Abstract
Higher education is currently facing some of the most significant stability challenges it has seen in years. Between sharp declines in state aid and revenue, as well as growing challenges from competitors (i.e., Google Career Certificates), the longstanding stability higher education has enjoyed is dwindling. As higher education looks to the future, faculty and student affairs professionals need to find intentional ways to partner, allowing utilization of resources from both parties. This chapter explores one such partnership focused on leadership and civic engagement at a small private university in the Midwest. The chapter includes a framework for collaborative success, built from multiple leadership models, learner orientation, and negotiation tactics.
TopIntroduction
Higher education faces unique challenges to budgets, student engagement, and, more specifically, civic engagement than it has in many years (Evans, Marsicano & Lennartz, 2018). State funding has decreased by nearly nine billion dollars over the past ten years, leading many institutions to cut corners to continue to exist (Mitchell, Leachman & Masterson, 2017). With labor market preparation of the utmost importance for many institutions, this focus can blind us to other essential skills realized in leadership and civic engagement research. First, let us consider career competency and soft skills. While labor market preparation focuses on content, employers look for more than just the content from their incoming workforce. The National Association of Colleges and Employer (NACE, 2020) conducted their annual employer survey, finding that employers rated leadership (72.5%), communication-verbal (69.6%), and ability to work in a team (86.3%) as top-rated attributes for incoming resumes (p. 1). Considering higher education’s direction emphasizing labor market preparation, it falls to faculty and student affairs professionals to change the narrative and provide opportunities for students to gain these soft skills. One needs to look no further than civic engagement to help students achieve these vital skills. This chapter focuses on the following objectives:
- 1.
Awareness of challenges and opportunities within higher education.
- 2.
Designing a collaborative framework model utilizing multiple models from varied disciplines.
- 3.
Highlighting a successful pilot program utilizing the collaborative framework model.
TopBackground
Higher education’s journey toward providing civic engagement opportunities has continued to expand over the past ten years. Dostilio (2017) provides context to this expansion, explaining that “Democratic civic professionals are mindful that they inhabit a multicultural and diverse world, and they prioritize personal responsibility, social responsibility, and inclusive practice to create social partnerships between the post-secondary and community spheres” (p. 4). This change toward civic engagement, along with an increasingly global mindset, adds additional layers of complexity to the work of higher education professionals. There is a feeling of wearing multiple ‘hats’ or assuming multiple roles at many smaller institutions. This change in roles is supported by more recent research, where “…there is no identifiable ‘we,’ or a singular job title that encapsulates the multitude of laborers who supply intermediary administrative work that is central to higher education’s ability to be democratically and collaboratively engaged with the larger public.” (Dostillo, 2017, p. 6). The lack of a singular title or position at many institutions creates a unique challenge for higher education professionals, enacting a balancing act as professionals attempt to focus on their position while also advancing the idea of civic engagement within their institutions. Designing a collaborative model that is both equitable and supportive can be extremely challenging when considering the necessary work to create civic engagement opportunities. Exacerbating that challenge are the very different viewpoints that student affairs professionals and faculty have. In this section, this researcher will discuss several of the challenges potential partnerships may face and opportunities and options to help alleviate the challenges one may encounter when designing collaborative programming.
Here is a shortlist of the potential challenges one may face:
Key Terms in this Chapter
Tertiary Stakeholder: These stakeholders may wish to be informed of current progress but are nowhere near directly affected by the current work. Examples could include a dean in a relevant college, who may be indirectly affected by programming success, but has no direct relation to the program.
Residential Students: Residential students are generally considered those who live on-campus or within a short distance from the campus. These are usually full-time students, and may be traditionally aged.
Stakeholders: The key internal or external entities that are invested in the success of the program. Examples include employees, supervisors (internal), shareholders/investors, and community partners (external).
Change Model: Lewin's Change Model, identified by three distinct phases. In summation, to change an organization's behavior, the current norms need to be melted (unfreezing), followed by implementing a change within the organization (change); finally, if the process is done well, the new norms will become the standard (refreezing).
Secondary Stakeholder: Considered an important but non-essential part of the work. These may be departments that would like to see programs succeed but may not be directly affected by the work. (i.e., a marketing department may be excited about your new civic engagement program, but they were not directly affecting the program's creation.
Experiential Learning: Opportunities that allow for students to experience content in a new way. This can be academic in nature or potentially experiences out in the community (i.e., student teaching).
Non-Residential Students: Non-residential students are considered students who are not a full-time student attending courses at a residential campus. These students may take courses online, may be part-time, but are considered to have other roles that exist outside of being a student. Many non-residential are also older, potentially post-traditional learners.
Collaborative Model: A model that focuses on finding ways to integrate and support multiple stakeholders. Utilizing a collaborative model involves hearing from various stakeholders, identifying potential challenges and opportunities, followed by working together to implement the opportunities and mitigate challenges. This allows additional resources from multiple stakeholders.
Primary Stakeholder: These stakeholders directly affect the quality and success of the program. They may be directly involved in the project or be supervising but should always be brought to the conversation whenever appropriate.
Assessment: The creation of a constant, sustainable, intentional feedback loop. When a new program is created, specific outcomes are expected from the program. Identifiable/tangible items are then associated with the program, allowing the program stakeholders to assess whether they met the outcomes they wanted to. After assessing, improvements are made and the process repeats itself, allowing for better version of the program to occur.