1. Establishing meaningful academic partnerships:  Broadening the lens and language of Student Affairs work
Tuesday, March
Dr. Lua Hancock Vice President, Campus Life & Student Success Stetson University
Dr. Leanna Fenneberg Assistant Vice President, Student Development Saint Louis University
Leanna
Presenters - brief introductions

2. Session Learning Outcomes
Consider the different cultural perceptions, priorities and structures of Student Affairs professionals and faculty
Challenge the lens of student affairs cultural perceptions and open the mind to a new lens of viewing the university
Reflect on opportunities to proactively build relationships with faculty on your home campus
Determine specific actions to promote structural initiatives and individual outreach with faculty partners towards increased student learning and belongingness
Leanna
Highlight learning outcomes

3. WHY focus on partnership?
Leanna
Framing the importance of partnerships – to what end

4. Impact of Partnerships: Outcomes for Students
Acclimation to the institution
Effective transitions
Sense of community
Persistence in college
Engagement
Campus involvement
Academic engagement
Civic engagement
Interactions with faculty and students
Student learning
Making connections
Thinking critically
Taking responsibility for learning
Understanding self
Understanding others
Academic and career decisions
Choice of college
Choice of major
Choice of career
Leanna
Partnership – not a catch phrase or buzz word. Not partnership for the sake of partnership. Done with intentionality – partnerships can have significant impact.
The key factor of this conversation of partnerships and shifting the role of student affairs in university partnership with academic affairs is intentionality
Collaboration or partnership needs to be more than a catch-phrase or professional trend – it needs to be purposefully designed to support student learning and success.
One such article outlines outcomes for students of programs facilitated in partnership between student affairs and academic affairs
Findings from this empirical study across 18 institutions highlight student outcomes of partnership programs to include four categories: acclimation to the institution, engagement, student learning and academic and career decisions and a number of related student outcomes.
(Nesheim, Guentzel, Kellogg, McDonald, Wells, Whitt, 2007)

5. Impact of Partnerships : Additional Outcomes
Demonstration of impact/Accreditation
Shared resources/Fiscal stewardship
Positive campus community/climate
Leanna
Beyond our shared student-focused outcomes – there are other institutional motivations and benefits to partnership

6. WHAT does effective partnership look like?
Lua

7. Coordination versus Collaboration
Lua
Based on Blake & Mouton, 1964

8. What CHALLENGES do we encounter in establishing partnerships?
Lua

9. Stereotypes of Academic And Student Affairs
Lua
Controlled audience participation – shout out…
What stereotypes exist for student affairs?
What stereotypes exist for academic affairs?

10. Board of Trustees and Advisory Boards
Cultural Lenses
Faculty/academic
Student Affairs
Institutional
Students
Alumni
Board of Trustees and Advisory Boards
Lua
Often stereotypes and different cultural lenses detour natural collaborative approaches and understanding.
Various lenses to consider as we approach collaborative work
Along with what we’ll discuss here (SA and AA), there are lenses of student and institutional perspectives.

11. Some Differences Between Student Affairs and Academic Affairs
Activity
Faculty
Student Affairs
How time is spent
Communication
Priorities
Interaction with students
Typical work schedule
Employment status
Meetings/ /etc.
Perceptions of where learning occurs
Organizational structure
Decision-making processes
Lua
Considerations of differences we experience in the cultures of AA and SA
Of course there are in group and individual differences in each of these considerations, we’ll stereotype and generalize to the populations to consider
How we spend our time, the nature of interaction with students, our work schedules and communication styles for example may be very different

12. Academic Structures, Priorities & Perspectives
Teaching, Research & Service
Tenure
Rank/Promotion
Instructor
Assistant Professor
Associate Professor
Professor
Lua
First consider academic lens -3 priorities for faculty – weighted differently per institutional type and size and faculty rank/academic discipline, but generally we all know: Teaching, Research & Service
This can be perceived that faculty are worried about things other than student learning, but fundamentally, faculty are committed to creating and disseminating new information and research which promotes the pursuit of truth and knowledge
Tenure is defined by the American Association of University Professors as “an indefinite appointment that can be terminated only for cause under extraordinary circumstances such as financial exigency and program discontinuation”. The principal purpose of tenure is to safeguard academic freedom. About 21% of faculty have tenure.
Various ranks requiring progressive levels of teaching experience and distinction in teaching, professional activity and service.
Instructor
Assistant Professor
Associate Professor
Professor 

13. Student Affairs Structures, Priorities & Perspectives
Co-curricular involvement and leadership
Out of class student learning
Hierarchical organizational structures
Holistic student development
Part 2:  Increased Understanding: (15 min)
The presenters will share reality about faculty culture.  This will include considerations of faculty priorities and reward structures, promotion and tenure process, ranks, distribution of research/service/teaching and load.  Information will be shared to increase understanding of how to access and learn about the University curriculum and consider shared learning outcomes between student affairs practitioners and faculty.
Consider student affairs lens

14. What do Student Affairs and Academic Affairs Have in Common?
Lua
Positive vs. deficit model
What do we have in common?

15. Belonging, Meaning and Learning
Lua

16. Taking Your Institutional Temperature
Where on this continuum does your campus philosophy associated with student affairs partnering with academic affairs fall?
Good fences good neighbors
Lua
Contiguous with some intersections
Very Fluid

17. Cultural Considerations
Lua

18. Reflecting on a New Mission for Student Affairs
What does it really mean to redefine student affairs work in meaningful ways?
What do our institutions need most from us right now?
What relationships and partnerships must be cultivated if the potential of student affairs is to be fully realized?
What thinking and behaviors must change if student affairs is to exercise the leadership needed of us?
How prepared are we to welcome a new future?
What new knowledge and skills will be needed to realize a new mission, and what will this mean for professional preparation and ongoing professional development?
(Porterfield, Roper & Whitt, 2011)
Leanna
From a Student Affairs lens – partnership work requires us to think differently about our work –a paradigm shift in how we see our work and role
The collaborative Envisioning the Future of Student Affairs document addresses ways Student Affairs needs to rethink our work to address these issues:
A follow-up article discussing the application of these concepts of rethinking student affairs work was published in the Journal of College and Character in Along with institutional examples, it provokes some questions that student affairs professionals need to consider as we continue to meet the needs of higher education in the 21st century.
Not just what have we always done – but what does our institution need from us?
Reflect as a field/division on our role in collaborative work and institutional leadership proactively.

19. Elevate and align efforts with research
Leanna

20. “Groups are far more likely to work together if they share a compelling aim and understand that it can be better accomplished through collaborative alignment across the institution” (p. 94)
“Although single programs or leaders cannot create or sustain such a culture, individual actions can contribute to a campus ethos that values student learning” (p. 147)
Leanna
We found great inspiration on partnership work towards institutional goals of student learning and student success in the book “The Undergraduate Experience”.
It outlines a perspective on institutional conversation on what matters most on our campuses, and 6 things that matter in support, and how to act on those elements.
Two insights from the book here highlight partnership perspectives on the macro (institutional) level
“Groups are far more likely to work together if they share a compelling aim and understand that it can be better accomplished through collaborative alignment across the institution” (pg 94)
And on the micro – individual partnership level
“Although single programs or leaders cannot create or sustain such a culture, individual actions can contribute to a campus ethos that values student learning” (pg 147)

21. Target of change 1st order change 2nd order change Individual
Awareness
Paradigm shift
Group
Membership
Restructuring
Institutional
Programmatic
Systemic
Leanna
We’ve focused primarily on the organizational/structural view of partnership so far.
But we recognize that this work happens on a number of levels.
Pope, Reynolds and Mueller in the Creating Multicultural Change on Campus book – provide a framework for considering levels of change associated with inclusion, including the individual, group and institutional levels, and subsequent orders of change and impact. Applicable to our partnership conversation.

22. “…it is not enough to simply espouse multicultural and equity values
“…it is not enough to simply espouse multicultural and equity values. Instead we must demonstrate our commitment through action” (p. 3)
“…institutional culture and context are shaped by campus climate and the presence or absence of cross cultural dialogue.” (p. 104)

23. Organizational Aspects That Support Partnerships
Institutional mission and priorities
Institutional culture and values
Focus on learning
Structures that respect multiple manifestations of leadership
Assessment & data driven decisions
Shared structures and resources
Rewards structures
Support from senior leaders
Leanna
There are organizational features which support the prioritization and sustainability of partnerships.
Some of these include:
Institutional mission and priorities
Institutional culture and values
Focus on learning (from a holistic, seamless perspective)
Structures that respect multiple manifestations of leadership (opportunities for shared leadership to fully co-author)
Assessment & data driven decisions
Shared structures and resources (creativity and efficiency)
Rewards structures
Support from senior leaders
This list is informed by combined works of Whitt, Nesheim, Guentzel, Kellogg, McDonald, Wells, 2008 and Kezar, 2006

24. HOW do we best facilitate partnerships?
 Leanna

25. We want faculty to understand and respect STUDENT AFFAIRS….
What Will You Do?
We want faculty to understand and respect STUDENT AFFAIRS….
But what are you actively doing to understand and demonstrate respect for FACULTY?
Broadening the lens and our approach to partnership….
We expect faculty to come to our spaces, and to respect our work, but what are we actively doing to engage in their spaces, work and priorities?
Examples….
(from audience if time). A few…
Go to a faculty job talk
Academic panel on a national topic
Reviewing course schedule and individually outreaching to faculty about upcoming events/speakers based on their particular academic interest or research to engage
Etc.

26. Mission
SAPAA provides a forum for interaction among student affairs professionals serving in an academic unit within their institutions and/or those who are interested in the collaboration between student and academic affairs and how this collaboration can continue and thrive in the future.
If you’re interested in further engagement on the topic of partnership – consider involvement with SAPAA KC
Committees
Social and Networking
Technology
Research and Scholarship
Communications
Regional Representatives
Assessment & Persistence Conference liaison
Working Groups
Academic Advising
Career Services
Living Learning Communities
Service Learning and Civic Engagement/CLDE conference support

27. Follow us on Social Media
Facebook SAPAA.KC
Twitter SAPAAKC1
LinkedIn Student Affairs Partnering with Academic Affairs (SAPAA)
If you’re interested in further engagement on the topic of partnership – consider involvement with SAPAA KC
Committees
Social and Networking
Technology
Research and Scholarship
Communications
Regional Representatives
Assessment & Persistence Conference liaison
Working Groups
Academic Advising
Career Services
Living Learning Communities
Service Learning and Civic Engagement/CLDE conference support

28. References
Arminio, J., Torres, V. & Pope, R.L. (2012). Why aren’t we there yet? Taking personal responsibility for creating an inclusive campus. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Association of American Colleges and Universities (2011). The LEAP vision for learning:
Outcomes, practices, impact and employers’ views. Washington, DC: AAC&U.
Felten, P., Gardner, J.N., Schroeder, C.C., Lambert, L.M., Barefoot, B.O. (2016). The Undergraduate Experience: Focusing institutions on what matters most. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Guentzel, M., Guentzel, M., McDonald, W., Kellogg, A., & Whitt, E. (2007). Outcomes for
students of student affairs – Academic affairs partnership programs. Journal of College
Student Development, 48(4), Retrieved from
t/v048/48.4nesheim.html
Keeling, R. (2006). Learning reconsidered 2: A practical guide to implementing a campus-wide
focus on the student experience. Washington, DC: NASPA.
Keeling, R., & Dungy, G. (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student
experience, (pp. 1-43). Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel
Administrators, American College Personnel Association.

29. References
Kezar, A. (2006). Redesigning for collaboration in learning initiatives: An examination of four
highly collaborative campuses. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(5),
Kezar, A. (2009). Supporting and enhancing student learning through partnerships with
academic colleagues. In G.S. McClellan & J. Stringer (Eds.), The handbook of student
affairs administration (pp ). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kuh, G. D. (2005). Documenting effective educational practice (project). In G.D. Kuh, J. Kinzie,
J.H. Schuh, & E.J. Whitt (Eds.), Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter
(pp ). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Newell, W. (1999). The promise of integrative learning. About Campus, 4,
Newell, W. (2010). Educating for a complex world: Integrative learning and interdisciplinary
studies. Liberal Education, 96, 6-11.
Pope, R. L., Reynolds, A. L., & Mueller, J. A. (2004). Multicultural competence in student affairs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

30. References
Porterfield, K.T., Roper, L.D., & Whitt, E.J. (2011). Redefining our mission: What does higher
education need from student affairs? Journal of College & Character, 12(4), 1-7.
Task Force on the Future of Student Affairs, Appointed jointly by ACPA and JASPA (2010).
Envisioning the future of student affairs.  Retrieved from:
Whitt, E.J., Nesheim, B.E., and Guentzel, M.J., et. al. (2008). Principles of good practice for academic and student affairs partnership programs. Journal of College Student Development, 49(3), Project MUSE. Web. 21 Jan Retrieved from