record data on habitat type, proximity to human structures, seed type, and hours the tray was available to animals (diurnal vs. nocturnal). Results can then be interpreted in simple terms of foraging vs. vigilance or in the context of more complex interpretations (e.g., optimal foraging theory or the “landscape of fear” [28,29]). The equipment needed is inexpensive and readily available (trays, play sand, and a food source), and while the module may require IACUC approval, it requires little specialized instructor expertise to facilitate.

How Many Squirrels Are in the Shrubs: A Lesson for Comparing Methods for Population Estimation

In this more-advanced module students compare the results of three population estimation techniques and evaluate the underlying assumptions of each (30). Population estimates are essential for many conservation and management techniques, and this module reveals to students that these estimates can differ widely based on assumptions and approach. In this module, students estimate the size of a single squirrel population using strip censuses, scat counts (Figure 2C), and camera traps. In strip censuses, students walk transects and record the distance to any detected squirrel. For scat counts, a number of plots within the area are cleared of scat, then new scat is counted on a return visit. Finally, camera traps are used to capture images of the focal species, and students estimate population size from the number of images. A standardized data sheet walks students through the calculations to estimate population size for each technique. Finally, as in the other modules, students also collect additional meta-data including habitat type, proximity to human structures, weather conditions, and other species observed during the surveys. Students can then compare population size estimates from each technique and consider how the assumptions underlying each technique might bias the outcomes. With the accompanying national database, this lab can also be extended to examine how each technique performs under varying environmental conditions (e.g., habitat type), with different species, or under differing community structures (types and numbers of other species). The only specialized equipment needed for this module are camera traps, although laser range finders can also be useful to measure distances.

Squirrels in Space: Using Radio Telemetry to Explore the Space Use and Movement of Sciurid Rodents

This advanced lesson plan using radio telemetry is aimed at upper division students in wildlife and ecology courses. In this module, students use antennae and receivers (Figure 2D) to locate and track radio-collared squirrels in order to better understand how they move in the landscape (31). They also collect data including habitat, proximity of the squirrel to human structures, and weather conditions. These data can be analyzed to answer questions about home range size, avoidance of roads, and interactions with other squirrels or other wildlife. Students can then interpret their findings through the lens of wildlife management and conservation. The lab requires radio telemetry equipment, which Squirrel-Net hopes to have for loan in the near future (for updates, see Instructors must also obtain necessary permits and institutional IACUC approvals to trap, handle, and collar squirrels, making this module the most advanced in terms of both instructor facilitation and student skill development.


Levels of Inquiry

Although there is some discussion as to what constitutes a CURE (24, 32), at their core, they are inquiry-based activities where students "do" science within a course framework (24). Through the use of authentic research experiences, they provide undergraduate students with the structured guidance and practice to develop the scientific maturity and skills they will need for a successful career in science. Several authors have articulated the concept of levels of inquiry, where inquiry-based activities can be seen as a continuum moving from highly instructor-led to increasingly more student-led (e.g., 33-35). Our lesson plans are presented at levels of inquiry that are on the instructor-led end of the continuum (Table 1). However, the standardized collection of data and the use of national databases allow considerable flexibility for each deeper level of inquiry, and suggestions for added complexity are given within each module (25, 26, 30, 31) and Table 1.

Table 1. Suggestions for varying the level of inquiry within each Squirrel-Net module.

Table 1. Suggestions for varying the level of inquiry within each Squirrel-Net module. Squirrel-Net modules are designed to be taught at multiple levels of inquiry, ranging from highly structured (i.e., largely instructor-driven) to free inquiry (largely student driven), with an increasing focus on developing data literacy skills (38).

Table 1. Suggestions for varying the level of inquiry within each Squirrel-Net module.

Table 1. Suggestions for varying the level of inquiry within each Squirrel-Net module. Squirrel-Net modules are designed to be taught at multiple levels of inquiry, ranging from highly structured (i.e., largely instructor-driven) to free inquiry (largely student driven), with an increasing focus on developing data literacy skills (38).


The simplest form of each module (i.e., a single, 2-hour lab activity) is presented in each lesson plan (25, 26, 30, 31). However, one of the strengths of our modules is their adaptability; there are multiple ways to scaffold one or multiple modules into a single course or across the curriculum (Figure 3). Alternatively, a single module could be implemented at multiple levels within a single course or across several courses. For example, the Squirreling Around for Science module (25) could be used several times in an introductory ecology course, building complexity by sequentially considering more explanatory variables, exploring the literature to develop hypotheses, and using the national database to augment data and/or practice data "cleaning". Similarly, a single module could also be used at various levels of inquiry across several courses, allowing students to revisit the same research project several times throughout their coursework at increasing levels of complexity (Figure 3). Whether scaffolding within or across courses, focusing on one module or one taxonomic group (i.e., squirrels) can provide cohesion by reexamining a common theme while moving toward more independent thinking.

Figure 3. Example of module scaffolding in the undergraduate biology curriculum at California State University, Monterey Bay (CSUMB) and Colorado Mesa University (CMU).

Figure 3. Example of module scaffolding in the undergraduate biology curriculum at California State University, Monterey Bay (CSUMB) and Colorado Mesa University (CMU). Yellow arrows indicate modules which are scaffolded into courses of different sizes (orange boxes); intensity of color increases with levels based on the BioCore Guide (39). In both institutions, students participate in the Behavioral Observation module in an introductory course required by their major. In cases where students repeat the Behavioral Observation module in advanced-level electives, the content and analysis are adapted to higher levels of inquiry (Table 1).


Through these innovative modules, Squirrel-Net seeks to lower barriers and increase accessibility to authentic field-based research. The modules are well-suited to this goal because they are easy to implement, often require minimal equipment investment, and have been field-tested with positive outcomes for students and instructors at multiple institutions. Additionally, we provide materials for instructors to work with local, charismatic mammals that are ubiquitous in the United States, including urban areas. Using squirrels as a model system, students can collect data either directly on or near most campuses, reducing barriers for students to access focal species. Finally, our approach is unique because each module connects to a national database, allowing for broader and more complex hypotheses and analyses than data collected from a single institution. The interactions among classes running the same module form the basis for a research network, which helps students develop a sense of belonging to a scientific community and accountability to peers to collect quality data. Each module is highly flexible and can be used at any level of inquiry or adapted to organisms other than squirrels. Lastly, a single module or multiple modules can be scaffolded within a course or more extensively throughout a curriculum, facilitating the intellectual growth of students to become independent and critical thinkers. We believe that this innovative approach to networked, field-ecology focused CUREs permits broad instructor adoption (37) across a wide variety of course levels and institutional types, providing positive student outcomes similar to traditional undergraduate research.


This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under a collaborative grant (Nos. 2013483, 2013281, 2013308, and 2013320). We would also like to acknowledge all of the students who provided helpful feedback on these modules as we developed and piloted them in our courses.


  1. Seymour E, Hunter A-B, Laursen SL, DeAntoni T. 2004. Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Sci Educ 88(4):493-534. doi:10.1002/sce.10131
  2. Hunter A-B, Laursen SL, Seymour E. 2007. Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students' cognitive, personal, and professional development. Sci Educ 91(1):36-74. doi:10.1002/sce.20173
  3. Thiry H, Weston TJ, Laursen SL, Hunter H-B. 2012. The benefits of multi-year research experiences: differences in novice and experienced students' reported gains from undergraduate research. CBE Life Sci Educ 11: 260-272. doi:10.1187/cbe.11-11-0098
  4. Indorf JL, Weremijewicz J, Janos DP, Gaines MS. 2019. Adding authenticity to inquiry in a first-year, research-based, biology laboratory course. CBE Life Sci Educ 18(3):ar38:1-15. doi:10.1187/cbe.18-07-0126
  5. Kim YK, Sax LJ. 2009. Student-faculty interaction in research universities: differences by student gender, race, social class, and first-generation status. Res High Educ J 50(5):437-459. doi:10.1007/s11162-009-9127-x
  6. Bangera G, Brownell SE. 2014. Course-based undergraduate research experiences can make scientific research more inclusive. CBE Life Sci Educ 13:602-606. doi:10.1187/cbe.14-06-0099
  7. Curenet. 2019. URL Accessed 11/11/2019.
  8. Orion N, Hofstein A. 1994. Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment. J Res Sci Teach 31:1097-1119. doi:10.1002/tea.3660311005
  9. Bowen MG, Roth MW. 2007. The practice of field ecology: insights for science education. Res Sci Educ 37:171-187. doi:10.1007/s11165-006-9021-x
  10. Oufiero CE. 2019. The organismal form and function lab-course: A new CURE for a lack of authentic research experiences in organismal biology. Integrative Organismal Biology 1(1):1-14. doi:10.1093/iob/obz021
  11. National Association of Colleges and Employers. 2017. Job Outlook 2018. URL Accessed 11/15/2019.
  12. Gould R, Sunbury S, Dussault M. 2014. In praise of messy data. Sci Teach 81(8): 31-36. doi:10.2505/4/tst14_081_08_31
  13. Kastens K, Kumhansl R, Baker I. 2015. Thinking big: Transitioning your students from working with small, student-collected data sets toward "big data." Sci Teach 82(5):25-31.
  14. Flaherty EA, Varner J, Duggan JM, Connors PK, Dizney L, Squirrel-Net. 2019. A CURE for the common course: Course-based undergraduate research experiences could benefit wildlife undergraduates. The Wildlife Professional 13:32-35.
  15. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Integrating discovery-based research into the undergraduate curriculum: Report of a convocation. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  16. Eder T. 2009. Squirrels of North America. Auburn, WA: Lone Pine Publishing.
  17. Peplinski J, Brown JS. 2020. Distribution and diversity of squirrels on university and college campuses of the United States and Canada. J Mammal.
  18. Frederiksen, JK, Slobodchikoff CN. 2007. Referential specificity in the alarm calls of the black-tailed prairie dog. Ethol Ecol Evol 19:87-99. doi:10.1080/08927014.2007.9522569
  19. Clucas B, Owings DH, Rowe MP. 2008. Donning your enemy's cloak: ground squirrels exploit rattlesnake scent to reduce predation risk. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 275:847-852. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.1421
  20. Yaskin VA. 2011. Seasonal changes in hippocampus size and spatial behavior in mammals and birds. Biology Bulletin Reviews 1:279-288. doi:10.1134/S2079086411030108
  21. Myers OE, Saunders CD, Bexell SM. 2009. Fostering empathy with wildlife: Factors affecting free-choice learning for conservation concern and behavior, p. 39-56. In Falk JH, Heimlich JE, Foutz S (eds.), Free-Choice Learning and the Environment. Altamira Press, Lanham, MD.
  22. Grove P. 2011. Why should our students study animal behavior? Am Biol Teach 73:206. doi:10.1525/abt.2011.73.4.3
  23. Rainey K, Dancy M, Mickelsen R, Stearns E, Moller S. 2018. Race and gender differences in how sense of belonging influences decisions to major in STEM. Int J STEM Educ. 5(1):1-14. doi:10.1186/s40594-018-0115-6
  24. Auchincloss LC, Laursen SL, Branchaw JL, Eagan K, Graham M, Hanauer DI, Lawrie G, McLinn CM, Pelaez N, Rowland S, Towns M, Trautmann NM, Varma-Nelson P, Weston TJ, Dolan EL. 2014. Assessment of course-based undergraduate research experiences: a meeting report. CBE Life Sci Educ 13: 29-40. doi:10.1187/cbe.14-01-0004
  25. Connors PK, Varner J, Erb LP, Dizney L, Lanier HC, Hanson JD, Yahnke CJ, Duggan JM, Flaherty EA. 2020. Squirreling around for science: Observing sciurid rodents to investigate animal behavior. CourseSource.
  26. Yahnke CJ, Dizney L, Varner J, Duggan JM, Erb LP, Lanier HC, Flaherty EA, Connors PK, Hanson JD. 2020. Sorry to eat and run: A lesson plan for testing trade-off in squirrel behavior using Giving Up Densities (GUDs). CourseSource.
  27. Brown, JS. 1988. Patch use as an indicator of habitat use, predation risk, and competition. Behav Ecol Socio 2: 37-47. doi:10.1007/bf00395696
  28. Brown JS, Laundré JW, Gurung M. 1999. The ecology of fear: optimal foraging, game theory, and trophic interactions. J Mammal 80:385-399. doi:10.2307/1383287
  29. van der Merwe M, Brown JS. 2008. Mapping the landscape of fear of the Cape ground squirrel (Xerus inauris). J Mammal 89(5): 1162-1169. doi:10.1644/08-MAMM-A-035.1
  30. Varner J, Lanier HC, Duggan JM, Dizney L, Flaherty EA, Connors PK, Erb LP, Yahnke CJ, Hanson JD. 2020. How many squirrels are in the shrubs? A lesson plan for comparing methods for population estimation. CourseSource.
  31. Duggan JM, Varner J, Lanier HC, Flaherty EA, Dizney L, Yahnke CJ, Connors PK, Erb LP, Hanson JD. 2020. Squirrels in space: Using radio telemetry to explore the space use and movement of sciurid rodents. CourseSource.
  32. Dolan EL. 2016. Course-based undergraduate research experiences: Current knowledge and future directions. National Research Council Commissioned Paper, Washington, DC, USA.
  33. Schwab JJ. 1958. The teaching of science as inquiry. Bull At Sci 14(9):374-379.
  34. Herron MD. 1971. The nature of scientific inquiry. School Review 79:171-212.
  35. Bell RL, Smetana L, Binns I. 2005. Simplifying inquiry instruction: Assessing the inquiry level of classroom activities. The Science Teacher 72:30-33.
  36. Mackenzie T. 2016. Dive into inquiry: amplify learning and empower student voice. Del Mar, CA:ElevateBooksEdu.
  37. Lopatto D, Hauser C, Jones CJ, Paetkau D, Chandrasekaran V, Dunbar D, MacKinnon C, Stamm J, Alvarez C, Barnard D. 2014. A central support system can facilitate implementation and sustainability of a classroom-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) in genomics. CBE Life Sci Educ 13:711-723. doi:10.1187/cbe.13-10-0200
  38. Kjelvik MK, Schultheis EH. 2019. Getting messy with authentic data: Exploring the potential of using data from scientific research to support student data literacy. CBE Life Sci Educ 18:es2:1-8. doi:10.1187/cbe.18-02-0023
  39. Brownell SE, Freeman S, Wenderoth MP, Crowe AJ. 2014. BioCore guide: A tool for interpreting the core concepts of vision and change for biology majors. CBE Life Sci Educ 13: 200-211. doi:10.1187/cbe.13-12-0233

Supporting Materials

Please create a CourseSource account to download the supporting materials for this article!


About the Authors

*Correspondence to:  5000 N Willamette Blvd, Portland, OR 97203. Email:

Competing Interests

PKC, JMD, and JV were supported by the 2019 CourseSource Writing Studio. PKC and JV have been supported by the Colorado Mesa University Faculty Professional Development Fund. Support for EAF was provided by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch Project 1019737. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under a collaborative grant (Nos. 2013483, 2013281, 2013308, and 2013320). None of the authors has a financial, personal, or professional conflict of interest related to this work.

Create a CourseSource account to add your comments!


Download Article

Please create a CourseSource account to download the full PDF of this article!