Student Development and Learning - Ashleigh Lewellen - Home
Student Affairs in Higher EducationComprehensive ExaminationAshleigh LewellenMissouri State UniversityContents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u History, Philosophy, and Values1Student Development and Learning PAGEREF _Toc409698296 \h 9Leadership, Administrations, and Governance PAGEREF _Toc409698297 \h 17Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Applicant PAGEREF _Toc409698298 \h 26History, Philosophy, and ValuesAs the Student Affairs profession has evolved, the philosophical framework has become more complex and varied throughout time. However, shared values and core principals have kept the “student” as the primary focus of the field. Throughout history, numerous models and approaches have evolved focusing on student services, student development, and student learning. Throughout this paper, I describe each model and highlight distinctive characteristics of each. I identify key factors that shape each model and how they may compliment institutional types. By highlighting significant publications and resources, I will address the core values and guiding principles of each model. Lastly, I conclude with an opinion on how understanding these models of student affairs contributes to the ACPA/NASPA competencies of History, Philosophy and Values. Student ServicesDerived from European universities, the cultures in early American institutions of higher education were much different than they are today. Administrators at Harvard founded in 1636, worked from a philosophy of en loco parentis meaning “in place of a parent” (Pascarella, & Terenzini, 1991). The concept of en loco parentis provides the foundation and evolvement of “student services” today because it defines the need for support systems within in higher education not related to academic pedagogy. Due to significant changes in access to higher education, student services have evolved into a more modern concept. Enrollment between the World War I and World War II grew from 250,000 to 1.3 million students (Thelin, 2004). During this influx, institutions sought to hire support staff that addressed issues and concerns that the faculty could not supply alone. The Student Personnel Point of View (American Council on Education, 1937) provides the best understanding of the student services approach. Examples of services created include: admission selection, diagnostic services, physical and mental health services, providing and supervising adequate housing, and administering discipline. One strength of student services is that it supports the structure of meeting student needs outside the classroom. Today there is a variety of institutions working with a student services philosophy. A local example of successful student services in higher education can be seen at Ozarks Technical Community College. Community colleges or vocational schools use student services to meet the needs of those not following the traditional four-year institutional plan. The student services approach works well at many of these types of institutions because students enroll and are able to receive responsive and efficient services that help them attain degrees in a timely manner and at an affordable cost. While the model of student services does not address the “whole student” in entirety, it does lay the foundation for the other models. Roberts (2102) describes the weakness of student services as catalyst for other models. Student services are limited because they are services and do not address the potential of development and learning. Student services are essential to the field of student affairs work. The student services model supports changes in demands within higher education and provides the basic framework for additional models such as student development and student learning. Student Development The 1960s and 70’s were significant in providing access to higher education. The GI Bill supported soldiers while the Civil Rights Movement supported minorities. “Women, veterans, and students of color from all social class backgrounds were enrolling in college” (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010). The diversity of students began to provide a link between outside lives and the classroom experience. “Students personal, emotional, and identity development needs were effecting their level of learning inside the classroom” (Schuh, Jones, & Harper, 2011, p.388). In 1968, the Council of Student Personnel Associations in Higher Education (COSPA) developed a committee on professional development. This committee provided the framework of shifting from student personnel services to student development. Publications such as Robert Brown’s 1972 “Student Development in Tomorrow’s Higher Education: A Return to the Academy” became a significant document outlining the mission of student affairs (Doyle, 2005 p. 70).The student development model contains many strengths that make it valuable to higher education. The approach “explains and suggests action for working with students, guiding practice in advising, teaching, programming, and facilitating” (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton & Renn, 2010). The approach helps student affairs professionals in the mission of supporting the “whole student.” Many theorists have contributed to student affairs and evolved with student development as the supporting framework. Many of those theories consider the individuality of students, which is more meaningful and intentional than student services alone. Specifically, many four-year traditional institutions such as Missouri State University may operate with a student development model in mind. Institutions of higher education that provide on campus housing, co-curricular activities and student employment opportunities have a foundation to focus on student development within their mission. While the student development model has many strengths, there are also limitations to the approach. Today, practitioners in student affairs come from very diverse areas of academic backgrounds and focus. This makes it difficult to link theoretical approaches to student development in practice. Many criticize the term “student development” stating it is overused and vague in meaning. (Evan et al. 2010, p. 9) Student development is also limited in that does not prescribe how student affairs should collaborate with faculty to enhance the student learning experience. Student LearningIn order to build upon the strengths and weaknesses of the student services and development models, student affairs has a newer theoretical approach known as the student-learning model. This is the emergence of faculty and staff working together to incorporate student learning and student development along with all aspects of learning not just inside verses outside the classroom (Magolda and Quaye , 2011). The student-learning model helps define student affairs practitioners as educators because of their contribution to cognitive and non-cognitive learning environments. This model provides the framework that collaborative efforts and relationships between student affairs professionals and faculty are needed in order to “deepen student learning” (American Association for Higher Education, 1998). Noteworthy publications help guide the vision of the student-learning model. Some include Learning Reconsidered: A Campus-Wide Focus on the Student Experience (Keeling, 2004; Keeling, 2006), and Powerful Partnerships: A Shared Responsibility for Learning (American Association for Higher Education (ASHE), American College Personnel Association (ACPA) & National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA), 1998). The strength of this approach consists in its multi-layered view of learning and the call for partnerships across the institution. With the student learning model, both faculty and student affairs have a responsibility to contribute to the achievement of student learning outcomes. One of the limitations is that implementing this approach requires trust and buy in from all university partners. Often there is a gap of knowledge in what faculty or staff members actually contribute to the institution. In order to work under this model, these barriers must be broken. The student-learning model is significant in higher education. Institutions that are able to collaborate and deliver outcomes are providing accountability within higher education. According to classroom discussions, universities in the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Accreditation system, such as Florida or North Carolina are leading the way for the student learning models. While the model is still evolving, only time, research, and experiences will provide insight into more prevalent strengths and weaknesses. In the meantime, many student affairs divisions will use the student-learning model as a benchmark to fully contribute to the mission of educating students. ConclusionBy understanding the philosophical framework of the student services, student development and student learning models, I am able to display knowledge of the History, Philosophy, and Values competency areas of student affairs. Over time, student affairs have been adaptable and intentional about creating educational environments while keeping students as the main priority. Throughout each model are significant strengths that produce exceptional services and complement the educational experience. Through collaboration with faculty, student affairs practitioners can ensure accountability for student learning and can effectively contribute to the holistic approach of higher education. By understanding the History, Philosophy, and Values of Student Affairs Competencies, I have knowledge of the “foundational philosophies, disciplines, and values on which the profession is built”, “historical context of institutional types and functional areas within higher education and student affairs”, and the ability to “describe the roles of both faculty and student affairs educators in the academy” (ACPA & NASPA, 2010).ReferencesACPA/NASPA (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners. Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPAAmerican Association for Higher Education, American College Personnel Association, & National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. (1998). Powerful partnerships: A shared responsibility for learning. Washington DC: Authors. Retrieved from: Council on Education. (1937). The student personnel point of view. Retrieved from: , J.A. (2004). Where have we come from and where are we going? A review of past student affairs philosophies and an analysis of the current student learning philosophy. In the College of Student Affairs Journal, 24, 66-83. Retrieved from Education Resources Information Center database. Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, practice, and research. (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Keeling, R. P. (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student experience. Washington DC: American College Personnel Association & National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. Keeling, R. P. (2006). Learning reconsidered 2: A practical guide to implementing a campus wide focus on the student experience. Washington DC: American College Personnel Association, Association of College & University Housing Officers-International, Association of College Unions International, National Association for Campus Activities, National Academic Advising Association, National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, & National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association. Magolda, P. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2011). Teaching in the co-curriculum. In J.H. Shuh, S.R.Jones, S.R. Harper, and Associates (Eds.), Student Services: A Handbook for theProfession (5th ed., pp. 385-398). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pascarella, E. T., Terenzini P. T., (1991). How College Affects Students. San Francisco:Jossey Bass Roberts, D. C. (2012). The student personnel point of view as a catalyst for dialogue: 75 years and beyond. Journal of College Student Development. 53, 1, 2-18. Schuh, J. H., Jones, S. R., Harper, S. R., & Associates. (2011). Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-BassThelin, J. R. (2004). A History of American Higher Education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Student Development and LearningThroughout the Student Affairs in Higher Education graduate program at Missouri State University, I was introduced to several sociological, psychological, and management theories of student development. These theories continue to provide a framework for understanding students and the developmental challenges they face throughout their college experience. Throughout this paper, I highlight five theories that cover multiple domains of student development. I provide a brief background to each theory and explain how it is used in my personal professional setting. I provide a strength and weakness for each theory as well as examine opportunities and challenges of implementation. Lastly, I conclude by describing how applying these theories contribute to Personal Foundations and Student Development and Learning Competencies (ACPA & NASPA, 2010). Theory 1- Alexander Astin’s Theory of InvolvementAlexander Astin’s Theory of Involvement is one of the strongest theories supporting student services within higher education. Astin’s (1984) Theory of Involvement provides the framework that students gain more knowledge from experiences that are both academic as well as social. The theory suggests that the quality of involvement is proportional to the quality of learning and development. Astin describes involvement as “the amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience” (Astin, 1984). There are three-core measurement variable that support Astin’s Involvement theory. Those are known as I-inputs, E-environments, and O-outputs. The theory emphasizes that students have the responsibility to invest time and energy into both academics and co-curricular opportunities. However, student affairs professionals are also given the responsibility of creating opportunities and providing an environment where involvement is encouraged and obtainable. As a professional, thi s theory provides the overall framework of my position in student affairs. A specific example of how I use this theory in a professional setting is that I am currently the committee chair for student involvement for the Missouri Park and Recreation Association. I work alongside faculty members in the Department of Kinesiology to develop programs that will enhance the student experience as well and the level of learning and development of those particular students within that major. The strength of this theory is that it emphasizes the need for students to take control of their educational experience and involvement by becoming engaged with their coursework, professors, and peers (Kuh, Schuh, White, and Assoc., 1991). Astin’s Theory of Involvement provides student affairs professionals the opportunity to advocate to students, parents, faculty, and other stakeholders about the responsibility that students have for their learning and development. This theory also supports the work of student affairs professionals to faculty and university administrators. Meanwhile, it challenges educators to provide opportunities and an environment that supports learning and development. Theory 2- Arthur Chickering’s Theory of Identity DevelopmentOriginally intended for faculty members within higher education, Chickering’s (1969) Theory of Identity Development provides a framework for educational programs that enhance student development. Chickering’s theory focuses on seven vectors that students experience throughout their time in college. A key to Chickering’s theory is that vectors can be revisited throughout identity development and are not stages. Chickering’s vectors include: developing competence, managing emotions, moving through autonomy toward interdependence, developing mature relationships, establishing identity, developing purpose, and developing integrity (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010). Along with development vectors, Chickering addresses environmental influences that lead to success of student development. As a professional in student affairs, I use Chickerings’ Theory of Identity Development while producing learning outcomes for programs. A specific example is when a student attends a clinic or training that yields a competence of a specific skill. Chickering’s theory is sufficient in student affairs in that it supports services and programs. A strength of the theory is that it is supported by years of research and is practical to implement. A weakness of the theory is that it is not very inclusive in that it specifically does not address development of women or racial minorities. As student affairs professionals, Chickering’s theory provides us the opportunity to build supportive and intentional programming that enhances student development. Theory 3- David Kolb’s Theory of Experiential LearningKolb’s Theory of Experiential Learning addresses learning styles and learning/development relationships. Along with faculty members, student affairs professional are capable of enhancing a student’s development by understating learning cycles and styles. Kolb’s model for learning consists of four stages: concrete experience (CE), reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptualization (AC), and active experimentation (AE) (Kolb, 1984). From these phases of the cycle, learning styles are produced. These learning styles are converging, diverging, assimilating, and accommodating (Kolb, 1999). His theory explains that when a learning environment complements personal learning style, that students have a better experience. Kolb’s model suggests that the experience itself is the basis for learning. As a professional who supervises students understanding Kolb’s Theory of Experiential Learning is beneficial in creating learning experiences. Specifically, I use this theory when evaluating job duties for each student employee. For example, a new employee reported low satisfaction and received a low performance evaluation after her first semester on the job. After learning Kolb’s’ theory, I was able to understand that the job duties did not provide an experience that was conducive to her learning style. Since that review, I have moved the employee into a position where the job experiences are more appropriate thus leading to higher satisfaction, performance, and learning. The strength of Kolb’s Theory of Experiential Learning is that it provides an understanding of the processes of productive learning styles. A weakness of the theory is that it lacks information about individual developmental factors such as ethnicity or gender in relation to learning styles. A challenge of implementing this theory is that it is individualized and may not be effective in a group setting. However, when implementing this theory, student affairs professionals have the opportunity to explore individual learning styles thus molding the environment for development. Theory 4 - Nancy Schlossberg’s Transition TheoryAnother framework that supports student affairs work is providing a supportive environment for transition throughout college. Transition has been defined as “any event, or non-event, that results in changed relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles” (Evans et al., 2010, p. 215). Schlossberg’s theory attempts to explain the psychosocial adaptations of individuals going through transition. Individuals “move in”, “move through” and “move out” (Schlossberg, 1989) during the process of transition. There are four stages that support migration through transition which include: situation, self, support, and strategies. Currently, I am using Schlossberg’s theory while working with a student employee who has just left the military. Together, we discuss the situation such as amount of control or impact it is making in regards to change. We also discuss support such as relationships, family, and friends. Most importantly, we have been working on self. Together we are focusing on how personal perception affects his outlook of transition. By understating the foundation of transition theory, I am able to help empower students to reflect, identify resources, and seek strategies that help them navigate successfully. One of the most significant strengths of Schlossberg’s Transition Theory is that it helps student affairs professionals identify transition periods and why students may be challenged throughout college. Another significant strength is that it is not limited to students and can be beneficial throughout all adult transition (Goodman, Schlossberg, & Anderson, 2006). While there are multiple strengths, there are also weaknesses in transition theory. The theory itself has not been the focus of many research studies and is instead a culmination of experiences and writings thus making it difficult to prove the theories validity. Theory 5 - Situational LeadershipWhile an understanding of sociological and psychological development theories are crucial for working with students, management theories are often just a useful and may be applied in any workplace. Blanchard (1985) developed the situational approach theory. The premise of the theory is that different situations demand different kinds of leadership CITATION Nor10 \l 1033 (Northouse, 2010). The theory prescribes that in order to be truly effective, that the leader must have the adaptability to change styles in different situations. There are two main leadership dimensions that are valued in the situational approach. One is a directive style that is task based and goal oriented. A directive styles helps identify the who, what, and how of the given task. The other dimension is a supportive style, which is behavioral based. This style is effective for problem solving and making members feel comfortable in the situation. The situational approach theory is unique compared to many theories. Unlike trait theory that focuses on the leaders innate quality’s or skills theory that focuses on personal attributes; situational theory does not view leadership from a leader-centered perspective. The situational approach takes into account the development level of the followers. The situational approach is very prescriptive because it shows that effective leaders are those who can recognize individual needs and proceed with a certain style of leadership. Situational Leadership is useful when working in student affairs due the diversity of students, experiences, and leadership opportunities. Like most professionals working in higher education, I am expected to wear many hats. Some of my responsibilities are task driven and require a directive style of leadership to be productive. Other times, I am seen in an advisory role. In those situations, I am more supportive and less directive, thus placing an emphasis on relationships and less on the task. A strength of Situational Leadership is that it is prescriptive in nature and provides practitioners a guideline on how to act or not act based on multiple factors. Another strength is that it is easily understood and can be applied in a number of settings (Northouse, 2010). A weakness of Situational Leadership is that it may be limited in information for individuals versus working in groups. There is also little known on how it directly relates to college student development, if at all. ConclusionBy understanding various learning theories and models, as well as identifying types of theories, I am able to build the foundations for developmental programs. By putting theory into practice, I can contribute to the goals of the university that enhance student learning and development. By recognizing that theory is simply a tool for helping student affairs professionals understand their stakeholders, I am intentional about applying theories that are appropriate to the situation. Theories must be thought of as a framework and not a solution to programing and development. Understanding the strengths and weakness of sociological, psychological, and management theories helps us complement and influence learning and development to the ever-changing student population. ReferencesACPA/NASPA (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners.Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPAAstin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development. Retrieved from: , K. H. (1985). SLII: A situational approach to managing people. Escondido, CA: Blanchard Training and Development. Chickering, A.W. (1969). Education and identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Evans, N. J., Forney, D.S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Goodman, J., Schlossberg, N. K., & Anderson, M. L. (2006). Counseling adults in transition. (3rd ed.). New York: SpringerKolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kolb, D. A. (1999). Learning style inventory – Version 3. Boston: Hay/McBer. Kuh, G.D., Schuh, J., Whitt, E. & Associates. (1991). Involving Colleges. San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass.Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice. (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks:Sage. Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Overwhelmed: Coping with life’s ups and downs. Landham,MD: Lexington Books. Leadership, Administrations, and GovernanceOrganizational structures, financial operations, and administrative practices are key institutional characteristics within higher education. A recent study found that state appropriations for institutions fell by 7.6 percent in 2011-2012, noted as the largest decline in at least a half century (Lederman, 2012). As resources are becoming scarcer and the demand for accountability is greater, the Division of Student Affairs has a responsibility to assess fiscal priorities, align divisional missions, as well as build an environment for student success. Throughout this paper, I highlight key elements in the case study “Tough Times at Peace University” (Nuss, 1993) which is in a similar financial situation as many of today’s public universities. I identify various stakeholders, evaluate available resources, and develop an analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. I provide a proposed two-year strategic plan for the Division of Student Affairs while emphasizing an assessment plan. In conclusion, I relate this experience to the application of the ACPA/NASPA Human and Organizational Resource as well as Law, Policy, and Governance Competencies. Stakeholders and Vested InterestOne of the major concepts of understanding organizational process and change theory is to acknowledge the influence of politics, power and conflict. Kuk, Banning, and Amey (2010) define politics as “those processes that influence the direction of the institution and the allocation of resources.” Peace University is a mid-sized public university meaning it has many stakeholders and political figureheads as administration. The primary sources of income for Peace University are state tax allocations and student tuition and fees. Besides students and the public, there are some key individual stakeholders as it relates to fiscal hardship and strategic planning. Assuming I am the voice of Dr. Archer Vice President of Student Affairs, I have a vested interest in complying with the president’s direction to reduce the departmental budget by 15%. I also assume the responsibly of continuing a long tradition to meet student needs with high standards. I value my relationship with faculty and need to capitalize on my staff loyalty while changing the mission and priorities of the division. Northouse (2013) describes the leader as the one that initiates relationships, creates communication, and carries the burden of maintaining the relationships. This is key to addressing the concerns of stakeholders. I appreciate Mark Underwood’s service and dedication to the university through his leadership with the Board of Regents, Residence Hall Association, and Recreational Sports Board. I understand his concern with rising tuition and fee increases. Heller (2011) states, “Since the 1980’s tuition prices at public colleges and universities have sky rocked, increasing 773 percent at four-year institutions.” I also value the opinion of Karen Nice, who represents Student Government, as a non-traditional student advocating for commuter student needs.Along with the students, I view each department head as a key stakeholder in the Division of Student Affair’s mission. I recognize the quality of program that Marilyn Jones, Director of Residence Life and her staff has created. I appreciate her leadership and effort of creating a fiscally self-sufficient department. I also understand the necessity of Steven Gibson’s position in department of Special Student Support. Due to major constitutional rulings such as The Civil Rights Act of 1964 including Title IV, Title IX, and the Americans with Disability Acts, access to higher education has changed the profile of the traditional student. As a result, the federal and state governments have become heavily involved in postsecondary education creating new legal requirements and challenges (Kaplin & Lee, 2009). His department is responsible for meeting for some of the highest demands of student needs with the least amount of resources in regards to staff. I am intentional about transparency with all seven of my departments. I know building a strategic plan to address budget concerns and align with the institutional mission will be a team effort and will require buy in and respect from all individuals and groups involved in the process. Available ResourcesThere is an expectation that those who play a central role in conceptualizing and implementing a strategic plan use the university mission, vision, and values as the cornerstone for divisional documents CITATION Var10 \l 1033 (Vartolla, Jones, & Schuh, 2010). Resources such as the university mission will provide a foundation of the changes needed for the Student Affairs Division. Other resources to consider are monetary in nature. Prior to making any decisions about how to reduce the budget by 15%, I need to educate my staff on these available resources so that they may understand the importance of the upcoming changes. I understand that there is a state mandate cap on admission so that tuition and fees will not be elevated in relation to enrollment size. I am also intentional and thankful of the economic impact of the auxiliary budgets such as residence life and the student union. Auxiliary budgets are segregated from the general fund since they intend to operate without any subsidy (Schuh, 2003). These budgets will be thoroughly evaluated since they are exempt from the President’s budget reduction plan. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and ThreatsThrough department collaboration and input from staff, I evaluate each program’s strengths and weaknesses. I gather key information through multiple perspectives. I recognize the importance of giving staff opportunities to discuss strengths and weaknesses through various forums. Strengths that I have learned about our Student Affairs Division include but are not limited to: 1) Over 50% of students enrolled at the University of Peace take advantage of living on campus in the residence halls. 2) The division has a history of growth in response to student needs. 3) Division employees have been compensated yearly at an equal level to faculty. 4) The division has multiple auxiliary units that are able to generate departmental funding. 5) Student Affair’s facilities such as the residence halls, student union, recreation center, and student health center are all new or recently renovated. Through feedback and communication with stakeholders, there are some notable weaknesses in the division as well. Those include but are not limited to: 1) key students are opposed to additional tuition or fee hikes 2) The majority of funding student affairs come from state appropriations and tuition revenue. 3) The division employees are unfamiliar with the impact of budget reduction, thus creating an environment of unease and uncertainty. Considerations such as financial impact, participation in regards to proportional needs vs. utilization, and an evidence of student learning and development help me determine which programs and services are contributing to the university mission and which ones have room for improvement. By proposing a new strategic plan for the Division of Student Affairs, I consider opportunities and threats facing the department and myself in order to align with the institutional priorities. There are numerous opportunities such as: 1) evidence of upholding a commitment to various stakeholders that reduce financial constraints 2) advancing the university mission in times of despair and 3) providing the university with higher quality and more impactful services. There are also numerous threats facing the Division of Student Affairs and myself. One of the most significant is that there are limited resources for staff that are tasked with doing more. There is a risk of negative job performance compared to faculty, who tend to have longer-term contracts, tenure or other forms of job security (Lake, 2011). Others include but are not limited to: 1) a fear of mistrust or anger from departments where improvement is needed and 2) an impact to facilities that is not sustainable for long periods. Based on the previous strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats I propose the following strategic plan/priorities for the next two years for the Division of Student Affairs at the University of Peace. The Strategic Priorities and Assessment Process for the Division of Student Affairs Identify collaboration opportunities within the division to eliminate redundancy and increase resources.After years of personnel growth, staff members will commit to collaboration on programming, services and cost sharing during years of hiring freezes.Departments will provide an annual plan on major programs and services in advance to reduce the re-creation of services.Produce a divisional development series with an emphasis on financial management and outcome based development.Student affairs staff will be educated on and tasked with making fiscally responsible decisions making the impact of budgeting more personal and less divisional. Staff will develop knowledge and skills on providing services and programs that are intentional about student learning and development.Staff will be provided professional development opportunities to collaborate, educate, and be inspired while funding is unavailable for travel.Develop an annual review and assessment process.Departments will articulate how programs and services are providing student learning and development based on data and evidence. Division will continue to review strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats in order to align with the institutional mission. Develop a staffing and facility priority plan for future years.Consider a performance-based review of staff compensation in relation to faculty.Research alternative forms of benefits in times of fiscal crisis. In an effort to continually evaluate the impact and priorities of student affairs, I have proposed that assessment is a key factor in the strategic priorities. Over the next two years, I will continue to evaluate strengths, weakness, opportunities, and threats of the Student Affairs Division. Through staff focus groups, programs and services, and financial impact I will assesses the impact of divisional strategic priorities and mission as it relates to the university and its stakeholders. ConclusionWhile this is simply a case study and is limited in details there are some key functional areas of Leadership and Management/Administration Competencies that arise. Human and organizational resources are defined by the utilization of networks and partnerships (ACPA/NASPA 2010). Collaboration, alliances, and staff loyalty are key in the success of developing strategic priorities. Resource management and suitability are evident in the case study because of self-sufficient auxiliary budgets and recent updates to major facilities within the department. Through the proposed strategic plan, there is an additional emphasis on supervision and evaluation. Law, Policy, and Governance competencies are also necessary for navigating the strategic plan. While the majority of funding is tax appropriations, an understanding of external policy in relation to education and legal systems is needed. Governance systems are also a major characteristic of Peace University. As VP of Student Affairs, Dr. Archer has participated effectively in the system by developing key relations with the faculty senate chair, student government representatives and other administrators on campus. Understanding, developing, and practicing the ACPA/NASPA competencies provide structure and guidance for a strategic planning and personnel management during fiscal hardships. ReferencesACPA/NASPA (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners.Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPAHeller, D. E. (2011). The states and public higher education policy: Affordability, access, and accountability. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.Kaplan, W. & Lee, B. (2009). A legal guide for student affairs professionals (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Kuk, L., Banning, J., & Amey, M. (2010). Positioning Student Affairs for Sustainable Change. Sterling: Stylus Publishing.Lake, P. F. (2011). Foundations of higher education law & policy: Basic legal rules, concepts, and principles for student affairs. Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.Lederman, D. (2012, January). State Support Slumps Again. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from , P. G. (2013). Leadership (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Nuss, E. (1993). Tough times at university of peace. In F. Stage and Associates (Eds), Linking theory to practice: Case studies for working with college students (75-80). Muncie, Indiana: Accelerated Development, Inc. Schuh, J. H. “Strategic Planning and Finance.” In D.B Woodward Jr and S.R. Komives (eds.), Student Services: A Handbook for the Profession (4th ed.) Jossey-Bass, 2003Vartolla, L. E., Jones, B. C., & Schuh, J. H. (2010). Developing Budget Models,Communication Strategies, and Relationships to Migrate the Pain of Tough Econoic Times. In StudenAffairs Budgeting and Financial Managment in Midst of Fiscal Crisis (pp. 78-79). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Assessment, Evaluation, and Research ApplicantCurriculum such as Foundations of Research, Research Methods, and Assessment and Evaluation have provided students with an understanding of social science research and its application to the profession of Student Affairs. In the case study “Your Career Begins Here” (Vaccaro, McCoy, Champagne and Siegel, 2013) a new counselor in the career center has the pressure of placing graduates into jobs during a struggling economy. While vested stakeholders such as the admissions office, the supervisor, students, and the workforce are evaluating the counselors success the department is also due for a regional accreditation review of outcomes assessment data. Throughout this paper, I represent the counselor and successfully navigate the personal and professional pressures using assessment, evaluation, and research tools. I then conclude with an explanation of how this case study supports my knowledge and application of the Personal Foundations and Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Competencies (ACPA & NASPA, 2010). Establishing Ethical Standards As a young professional and new counselor in the career center, I have a lot of pride in my work. I often reflect on the university mission of “Preparing for Careers that Count” and understand my contributions to student success. This case study has brought many challenges including: the pressure for job placement, validity of part-time employment, extended work hours, the unknown culture from previous employees, and the need for accurate assessment methods. As challenges arise, I am able to reflect on my personal foundations of the Student Affairs field. I evaluate my personal beliefs, attitudes, and values. According to Schuh (2011) “As soon as student affairs professionals begin to integrate the ethical framework of the profession into their work, ethical dilemmas become visible.” I have an ethical standard to be honest in my work even during times of conflict. These commitments help me navigate the assessment, evaluation, and research process while facilitating communication with vested stakeholders. Maintaining a healthy work/life balance and clarification of job placement reporting are concerns I can successfully communicate with my supervisor. Once guidelines are established and relationships are built I am able to build an assessment plan supporting my work in the career center to present to university administrators as well as the regional accreditation board. Showcasing my assessment, evaluation, and research tools helps provide accountably for me as a professional and supports the university mission. The Research Process Outcomes-based assessment is about improving student success and informing improvements in the practice of student services and programming. (Bresciani, Gardner, and Hickmott, 2009) Because there is conflicting information about standards and guidelines in job placement, my first step in the assessment process is to research general information pertaining to career center success. “In order for research to be useful to practice, student affairs professionals who may not be trained as researchers need to know what they are looking for in research studies and how to interpret what they find” (Sax and Harper, 2011) By researching best practices, performance indicators, benchmarking, peer reviews and external reviews I can gather information needed to build an assessment plan (Ridley, 2012). What are other career centers and professionals saying about part time employment and graduate work? What are the standards for accreditation? Levine & Dean (2012) state “Current students are facing the worst economy in recent years with unrealistic aspirations for the future.” How are career center professionals responding? These are just a few topics to research so that I gain knowledge and information supporting my assessment plan. In order to communicate this information, I prepare a literature review so that administration and my supervisor is aware of the latest research effecting and supporting career centers. Building this review also provides me an idea of research designs and methods I may want to use for developing my own outcomes assessment. Literature and research also support any significant findings or recommendations I may provide for our department or that is suggested by the accreditation review process. Choosing Assessment Tools and Methods“Outcomes-based assessment begins with identifying your unit or program’s mission, objectives and of course, outcomes. It is tempting for those that are trying to fit assessment into already packed workloads to choose a tool without first identifying the specific information to be gathered for improving student learning and development” (Bresciani, Zelna, and Anderson, 2004). Knowing this information keeps me intentional about choosing methods that support outcome development. In order to develop a thoughtful planning process, I use considerations such as my audience, budget, time, data analysis, and data sharing opportunities. Using rubrics, interviews, focus groups, observations, documents, surveys, and portfolios are just some examples of how I can gather outcomes data. (Kumar, 2011) I prefer to use a mixed method approach so that the career center’s information is not only quantitative buts also qualitative. This allows us to provide statistics for the workforce while providing outcomes data to the administration and accreditation board. Developing the Assessment PlanAs a new professional, I am unaware if research and data collection in the career center were accurately recorded in the past. While I have my concerns, I know that developing an assessment plan for the department will provide us some transparency in the reporting process. By developing and presenting my plan, my supervisor and vested stakeholders will have an understanding of how the assessment process works and thus how information is gathered. The assessment plan includes an overview of the career center and programs we offer. Is also contains specific learning outcomes and how those complement the division and university goals. I provide a description of my sample audience and the data collection time frame. Along with my plan, I inform those vested in our assessment how the results will be reported. Communicating ResultsThere are many professionals who view evaluation results and fail to continue the assessment process. Once my findings are gathered, I am committed to reporting and sharing them to others. There are numerous ways to record findings in assessment and research. Some may report in a database or spreadsheet, others may report in a forum or presentation. Specially, I am reporting the career center outcomes in a written final report. This report includes details listed in the assessment plan such as program overview, outcomes, sample audience, collection period, and data collection methods. In addition to those elements, I provide research limitations, a summary of results and provide decisions and recommendations in order to enhance student learning and development. Transparency and Challenges The assessment process that I have provided is just an example of how to gather data and report results about student learning. While formats and strategies may vary by institution, one similarity is that professionals may face challenges based on their outcome results. As showcased in the case study, the new professional in the career center is pressured to place students in jobs in order to receive a positive review from his supervisor. The department is pressured to succeed in order to maintain its tradition and fulfill job market needs. The department is also challenged to operate in compliance with accreditation standards. The university is pressured to fulfill its mission. “It is true that when we attempt to find out information about how well our students learn as a result of our programs, we find information about another’s program. Thus, while we may desire to be transparent, our colleagues may not” (Bresciani et al, 2004). Outcomes assessment can be a scary process. Many fear that results may show ineffectiveness or failures. The results may lead to change or even worse, elimination. While these are all valid concerns, assessment also provides accountability for student affairs positions in higher education. It supports departmental missions and is proof that student affair’s contributes to student learning and development. Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) state that where students go to college has a much smaller effect on their learning and development than what happens to them once they enroll. It is imperative that student affairs professionals begin to use assessment to showcase their worth and hold themselves accountable for the success of students. Conclusion Navigation of this case study supports the Personal Foundations and Assessment, Evaluation, and Research ACPA/NASPA competencies. Like any professional faced with challenges, I had to establish ethical standards. I enforced personal beliefs and attitudes but respected differences in others. I demonstrated goal setting while expressing needs for a healthy work/life balance. Lastly, I used reflection to guide my career practices to support the university mission and student learning. Throughout this case study, I also demonstrated competence in Assessment, Evaluation, and Research. When developing an assessment plan, I emphasized the value of AER, provided an intentional research design, collected and analyzed data, as well as interpreted and reported results. I provided input on political challenges of assessment but express the importance of accountability for student learning and development within higher education. References ACPA/NASPA (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners. Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPABresciani, M., Gardner, M., and Hickmott, J. (2010) Demonstrating student success: a practical guide to outcomes-based assessment of learning and development in student affairs. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus. Bresciani, M., Zelna, C and Anderson, J. (2004). Assessing student learning and development: a handbook for practitioners. Washington, DC.: NASPAKumar, R. (2011). Research methodology: a step by step guide for beginners. Los Angeles: Sage.Levine, A., and Dean, D. (2012). Generation on a tightrope. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P.T. (2005). How college affects students (2nd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ridley, D. (2012). The literature review. Los Angeles: Sage. Sax, L. J & Harper, C. E. (2011) Using Research to Inform Practice in Student services: ‘A handbook for the profession (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-BassSchuh, J. H., Jones, S. R., Harper, S. R., & Associates. (2011). Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-BassVaccaro, A., McCoy, B., Champagne, D. and Siegel, M. (2013) your career begins here. NASPA Decisions Matter: Using a decision-making framework with contemporary student affairs case studies ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.