Transcript  Goal: To consider five issues technologyrelated issues that affect our work as student affairs professionals › Student Expectations › Personal Relationships › Ethical Concerns ›


Goal: To consider five issues technologyrelated issues that affect our work as
student affairs professionals
› Student Expectations
› Personal Relationships
› Ethical Concerns
› Professional Development
› Access Issues

Reflecting on who we are, what we know,
and where we are going

Student Expectations
› How has technology changed students’ expectations of
us as professionals?

Personal Relationships
› How are technological developments changing
relationships within the campus community?

Ethical Concerns
› What ethical challenges does technology present to our
students? What is our role in responding to them?

Professional Development
› How are we staying current and innovative in our work
with students?

Access Issues
› How can we accommodate our use of technology to
include students with different levels of knowledge and
access ?
Constantly “Wired”
› Applied to college using online application
process
› Utilize online registration and classroom tools
› Use cell phones and internet as means to stay
connected to peers, family, etc.
 Connect technology use with “good service”
› Frustrated by slow or out-dated information
› Prefer to use technology as a way to gather
information over face-to-face interactions



As a division, we have to acknowledge the
importance of technology to our students “in
order to maintain the value of the [student
affairs] profession and fulfill the promise to
students who rely on [us] to advocate and
understand their out-of-classroom needs”
(Kleinglass, 2005, p. 26)
“The expectation that information and services
will be available according to the 24/7 service
demands and Web savvy of today’s students
has resulted in efforts by colleges and
universities to transition many routine and
relatively simple institutional transactions to the
Web” (Moneta, 2005, p. 6 )
In what ways does your office currently use
technology resources?
 How do we balance “good service” with
encouraging more realistic expectations?
 What aspects of your work are you
committed to delivering through personal
interactions with students despite student
demands for technology?


Internet Communities
› Facebook.com- 600 colleges and 2.4 million
›
›
›
›
users (Maria Tess Shier)
Form community without geographic or
physical limitations (Maria Tess Shier)
Serve no true academic purpose
Often reinforce negative behaviors and
biases toward others
Complicate engaging students in campus
community

Family Involvement
› Millennial generation views parents as friends
(Howe and Strauss, 2007).
› High level of family involvement in decisions
regarding college admissions process persists
throughout college experience (Coburn,
2006)
› New family concerns: mental health issues,
campus safety, student’s level of satisfaction
with campus services
Involving students in our campus community both
“in and outside the classroom promotes greater
social and academic integration, which can then
lead to persistence” (Braxton, 2003, p. 319).
 “The more successful we are in helping parents
understand the normal stages of late adolescent
development, the less anxious they are likely to be
about their own child’s behavior. The less anxious
they are, the more likely they are to support their
child’s growth in appropriate and meaningful
ways- and the less likely they are to intervene
inappropriately” (Coburn, 2006, p. 10)

How can we use internet communities to
develop new relationships with students?
To connect students with peers?
 How might we use technology resources
to develop meaningful relationships with
families?
 How can we collaborate as a division to
improve relationships as a campus
community through technology?


Academic Integrity
› Technology provides limitless access to
information and methods to cheat
› NSSE 2003 survey: 87% of participating
students admit to copying information
directly from an internet source without
citation “at least some of the time” (Shier)
› “Students find it easier to rationalize or justify
cheating” (McCabe in Levine)

Unhealthy Behaviors
› Internet Addiction
› Gambling
› Illegal Acts- Stalking, File-sharing

Often, students do not realize that these
behaviors are unhealthy or dangerous
“The technological tools for plagiarizing
are always going to outstrip any
technological tools for detecting it”
(Tribble in Levine)
 “The challenge… is to create policies
and approaches that are flexible
enough to meet changing times,
however they may change” (McCollum,
1999, p.1)
 Student affairs professionals are often
charged with responding to these issues

What is our level of responsibility as
professionals to address these kinds of
behaviors?
 How can we collaborate with each other to
address these issues? With students? With
academic affairs? With information
technology services?
 How can we use technology and these
ethical concerns to educate students on
personal and community responsibility?
What do we want them to know?


Underprepared Professionals
› Unclear CAS standards for technology
education in student affairs graduate
programs (Renn & Zeligman, 2005)
› Entry level professionals begin careers with
different levels of training (Renn & Zeligman,
2005)
› High demand for more resources and skill
development at all levels of profession (Dare,
2006)
“Individuals charged with providing
student services in face-to-face
settings…are not being well prepared to
deal with the challenges of integrating
technology and online learners into their
work” (Renn, 2005, p. 547)
 “Beyond developing the skills to use
tools, professionals need to comprehend
and envision how technology can be
used.” (Kleinglass, 2005, p. 30)

What kind of technology training did you
receive in graduate school or in prior positions?
 How comfortable do you feel using
technology in your position? Are there areas in
which you would like to have more training?
 What ideas do you have on better
incorporating technology in our work? How
can we as a Division of Student Affairs promote
innovation and support new ideas?



Students enter college with a wide range of access
to and comfort with technology.
Students benefit from early access to technology.
› A Study Poll study done in 2003 showed that students with
an ACT score between 26 and 36 were more likely to have
had access to a computer than students with ACT scores
of 21 or lower (97 vs. 88 %) (Gifford, BricenoPerriott, Mianzo, 2005).

Identity characteristics can affect access:
› Socioeconomic status
› Race
› Gender
› Age

Almost every step of the college search
and application process has become
electronic.
› Admissions & financial aid applications, class
registration, room selection, etc.

Not all students are equally prepared to
meet these expectations.
› Socioeconomic status surpasses all other
considerations related to the access to technology,
including ethic or minority group affiliation (Solomon,
2002).
In what ways do social identities and
characteristics limit students’ access to
college?
 Do you have expectations of students’
technological knowledge and
capabilities? Is it realistic to have these
expectations of all students?
 How can we as a division ensure that all
students are receiving proper technological
training?


Commitment
› The Division of Student Affairs will dedicate the
resources and support need to address the
challenges posed by technology and to optimize the
learning opportunities it creates.

Collaboration
› In order to fulfill this commitment we will need to
partner with students, academic affairs, and each
other.

Assessment
› To begin this process we will evaluate where we are
on the five issues we have discussed today, create a
strategic plan our divisions goals for technology, and
continue assessing our progress for the upcoming
year.
Ardaiolo, F. P., Bender, B. E., & Roberts, G. (2005). Campus services:
What do students expect? In T. E. Miller, B. E. Bender, & J.H. Schuh
(Eds.), Promoting
Reasonable Expectations. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Braxton, J. M. (2003). Student Success. In Komives, S. R., Woodard, D.B. &
Associates (Eds.), Student Services (317-335). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass .
Coburn, K. L. (2006)Organizing a ground crew for today’s helicopter
parents. About Campus, 11,3,9-16.
Dare, L. (2006) Technology in Student Affairs: Seeking Knowledge,
Craving Community. Student Affairs Online, 7,2.
Gifford, D., Briceno-Perriott, J., & Mianzo, F. (2005). Pen to mouse: Webbased technology’s impact on college admission applications.
Journal of College Admission, 17-18.
Houtz, L.E. & Gupta, U. G. (2001). Nebraska High School Students'
Computer Skills and Attitudes. Journal of Research on Computing in
Education, 33(3), 316-327.
Howe, N. & Strauss, W. (2007). How is the millennial generation of
students changing colleges and universities? Trusteesship, 15,4, 40.
Kleinglass, N. (2005) Who is Driving the Changing Landscape in Student
Affairs. New Directions for Student Services, 112, 25-38.
Levine, J. H. (2001). What we are learning about academic integrity.
About Campus, 6, 1, 9-16.
McCollum, K. (1999). On line, ways to misbehave can outpace college
rules. Chronicle of Higher Education, 46, 4, A35-37.
Moneta, L. (2005). Technology and student affairs: Redux. New
Directions for Student Services, 112,3-14.
Poock, M.C. (2001). A model for integrating professional development
in graduate education. Journal of College Student Development,
35(3), 345-352.Added
Renn K.A. & Zeligman D.M. (2005) Learning about technology and
student affairs: Outcomes of an online immersion. Journal of College
Student Development, 46,5,547-555.
Solomon, G. (2002). Digital Equality: It's not just about access anymore.
Technology and Learning, 22(9), 18-24.
Shier M.T. (2005). The way technology changes how we do what we do.
New Directions for Student Services, 112, 77-86.