The Biology Department at the University of Mary Washington recently revised our curriculum to focus on the research process. In addition to other requirements, Biology majors are now required to complete a two course sequence designed to improve their understanding of how scientific knowledge is acquired. First they take BIOL260, The Research Process, in which they are introduced to scientific method and the statistical analysis of data. Then they enroll in one of several upper level courses designated as research intensive. These courses require that small groups of students carry out a short research project and present their results in a research forum. I redesigned my molecular biology course to meet the new requirement and taught the course in the fall of 2014 and 2015. My course was designed around the use of yeast as a model organism. The lecture material was taken entirely from review articles and primary literature. In the laboratory portion of the course, student groups chose one gene from the lecture topics as the focus of their research project. Early on, students learned molecular techniques that they used later in the semester to characterize the mutant phenotype of their gene and to show normal gene expression under cellular conditions of their choice. Students had to research their gene of interest, write a proposal, design their own set of experiments, carry out the experiments and present their results to the rest of the class. In general, the course design was successful. Student comments from the first offering suggested that they enjoyed the topics and felt real ownership of their research projects. They did, however, struggle with designing and carrying out their projects. It was clear that our students were not well prepared for research and their comments confirmed the need for this type of course in our curriculum. In the second offering of the course, I administered the CURE pre-course and post-course surveys and received a more formal evaluation of the course. These results show that while students made significant gains in several areas of their appreciation for research, there is still room for improvement. In addition to evaluating my own course, my department has begun an evaluation of our two course sequence. We administered the CURE pre-course survey during the first two weeks of BIOL260 in fall 2015 and spring 2016. At the end of this semester, we will collect matched post-course surveys from students that enrolled in a research intensive course this spring. We will continue to collect these data over the next few semesters. Preliminary data from the first students that complete the survey in the two course sequence will be presented.