Student Development Administrators
and Counselors
Sunday, June 24, 2001
Facilitator: Jack
Bautsch
Recorder: Maria
Guevara-Lee
1.
What were the critical issues emerging from the
morning session? (Critical Problems and
Issues, Part I)
·
Architecture – many of our definitions have become
obsolete. The perception of our role within the college must change
particularly with interactions with faculty.
Better linkages between student development and faculty must become the
focus. The Community College of
Baltimore County (CCBC) cited the “Powerful Partnerships” report from the
American Association of Higher Education as an effective tool.
·
Distance Learning – how to best develop support services
for distance learners. The Seattle Community College District has created a
position that coordinates student support services for distance learners.
·
Legal Issues – concerns were expressed regarding students’
right to privacy and technological advances now available to student
development teams.
·
Student Goals – problems with accurate tracking of
students’ intent and institution’s definition of successful completers.
·
Research – lack of documentation tying learning outcomes
and student development. Student
learning … the cognitive and non-cognitive. Those skills which are transferable
inside and outside the school environment. The definition of learning outcomes
needs to be broadened to include development services as well as
instruction. Many of us are teaching
either Human Development Courses and/or teaching in Coordinated Studies
Programs, this needs to be communicated to the institution.
2.
What strategies are needed to enhance the Learning
College culture?
·
Develop cross-functional teams with instruction and
student development, sharing the same vocabulary. Now in its third year, CCBC
has established a Council for Innovation and Student Learning that pairs
instruction and development staff.
Powerful connections made when teams teach together.
·
Involve student development teams in all areas of the college. These to include participation in
non-traditional arenas for example teaching within learning communities,
serving on curriculum review committees and on faculty hiring committees. “Infuse development into the fabric of every day life” was the quote
from the Community College of Denver where barriers have been explored with the
participation of students. Their
findings: it narrows down to
communication, informing the college community of our role and documenting our
successes.
·
Lane Community College offers a course which links student
success, diversity and career exploration. It is taught by counselors and has
worked well in legitimizing student development’s role in student
learning. Similarly, Cascadia
Community College’s Student Success Facilitators teach educational planning and
career portions of their College 101, College Strategies. Unlike at other colleges, students at
Cascadia are required to successfully complete
College Strategies as a condition of graduation, thus providing student
development with on-going visibility in the classroom environment.
·
Lane Community College uses a “neighborhood” model which
pairs a counselor and an advisor to an instructional division where they work
directly with faculty. This is how they are “woven into the fabric” of their
college. At Cascadia, (where faculty
are grouped by learning outcome, not by discipline) all fulltime Student
Success Services Team members serve on the Learning Outcome Teams with faculty,
staff and administrators to develop the tools for measuring/evaluating stated outcome.
·
The student development team from Community College of
Baltimore County now integrates their goals and objectives for student learning
to their strategic plan and to their budget. Research linking student development
and student learning is coming in form of dissertation from a member of their
team.
·
Open Enrollment – a question arose regarding community
college policy of providing access to all learners. Admissions into specific programs and enforcement of prerequisites
vary widely among the schools represented.
Is it time to re-examine? We
could lead the discussion and make decisions based on research.
3. How are
we doing? This conversation centered around areas of weakness or in need for
improvement in:
·
Visibility – this seen as a must. The ability to conceptualize what we are
doing and getting the word out to the college, the board of trustees, our
communities and our colleagues.
·
Developing the same vocabulary
·
Measuring our efforts and its impact on student learning
·
Visibility in the literature –
§
Student Surveys
§
Faculty Surveys
§
Self-Assessment – how are we assessing ourselves regarding
Learning College objectives. How do we
improve/enhance student learning? How
do we know?
4.
How do we need to change?
·
Mental shift from Student Development to Leaning College
·
Change vocabulary.
Traditional terms are loosing their meaning for example,
advisors/counselors:
§
New terms to encapsulate new roles
§
Educational Planners, Learning Specialists, Student
Success Facilitators
§
To whom do they report?
·
Remember it is not about us, but about the students
·
Empower ourselves to impact change to exhibit Learning
College objectives.
·
Make ourselves indispensable “we have information the
college can’t live without”.
·
Visibility in research
·
Suggestion: To infiltrate faculty sessions the next day
and share concerns, strategies, best practices, etc.
Issues:
This was a joint session as the student services group joined the faculty
group. This joint session came about after several issues/themes were
identified at the Sunday session:
·
We need partnerships to coexist.
·
Student services/development needs to
refocus around learning.
·
The paradigm is changing as we move
towards becoming learning centered.
·
Counselors have information on the
affective domain, so we should work together to help craft the successful
student.
There is powerful learning when faculty and counselors work together or forge links. The participants shared diverse examples of joint projects:
·
Class visits. Counselors visit program classes, speech classes for study skills
instruction, career information
·
Team teaching of foundations courses, communications/peer tutoring courses;
modularized or full semester
·
Online instruction/registration includes career workshops, employment information; students who
learn online have the same need for connections to a counselor as do
traditional students
·
Communication/collaboration. Joint meetings regarding communications issues, student
timetables, issue of faculty rights; Council for Innovation of Student learning
(wrote 10 principles of learning)
·
Joint sponsorship of conferences, guest speakers
·
Crisis intervention. Working together on crisis interventions, conflict resolution
helps faculty learn these skills
·
Staff training by counselors on sexual and prejudice/discrimination, harassment issues;
Faculty learn about these issues as well as how to link students in jeopardy
regarding financial, child care issues
·
Disability services. Faculty, student services, support staff need to be involved in
delivering these services
·
Volunteer activities. Counselors mentor student athletes, and then are seen as people
who can help with issues
Conclusion: We have a shared responsibility for student learning;
therefore, we need a strategy so we can work together more effectively.
Suggestions:
·
Change work positions frequently (e.g.,
every 2 or 3 years) so we can learn about diverse issues and so that each
person responsibility for a piece of student learning
·
LOTS - Learning Outcome Teams: teams
develop learning outcomes and determine how they will be applied to other areas
of the college e.g. registration
·
All college employees are held
accountable to the same core abilities outcomes.
What's next?
· Workload issues: need to find the required time by re-focusing roles, becoming strategic (i.e. doing only part of the role, sharing the power, the workload)
· An adaptable model: What does the box look like when we share the responsibility for learning? People need to work with their strengths. Perhaps cross-functional teams are good for faculty as well as for students
· Role changes: need to step out of our traditional roles which may mean sharing control
· Communication: need regular (once a month) joint meetings to share concerns and to provide direction
· Cross functional teams: for learning outcomes, tracking, hiring
·
Look at government structures: Are they also centered on learning?