|
K. Patricia Cross (1999) asserts that “Learning Is About Making Connections.” She describes the process by which learning occurs in the brain through neurological connections. Similarly, I suggest that within higher education, authentic collaborations between instruction and student services represent the connection necessary for transformational learning. In fact, institutions intent on achieving transformation at this level may need to “recast their missions to focus on learning, realign structures to foster collaboration, engage all stakeholders in the change and educational process, and establish open systems of exchange and communication, removing substantial barriers to their effectiveness” (O’Banion 1997, p. 7).
The complete picture of student learning cannot be taken without cooperation from both instruction and student services divisions working together. The gap between these areas that often exists on college campuses can generally be traced to the lack of integrated planning. Thus, finding effective strategies to close the “collaboration gap” is critical to enhancing the learning experiences for students. Many of the activities identified as being led by student services are often not connected or associated with learning within the classroom and occur outside of faculty involvement and as Jacoby (1989) has indicated, occur through traditional ways as modeled by residential universities. It is anticipated that as learning and student success are more commonly identified as the intended outcomes of the educational experience, more innovative strategies for organizing and working with faculty, a more effective organizational model and service delivery systems will emerge (Newton & Smith, 1996).
A Partnership Model
A partnership model, characterized by extensive collaborations and connections among student services professionals, faculty, and academic administrators, is one solution asserted by Martin and Murphy (2000) as a transformational tool to enhance the overall quality of a students' educational experience. They identified traditional separations among academic disciplines and departments, lack of significant recognized rewards for faculty participation, significant turnover in entry level student affairs positions, budget and reporting structures that limit scopes of operation, and cross cultural communication issues as barriers to the partnership model.
Research conducted by Fuhrmann (1995) on instruction and student services collaborations to improve students’ first-year experience identified all first-year students taking English and required them to write an anonymous response to a single question every week for 15 weeks. The questions addressed expectations for college life, learning experiences, adjustment issues, and social experiences. For instructors, the responses yielded information regarding how students were progressing in writing as well as additional data through analysis of content. Faculty and student services personnel coded 10,000 essays, conducted a random sample of student writers, interviews 18 months later, and conducted follow-up interviews 3 years after the first study. The findings were summarized in several reports that have been incorporated into the college’s strategic plan. Findings concluded that students over time became more receptive to diverse ideas and that students were frustrated with advising and financial aid. As a result of the findings, the institution established a central advising center and several multicultural workshops. Student success within the first year of college depends on whether students connect with the institution academically and socially, making the new student experience a perfect place to form necessary collaborations between faculty and student services staff (Tinto, 1993).
Improving Student Retention
In another study, a questionnaire designed to serve the needs of both instruction and student services was used to improve the retention and academic success of beginning college students at risk of dropping out. The questionnaire was mailed periodically to non-returning freshmen to determine why they dropped out and how they perceived the quality of instruction, support services, and campus climate. Students not responding to the questionnaire were interviewed by phone. As a result of the findings, faculty and student services staff revised the freshman seminar course to include cooperative learning and group-based activities to encourage peer interaction and increase student identification with the institution. Ultimately, membership in at least one student club or organization and visits to campus support programs was required of all freshmen. Orientation for faculty and staff teaching the freshman seminar also included an emphasis on how student interaction with faculty and staff and with other students is important for student learning and persistence (Banta & Kuh, 1998).
Brady (1999) posits that by improving collaboration between instruction and student services, in-class and out-of-class learning is enhanced. Further, research suggests that student affairs personnel should create innovative approaches to address the challenges created by the wide variety of demographic changes taking place throughout postsecondary education and actively seek collaboration throughout the institution, particularly with instructional areas. Modeling strong administrative commitment, planning curriculum and assessment jointly, promoting goals for student development college-wide, coordinating in- and out-of-class learning experiences, designing and administering appropriate measures of desired outcomes, and using assessment findings to improve the total student experience are recommended for both initiating and sustaining collaboration between instruction and student services (Banta & Kuh, 1998).
Expansive research conducted over the past two decades has indicated that improving the undergraduate experience will require ongoing collaboration. The notion of a seamless culture of learning fostered through increased collaborations was suggested in Kellogg’s (1999) research as significant to learning as institutions integrate curriculum, generate enthusiasm for institutional renewal, develop a common vision of learning, foster collaboration, cross-functional dialogue, and examine the influence of student cultures on learning.
Collaboration to Improve Learning
The National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA, 1998) in their powerful partnerships document provided support for extensive collaborations in order to foster improved learning. The call for institutional collaboration appeared in the earlier work of Angelo (1991) in which four frames of learning were introduced around which student affairs professionals were encouraged to partner with faculty to match learning to in-class and out-of-class experiences. In the work of Banta and Kuh (1998), they urged that there be increased collaboration between academic affairs and student affairs specifically in the area of college assessment, an area identified by the authors as the missing link in assessing learning comprehensively.
Shenk and de la Teja (2006), provide due emphasis to the importance of creating intentional partnerships between instruction and student services within community colleges and to the need for developing strategies which transform institutional cultures to those that are more open and responsive to change and learning. Authentic collaborations between the two areas most engaged with students, instruction and student services, should be encouraged and supported throughout the learning process. By assuming collective responsibility for student learning, comprehensive models that empower the learning of diverse student populations will culminate in comprehensive and more vibrant educational systems.
Partnership of Equals
Findings within my own comparative study, which examined the adoption of the learning paradigm within student affairs divisions of Vanguard community colleges, supports the need for greater collaboration and connection between instruction and student services and confirms benefits resulting from these critical partnerships. The major benefits identified in the study included the emergence of innovative models for student learning and success, ongoing collaborations across division lines and the sustained acceptance of blended partnership approaches in support of learning. A blended partnership was defined within the study as a partnership of equals where instructional and student services divisions work closely initiating change and developing new vehicles to engage students and enhance learning. Blended partnerships serve to reduce silos and build community. An important goal of such collaborations is the focus on outcomes and pedagogical similarities in order to respond holistically and comprehensively to diverse learners (Harvey-Smith, 2003).
If “Learning Is About Making Connections,” the relationship between instruction and student services can prove to be a critical connection that empowers learning. Making these connections an individual and institutional priority may serve to transform undergraduate educational experiences for the broader community of learners and those committed to serving them.
References
Angelo, T. A. (1991). Classroom research: Early lessons from success. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Banta, T. W., & Kuh, D. K. (1998). A missing link in assessment: Collaboration between academic and student affairs professionals. Change, 38(6), 40-46.
Brady, S. (1999). Students at the center of education: A collaborative effort. Liberal Education, 5(1), 14-21.
Cross, K.P. (1999). Learning is about connections: The cross papers, number 4. League for Innovation in Community Colleges, Mission Viejo, CA.
Harvey-Smith, A. B. (2003). The adoption of the learning paradigm in student affairs divisions in Vanguard community colleges: A case analysis. Dissertation study, University of Maryland-College Park, MD.
Jacoby, B. (1989). The student as commuter: Developing a comprehensive institutional response. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 7.) Washington, DC: George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Kellogg, K. (1999). Student affairs and academic affairs working together to promote student learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Martin, J., & Murphy, S. (2000). Building a better bridge: Creating effective partnerships between academic affairs and student affairs. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, Washington, DC.
National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. (1998). Annual Report. Washington, DC.
Newton, F. B., & Smith, J. H. (1996). Principles and strategies for enhancing student learning. In S. C. Ender, F. B. Newton, & R. B. Caple (Eds.), Contributing to learning: The role of student affairs (New Directions for Student Services No. 75, pp. 19-32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
O’Banion, T. (1997). A Learning College for the 21st century. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
Shenk, E. & de la Teja, M., (2006) Chapter 12–Collaboration in the Community College. In Lewis, C, & Cook, J. H. (Eds), Divine Comity: The Seven Circles of Effective Collaboration. (To be printed in late 2006 by NASPA.)
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
|
