This week, we wrapped up reading How College Works. The specific chapters I read were Learning, Finishing, and Lessons Learned.
The Learning chapter focused on many hallmarks of a liberal arts education: writing, speaking, critical thinking, studying abroad, exploring diverse perspectives, etc. What I particularly liked about this chapter was how it demonstrated the knowledge learned in classes may not always be directly what students expect to learn. For example, when learning to write, students are also learning transferable skills about how to tailor messages to an audience, motivate or persuade people, and other skills often attributed to leaders. It made me consider the following questions:
The Finishing chapter began by highlighting how the biggest challenge for seniors may be simply staying engaged in the present. While I was nearing graduation, I definitely saw this become true. Students call it "senioritis," and it is real. Other points that stood out to me were how students who learn to think critically often come to identify as a certain kind of person, and students also often learn how to win a debate while preserving the underlying relationship. Many of my peers and I would often debate issues, and the challenge of debating and maintaining a relationship was clear. Finally, the importance of relationships rang true with me. At the end of my job with the Vice President for Student Affairs at my undergrad, I did an assessment of seniors' experiences at Bradley. By far, the most positive self-reported influence was the relationships they formed with peers, faculty, and staff. The final chapter, Lessons Learned, began with highlighting some of the limitations of this book, which I believe are important to note. This book took a very positive look at college and was searching for the good; but it is important to remember that not everyone has such a good experience in college. Also early in the chapter, the authors included a sentence that really resonated with me: "The key to improving education in a college, we think, is found less in the organization of programs than in the deployment of people." Then, they shared some concise lists about college. Highlights that stood out to me from each list are included here. How College Works: Basic Principles
Overall, I very much enjoyed reading this book. We had several other readings for this week as well, however. An article by the New York Times, "Sex on Campus: She Can Play that Game Too," talked about the hook-up culture of colleges and how it is not solely male-driven. I thought this was fascinating, as it challenges traditionally perceived gender norms. In fact, just last week in a class, our instructor was talking about how men tend to be more rational and logic-focused, whereas women are more emotional and focused on community-building (don't get me started on this...). I think this article says quite the opposite. And in a strange way, the beginning of this article makes me proud. I celebrate the goal-driven, assertive, independent women who are choosing to put themselves first (at least for now) instead of clinging to a partner. I was also surprised to learn that a lot of this attitude comes from parent suggestion. However, the article does move on to the dangerous side of hookup culture. Sexual violence, unhealthy relationships, and longterm emotional and psychological effects are often a part of this culture. I also think there is a big difference between people who fall into the hookup culture because they're choosing to focus on other personal goals and people who fall into it because they feel like it is necessary. Regardless of why a person is engaging with this culture, we need to ensure we are educating on safe sex practices, consent, and healthy relationships while also encouraging independence. The Chronicle article in response to the NY Times article seemed a bit pointless. Although it calls into question the idea that students are having more sex than previous generations, I thought it missed the point of the NY Times article - that women's attitudes toward the hookup culture have changed. The next reading was "A Rape on Campus," from Rolling Stone. This article gave a very in-depth, personal look at sexual assault on the campus of University of Virginia. Most interesting about this article was how UVA's tradition and school spirit suppresses reports of sexual assault. I had never considered this before. I was surprised to see how much students buy into this culture and are worried about UVA's reputation related to sexual assault. This seems pretty opposite from what I've encountered in my own experience; usually, it seems that students are critical of universities when their actions are based solely on maintaining a positive image. However, this is not the case at UVA. This article made me think about how important it is to foster an environment where victims of sexual assault feel comfortable reporting, can easily be connected with resources, and feel supported by their university community. Schwitzer and Van Brunt (2015) wrote about mental health on campus, providing definitions and an overview of several different mental disabilities students may have. These can be psychological, emotional, social, etc. What I found most interesting from this article was how it talked about the impact of students' mental health issues on the campus community as a whole. For example, it highlighted how a resident's self-harming could effect other students on the floor as well as the RA. When I was in undergrad, I knew many people who struggled with anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation. I can personally attest to how the impact extends far beyond the person who is facing these issues. Our last reading was another chapter from danah boyd's book, "it's complicated." It talked about bullying, specifically cyberbullying. What I liked about this chapter was what it said about the setting for cyberbullying; having this bullying in a public forum offers more opportunities for interventions. In a profession that often promotes bystander intervention related to sexual assault, we should also ensure we are using our voices and influence to intervene in all situations of wrongdoing.
0 Comments
Can engaging one student lead to isolating another? Chapter Four of How College Works answers this question with a strong, "Yes!".
It seems almost counterintuitive, yet the logic pans out. Often, we in student affairs strive to create personal interactions with students and facilitate close relationships between them and the university. Those in academic affairs will tout small class sizes, proclaiming the benefits of such exposure to professors. But, at many colleges, it isn't feasible to deliver this level of service to all students. And, when so much effort is put into serving just a few students, the service to other students may be significantly decreased. I thought it was a bit odd that it took the researchers so long to figure out why the majority of students were taking large classes, despite the college's efforts to create more small classes. Most likely, this is just because readers have an outside perspective - but the issue seemed obvious. This was a good reminder to consider multiple perspectives and variables when conducting research. This chapter also struck a cord with me because my undergrad offered mostly small classes. In fact, I took very few classes with more than 20 students, and I didn't have a single class with more than 30 students. I loved the access I had to professors. However, I now realize how important it is to balance the personal interactions with a few and the general interactions with all. Chapter Five of How College Works was all about how students come to (or do not come to) belong in college. Immediately, I realized I had experienced several of the stages discussed in the chapter. On p. 79 and 80, the authors share some conditions crucial to the existence of bonded groups; I realized all four of these factors played a role in one of my closest friend groups from undergrad, the student newspaper. Following are the stages outlined by the authors and how our staff exhibited them.
I also found the idea of networks interesting. Again, reflecting on my own experience, I could see how true it was. However, I wonder about the differences in this idea across institution types. I wonder if students' networks are related to size of their college; and whether that relationship - if it exists - would be direct or inverse. Overall, I believe it is important for us as future student affairs professionals to consider how students form networks, what impacts they have, and how we can help facilitate this process. This week's readings also included several articles about factors affecting student persistence. Berger, Ramirez, and Lyons (2012) gave an overview of how retention came to be a focus of higher education. Originally, students did not always come to college with the intent of finishing. Over time, however, colleges began to realize how important it was for students to attain degrees. The authors also introduced vocabulary associated with retention and the differences among the words. In particular, a "stopout" stood our to me, as I had never heard of this; a stopout is someone who temporarily withdraws from an institution or system. Habley (2012) offered two chapters student success and persistence. The author highlighted how limited language portrays an inaccurate picture of retention, especially because some students may not persist at a singular institution, but they may still earn a degree in a system. I also found it interesting that student attrition prior to 1975 was nearly all attributed to student characteristics rather than institution characteristics. In chapter 2, Habley introduced several theories related to persistence, especially by Tinto, Astin, and Kuh. I'm looking forward to using these in my reference matrix and persistence autoethnography. The chapter by Hagedorn (2012) seemed somewhat redundant to the other readings. It gave a bit of a historical perspective, a bit of a theoretical perspective, and insight into how we may approach retention today. Most interesting to me was the need to consider student educational goals when looking at retention. I liked the article by Winkle-Wagner (2014). In particular, I liked the author's willingness to question some of the long-accepted theories proposed by Tinto. Although the author was not saying the theories were wrong, they did highlight limitations of the theories. This, too, will be important to consider when writing my own persistence autoethnography. Finally, the New York Times article gave a very personal look into factors effecting a student's persistence. This reminded me somewhat of our vignettes, as they told more of a story rather than simply presenting research. This article also reminded me of the importance I will play as a student affairs professional in supporting students along their higher education journey. I LOVED this week's readings. The first set of readings was from How College Works, by Daniel F. Chambliss and Christopher G. Takacs. Over a period of eight years, the authors followed the paths of nearly 100 students at a small liberal arts college in New York. The extent of this in-depth, qualitative research permits a highly personal look at the experience of today's college students.
What I especially liked about these readings were how they are structured around those key moments in college that transcend generations, institutional types, etc. The book began with a chapter about why the authors chose to write this, then moved into two of those important experiences: entering college and choosing (specifically an academic major). From the first chapter, current student affairs professionals can remind themselves of the importance of considering the student perspective as well as begin to develop a response to the question, "Is student affairs important?" The rest of the book furthers these two lessons and can be a resource for many years, for whenever professionals are trying to remind themselves of the student experience. The chapter on entering college focused on the importance of successfully socializing during the first semester. It made me think of my own transition to college, which had me quite anxious as it approached. I would know one person at the university, but they weren't someone I knew very well. As a shy person, I had no idea how I would make friends. Yet, somehow, I became part of a group of friends that were crucial in getting me through the first year and a half of school. I stopped going home every other weekend and instead started to make my undergrad my home. As I thought about it, I realized just how much of a role was played by those strategic efforts of my university, as described in this reading: orientation (precedence), residence halls (proximity), and extracurriculars (shared interests). This last one especially was important as I advanced through college and became more and more involved. Considering these efforts made me wonder of my SAAHE classmates' experiences and the following questions:
The chapter on choosing was equally interesting. However, I chuckled a bit about the emphasis placed on professors hosting dinner for students at their houses; this was the sixth reading I've had this semester that spoke of the effectiveness of this. It's definitely something I'll keep in mind, and perhaps even incorporate into senior satisfaction/exit assessments if I get the chance to work on such a project again. Additionally, I was surprised by the praises sung for delaying a student's choice of major. When I was considering possibilities for my undergraduate education, a strong factor in choosing which college was the ability to immediately take classes in my major. I wonder if these same praises would be sung at non-liberal arts schools. The second set of readings was from Educating a Diverse Nation, by Clifton Conrad and Marybeth Gasman. I really enjoyed how the Introduction started with personal experiences of different students entering college. This was an excellent way of highlighting how many different paths students may take to and through (or out of) college, including challenges unique to various cultures, income statuses, locations, etc. One passage in particular stood out to me from the introduction:
In chapter one, another passage stood out to me:
Finally, chapter two shared some of the defining characteristics of MSIs. Often more so than at PWIs, the missions of MSIs promote a commitment to ensuring access to college and meaningful experiences for minority students. Additionally, faculty view their primary roles as teachers, not as researchers. I think this is an interesting point, as it is a point of frustration for many students when they feel as though their professors are not their to teach. This additional support and students-first mentality is important for student success, especially at MSIs. I was intrigued by the differences among MSIs, and I believe it is important to remember these differences rather than viewing all MSIs similarly. Each type serves unique populations and are therefore unique institutions. This week's readings talked about students' transitions to and in college as well as the ways that today's teenagers are interacting with new technology. By understanding changing attitudes and experiences of students, as well as how they use technology to construct their social lives, we can better serve them during their time at college.
In the first reading, Renn and Reason (2013) talk about socialization. When I first started reading about it, it reminded me of this article I recently read for another class, calling for academic advisors to become cultural navigators. This article was saying college has its own culture, and academic advisors should serve students by teaching them the culture. I liked how Renn and Reason highlighted the many other ways a student may learn the college culture or become socialized, especially through the influences of family and peers. Renn and Reason clearly described a transition to college as "a psychological phenomenon, focusing on issues of stress, emotional adjustment, goal commitment, and a sense of institutional attachment" (p. 66). Thinking of my own experience as an undergrad, this is definitely true; I can describe many experiences relating to each of these issues. Another part of this article that stood out to me was about first-year seminar classes, as I served on a committee at my undergrad that sought to revamp the seminar program. In the process, we did many of the things mentioned in this article, such as setting specific desired outcomes, closely collaborating with faculty (rather than just us in student affairs), and developing an assessment plan. The bridge programs mentioned by Renn and Reason also interested me, as I'm not very familiar with these. I was surprised by how long some of these programs may be, and am interested in seeing how these may be geared to a variety of different students. Finally, I appreciated the efforts made by the authors to differentiate transfer students and highlight their unique situations. Whereas I generally thought the toughest challenges of transferring had to do with socialization into pre-existing systems, this article opened my eyes to more of the challenges related to academics and financial aid. In the article by Schaller (2010), attention is drawn to a group of students that, until recently, schools seem to have not put much thought to. Overall, I found it interesting how important self-efficacy is in the second year. It makes sense; sophomore year is when students must really start making a lot of decisions, and if they don't believe in their own competency, this can be incredibly difficult. Additionally, their first year at college will have a significant impact on students' self-efficacy, highlighting how important it is to view students holistically and understand the interconnectedness of all their experiences and milestones. I also liked the parts about students' motivation and values, and especially the impacts of parents' income on these two elements. I realized that, for the first bit of college, my main motivation was derived from parental expectations and lack of other perceived choices. However, that greatly changed throughout college and I became much more goal-driven and determined to help others with my education. It's important to realize what is driving students, so we can help them become more self-motivated toward success. While reading this, a few questions came to my mind:
The last reading, by Danah Boyd (2014), seemed a bit disconnected from the others (both the other readings for this week, and the other readings for the class so far). Indeed, I struggled to name this blog post because I could not think of a title that tied together all the readings. This article focused more on teenage students and their relationships with social media. Although it did not explicitly focus on college students, I think understanding students in the younger context is crucial to helping students transition to college. Like the first article, these chapters had to do with socialization. Rather than talking about how colleges somewhat force socialization to the higher ed environment, however, these chapters highlight the extent to which teenagers attempt to create and control their social lives. They supplement in-person interactions with online ones, and they tend to many different audiences. However, the digital world makes this difficult, as their social contexts can easily collapse due to the ability of so many people to see and participate in their interactions. This reading stressed that today's social media does not encourage isolation and withdrawal from in-person interactions like early forms of social media. Rather, it extends these interactions into more personal spaces. These chapters also speak to the generational differences in perceptions of privacy. Whereas many former generations assume an automatic privacy, requested publicity, today's teenagers assume publicity and create privacy when desired. I felt like the author was trying to stress that parents should just accept their children's different attitudes toward privacy rather than try to fight it. However, I believe a bit of compromise may be good on both ends. In the context of higher ed, it is important for us to understand how our students interact with social media. With the prevalence of these social networks in today's society, we have many opportunities to engage students, seek to understand them, and guide them in learning responsible practices. We need to understand how students are using social media and realize that a person's profile rarely tells the whole story, just like the example of an applicant who wrote about wanting to go to college to leave his gang-ridden community but posted several gang-related symbols on MySpace. Readings (presented in a lazily-attempted APA format):
|
Kristin KreherMy happiness comes from meaningful interactions, the outdoors, thrift shops, and saying "thank you." Archives
April 2018
Categories
All
|