3 Ways to Infuse Assessment Capacity into Your Work in Student Affairs

This morning, @JChase_ shared some thoughts on why some people in student affairs don't engage in assessment here. He wrapped up his post with:

"So, let’s revisit the common objections [to doing assessment]:

1. Competence - step by step guides on doing assessments are available.  If you don’t know, go find them, or go find a friend that knows how to Google things.
2. Time - doing assessments can actually SAVE you time
3. Lack of interest - You should care about this stuff.  It’ll make you better at your job.  You’re not in this field because you don’t care about it."

After reading and reflecting on Jeff's post, I decided to pull some thoughts together, and offer my own take with this post. There are three things everyone in student affairs can do to work on building assessment capacity in their positions, and also for their own professional development.

1. Take Jeff's advice, on all three of his suggestions.

• You can learn about assessment from so many sources: books, journal articles, newsletters, conferences, student affairs division websites, and colleagues on Twitter. I started my assessment learning by telling the director of residence life that I wanted to learn about assessment. That led me to conferences focused on assessment.
• Take a good look at how you spend your day. Are there things you can delegate or can be assigned elsewhere to free up an hour a week for you to commit to assessment?
• Assessment is becoming the key to longevity in our field. We all have to be able to speak about the work we do from a standpoint that is informed by data, not just anecdotes of superstar student leaders.

2. If you're spending time on Twitter, are you using it to build your Personal Learning Network (PLN) to help develop assessment competence? There are so many people willing to answer questions and even consult on assessment efforts that you should never have to feel like you're in it alone.

3. Answer the questions below. After you identify what you need to know, and you can answer the other three questions, you've taken the first step toward assessment and evaluation in student affairs.

• What do I need to know?
• Why do I need to know this?
• What kind of data will I need?
• Where can I find the data?

Ultimately, I want people in the field who shy away from assessment to recognize that they can build assessment capacity in their positions, and in themselves. Just like anything else, growth takes initiative.

In a future post, I will offer some thoughts on developing assessment competence, moving from beginner to advanced, as outlined in the NASPA/ACPA Professional Competencies.

How to Address Student Development Theory Questions in Job Interviews

This was originally published in the March 2013 issue of AFA Essentials. I'm sharing it on my blog as it might prove useful and timely for those preparing for placement exchanges, phone/webcam interviews, and ultimately on-campus interviews! I hope you find my perspective helpful, and if you want to chat about theory beyond stages, send me a tweet @drbbourke.

How to Address Student Development Theory in Job Interviews 

Dr. Brian Bourke, Louisiana State University  

Students in graduate programs in student affairs should spend time studying theories of student development. They are so important that students spend countless hours making index cards filled with information on each theory, including how they were developed and their stages. Even with all of that preparation, many graduate students feel underprepared to talk about uses of student development theories in job interviews. This article provides tips on preparing for theory-related interview questions and concludes with some thoughts on keeping student development theory as a part of your ongoing career development.  

What is your favorite theory? When interviewing for entry-level professional positions in student affairs, one commonly encounters questions dealing with student development theory. You may be asked to talk about your go-to theory. As is the case in many conversations involving student development theory, Chickering’s (1993) vectors of development does not always have to be the answer. Be prepared to not only name a theory, but to be able to speak intelligently about a theory. What is it about a particular theory that resonates with you?    

How would you apply theory? 

You might also expect to be asked about how you would apply student development theory in your work as a student affairs professional. In responding to this type of question, it is important to think beyond the stages that comprise any theory. Recall one of the potential pitfalls of applying student development theory rests in a stage-based application with individual students. Theories can help us understand students’ experiences, but we need to carefully avoid using theories to label or diagnose an individual student. For example, labeling a student I meet with as a dualistic thinker based on Perry’s (1970) intellectual development theory does little to help me or the student.   

If the focus in applying theory goes beyond a stage-by-stage approach, then where is the focus? Student development theories provide a foundation for your work as a student affairs professional. Each theory can be used to develop a basis for understanding the developmental paths that students might take. With this understanding, you can make connections to broader areas. For example, you are asked how you might utilize student development theory in advising the Interfraternity Council (IFC). You might draw on campus environment theories, such as those by Astin (1984) and Schlossberg (1989), to help you think about the ways the IFC members interact in the setting and structure of that group. Or, you might use King and Kitchener’s (2000) reflective judgment model to design activities to help students talk through group decision making. Both of these examples represent broad approaches to working with students.  

The homerun 

What is the magic answer to any question regarding the application or utilization of student development theory? There is not one, at least not entirely. Recently, Kevin Kruger, who is the president of NASPA—Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education (NASPA), said assessment is the most important competency for new professionals and graduate students to develop (NASPATweets, 2013). Student development theory should drive assessment through the development and evaluation of learning outcomes. If we are to assess the impact that students’ experiences are having on their learning and development, then we need a grounded approach in theory. Student development theory is that grounded approach.   

Become a lifelong learner As you prepare to enter the professional realm of student affairs or transition to another career role, learning more about student development theory is probably the last thing on your mind. There is a lot of great research on theories, both directly in student affairs and in related academic fields. More theories about psychosocial identity development specific to individual subpopulations are being developed. Neo-Kohlbergian perspectives on moral judgment and reasoning continue to evolve. Conversations about these theory developments are taking place in a number of settings: scholarly journals, professional publications, professional associations, and social media.    

References  

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 25, 297-308. 

Chickering, A. & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2000). The reflective judgment model: Twenty years of research on epistemic cognition. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 37-61). 

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. NASPATweets. (2013, January 29). "Probably the most important competency right now is assessment." @NASPApres #hejchat #tpe13 #saass [Twitter Post]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/NASPAtweets  

Perry, W. G. (1970), Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. 

Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. In D. C. Roberts (Ed.), Designing campus activities to foster a sense of community (New Directions for Student Services No. 48, pp. 5-15). San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.