Embracing the Power of Programming...Again

A few months ago, I wrote a post entitled "Embracing the Power of Programming".  It was one of my favorite posts because it addressed an issue I had felt for years, but hadn't found the words to articulate.  I was honored last week to have a revised version of this post published in the Student Affairs Feature. With the Student Affairs Feature's support, my piece was read by over 1,200 people.  I have been honored by the people who have retweeted the article, left comments, and become new followers on Twitter.  The closeness and collegiality of our profession is something I couldn't value more.

The original post was a little fiery and feisty, so when I submitted it to the SA Feature, I refined it a bit.  You can find the original by searching the Renewing Leadership archives, but I wanted to post the refined version here.  Thanks again to everyone who read the post.  This is a subject that I care deeply about and I hope it is something that spurs discussion throughout our field.

--Paul

Embracing the Power of Programming

by Paul Shepherd

September 17, 2013

When I started my career in student affairs, I always had a plan in mind. I started as a hall director in residence life, but knew I did not want to stay in a live-in position long. When I connected with others who had aspirations for climbing the proverbial ladder, I noticed the discussion of requisite skills for advancement often centered on supervising as many staff as possible and gaining budget and facility management experience. Supervision, budget management, and facility management are valuable skills to be certain, but what often troubled me was the encouragement from others to “let go” of other responsibilities in favor of the more “managerial” skills. Whether it was said explicitly or implicitly, the message seemed clear. Programming and advising student groups were for the staff further down in the organizational hierarchy.

I feel fortunate to have had the opportunity to progress to the position I hold now because of my focus on programmatic goals. I do fear, however, there are not many of us around. Within the state system of higher education where I work, I believe there are only two other people who share my title and general responsibilities. Most of my counterparts are not in director-level positions existing instead further down the hierarchy reporting to professionals who have more supervision, budget management, and facility management responsibility. Although this may send an unintended message about the importance of or focus on student engagement, I am not sure the hierarchy matters that much. As a director-level person, most of the student affairs meetings I attend focus more on budget and facility management than on student engagement. This may be a sign of the times and driven by a need to respond to the issues of the day, but it is a troubling trend I believe we should take a stand against.

Student affairs should not run away from our programming roots. My experience in this profession has shown me that some (not all) view programming as a task for new professionals or one with a lower priority than other functions that dominate our days.“The need for that intentional interaction has never been more important than it is today and that is where programming comes in.”Our profession was defined by the need for structured interactions with students for the purposes of increased success. The need for that intentional interaction has never been more important than it is today and that is where programming comes in. In an era of accountability and a focus on student success, having an intentional and coordinated strategy for increasing student engagement in educationally purposeful activities could not be more important. In order for student affairs to carve out a relevant role in higher education’s student success mission we need to remember where we came from.

Before there were full-time professionals living in the residence halls and staff serving as conduct officers, career and mental health counselors, orientation staff, and individuals charged with student engagement, faculty tended to all the needs of students. In the late 1890s, an academic leader in our nation espoused a different vision for the future of higher education:

In order that the student may receive his highest success, another step in the onward evolution will take place. The step will be in the scientific study of the student himself. Today the professor’s energy is practically exhausted in his study of the subject which he is to present to the student… [P]rovision must be made, either by the regular instructors or by those appointed especially for the purpose, to study in detail the man or women to whom instruction is offered. (Harper, 1905, p.321)

-William Rainey Harper
President, University of Chicago
Quote taken from a presentation by Dr. Jörg Vianden, UW-La Crosse

Then in the 1930s, a group of leaders in higher education provided additional structure to what William Rainey Harper called, “the scientific study of the student himself.”

This philosophy imposes upon the education institutions the obligation to consider the student as a whole – his intellectual capacity and achievement, his emotional make up, his physical condition, his social relationships, his vocational aptitudes and skills, his moral and religious values, his economic resources, his aesthetic appreciations. It puts emphasis, in brief, upon the development of the student as a person rather than upon his intellectual training alone.

-Student Personnel Point of View, 1937, p.3

Student affairs became the people “appointed especially for the purpose” of creating structured interactions implemented outside the confines of the classroom that would contribute positively to student development. These structured interactions still exist in our current understanding of the role of student affairs in higher education. These interactions happen through the development of programmatic interventions that increase the chances for student success.  

In an effort to synthesize this, I would like to offer three points for broad discussion in our profession to put programming back in its rightful place at the heart of our work.

Programming is More Than Events

I define programming as any structured interaction designed to meet certain outcomes. Some examples of programs that are not events include (but are not limited to):

Conduct Meetings
We could just fine students for violation of policy, but most institutions have a structured process for helping students learn from their experiences and better understand their role and responsibility in a community.

Roommate Agreements and Community Standards
We could have student staff in the residence halls just talk to roommates and floors about the rules, but many institutions have created a structured process that assists students in having sometimes difficult conversations with peers about needs, working through differences, and expectations for themselves and others.

Academic Advising
We could let students sign up for whatever courses they want to take, but most institutions require students to consult with an academic advisor before enrolling in classes each semester. These structured interactions keep students on track toward clarifying and accomplishing their goals.

As we continue to look for strategies to increase the likelihood of college success for all students, multifaceted programs that blur the lines between academic and student affairs will become more important. First year seminars, living learning communities, peer mentoring, and academic skill development are just a few of many other examples of programs that are not events. I believe all types of programs should work together to increase the changes of student success.

Programming is Theory to Practice

All structured interactions student affairs professionals create are often (and should always be in my humble opinion) rooted in student development theory. The Student Personnel Point of View listed a set of outcomes our profession still addresses through the development of structured interactions. Taking a student development theory or philosophical framework and turning it into a student engagement experience designed to meet certain outcomes is what enables us to achieve the vision set forth by the founders of our profession. Sometimes programming can be viewed as “just for fun,” but professionals in our field should embrace the idea there is much more to these structured interactions than entertainment value. It is our job to remember that and make that obvious to students, parents, faculty members, and top administrators.

Programming is About Student Success

No matter what our specific job responsibilities are on a college campus, we should all do what we can to help our students succeed. Student engagement in educationally purposeful experiences contributes significantly to the likelihood of student success. The skills and experiences gained as a result of this engagement contribute significantly to individual self-efficacy and students’ ability to distinguish themselves in a competitive job market post-graduation. There are any number of studies that could be cited to demonstrate the connection between student engagement and success. Let us make this research known on our campuses and bring it alive in our work.

The types of programs proven through research to make a difference in student success are not easily implemented. We need creative and pioneering scholar/practitioners to help our profession live up to its full potential. We need to strengthen the connection between our programs and the academic mission of our institutions through increased assessment and universal recognition that all of us in student affairs should have a role in advancing student engagement.

Programming is the clarion call of our profession. It’s our history and our future. I hope we can all work together to strengthen our efforts to create structured interactions that connect directly to holistic student development and success.

About Paul Shepherd

Paul Shepherd currently serves as the Director of Student Life at the University of Wisconsin – River Falls where he is responsible for a diverse array of student engagement opportunities including leadership, student organizations, social justice education, service/volunteerism, student governance, and campus events. Paul has served the student affairs profession for 13 years and is passionate about student learning and development through intentional co-curricular programming. Paul is currently pursuing a Doctor of Educational Leadership degree and is interested in researching student engagement and persistence to graduation among multicultural, first generation, and low income college students. Paul has served as a presenter, consultant, and speaker in the areas of leadership development, student engagement, bystander intervention, and learning outcomes based assessment. In his spare time, Paul enjoys spending time with his family and blogging at Renewing Leadership. Paul also loves engaging with colleagues and students via Twitter! Follow Paul @pshepRF.