Author: ACPAAdmin

Supporting Students with Differing Beliefs | King

Abstract

 In a world of differing views and beliefs, it can be challenging to support all students in the way they need while balancing personal beliefs. In this case study, a graduate student will be faced with a challenging event proposal from a student organization that conflicts with her personal views. Will she be able to balance her personal beliefs with her responsibility to support all students?

Keywords/Phrases: Campus Activities, Student Support, Challenging Beliefs

Characters

Bennett Alexander – (he/him) He is a senior at Oceanwest University and the President of the Advocates for All organization. He identifies as White, heterosexual, and religious.

Alaina North – (she/her) She is a sophomore at Oceanwest University and the President of the Proud to be Me organization. She identifies as White, bisexual, and non-religious.

Morgan Tile – (she/her) She is a graduate student in the Higher Education program at Oceanwest University and serves as the Graduate Assistant for Campus Activities in the Office of Student Engagement. She has only been in the role for about a month. She identifies as biracial, pansexual, and religious but non-practicing.

Terrence Green, M.Ed. – (he/him) He is the Director of Student Engagement at Oceanwest University and has been in the role for eight years. He did not follow the traditional Student Affairs route and instead has experience working as an Assistant Principal of a Middle School for five years prior to switching fields. He identifies as Black, heterosexual, and religious.

Elizabeth Fort, Ph.D. – (she/her) She is the Vice President of Student Affairs at Oceanwest University and has been in the role for two years. She has a long history of working in Student Affairs, and recently finished her Ph.D. program studying the effects of practitioner bias in student support. She identifies as White, heterosexual, and non-religious.

Context

Oceanwest University is a private, four-year University with about 10,000 undergraduate students and 5,000 graduate students. Oceanwest is not religiously affiliated and has a strong mission statement that includes a commitment to a diverse and inclusive campus with the goal of creating a sense of belonging for every student. Oceanwest prides itself on supporting all students and allowing space for challenging conversations about differing views to prepare students for life after graduation. 

Case Study

The door slams shut, and the room suddenly goes cold. Terrence takes a seat behind his desk and lets out a sigh. Morgan feels uncomfortable with the tension in the room. She is nervous at the thought of being in trouble because she is someone who always does things by the book and avoids getting in trouble at all costs. Some may say she is a bit of a people pleaser. Terrence begins to tell Morgan why he has called her into his office today, “So, I am guessing you know why you are here. I received a phone call this morning from Vice President Fort who had a lengthy conversation with the parents of Bennett Alexander, a student you worked with last week? Dr. Fort explained that Bennett feels that his freedom of speech is being violated and that he was told his beliefs were wrong. Would you please care to explain what happened here?” Morgan takes a deep breath before starting the story.

About a week ago, Morgan was working in her office after finishing her one on ones with her student staff for the day. She heard a knock at the door and looked up to see a student standing in the doorway. “Good morning, my name is Bennett. I was told you were the person to talk to if I need help coordinating an event for my organization?” Morgan invited Bennett in to take a seat and tell her more about his organization and event proposal. Bennett explained that his organization is called Advocates for All and works to provide a space for religiously conservative students on campus to gather and discuss current issues. They believe that equality means all people were created equal and should be treated as such. Morgan shifted uncomfortably in her seat and with a sterner tone asked what his event proposal was.

Bennett shared that his organization would like to host a panel with guest speakers. The topic of the event would be “The Negative Impacts of Promoting LGBTQ+ Rights in the Classroom”. Morgan was taken aback by this proposal. As a pansexual woman, she fought the outrage that was boiling up inside her and tried not to have an outburst at this student sitting in front of her. She asked, “So what exactly is the goal of this panel?” Bennett explained that his organization believes that teaching about LGBTQ+ rights is convincing students to believe things that they do not actually believe, and that bringing professionals to campus to discuss this topic more would help students better understand why LGBTQ+ issues were being taught and what the potential negative impacts could be. Morgan told Bennett that Oceanwest’s mission is to promote a safe environment for all students of all backgrounds and identities. Bennett said he gets that, but that every belief has two sides and both sides deserve space and time to be discussed. Morgan acknowledged that but told Bennett that this event would be too harmful for the LGBTQ+ population and he would need to think of a different event. Bennett told Morgan that she was silencing the voices of the students in his organization and that she “would regret this decision”.

Terrence asks Morgan to explain the reasoning behind her decision, and she was confused that Terrence was not supporting her on this issue. Morgan explained that she was following the university’s mission and she thought this event would be more harmful to the student body than informative. Terrence asked if attendance to this event would have been mandatory for all students, or if it would have been voluntary. Morgan tells him he is not sure, but that she assumes attendance would be voluntary. Terrence explains that while it may be harmful to have this event take place, Advocates for All is well within their right to hold this panel and students could choose whether or not to attend which minimizes the harm. Terrence instructs Morgan to call Bennett in for a meeting where she will apologize for the confusion, explain that she is new to her role and made an honest mistake, and help him coordinate the event. Morgan tells Terrence that she cannot in good conscience support this event, and Terrence explains that he understands that and how hard this can be, but that their roles are to support all students no matter their own personal beliefs. Morgan is frustrated but tells Terrence that she understands and will do as he asks.

Morgan holds the meeting, and Bennett accepts her apology and is excited that the event will be happening. They discuss the details and Morgan helps him reserve the spaces, think of marketing ideas, and talk through event logistics.

That night, Morgan is restless as she tries to go to bed. She cannot believe that she is being forced to give up her own beliefs and not only support an event like this, but to assist in the planning. She decides to do something a little drastic. The next morning, Morgan reaches out to a student who she has been able to grow a strong relationship with during her short time at Oceanwest. Alaina is the President of the Proud to be Me organization which promotes LGBTQ+ advocacy and support on campus. Morgan tells Alaina about the upcoming event and asks if she would be willing to organize a protest to show the Advocates for All the harm they are doing. Alaina tells Morgan absolutely and gets to work.

Morgan feels relieved, but that relief immediately vanishes when she gets called into Vice President Fort’s office the next day. Apparently, Alaina did not organize a peaceful protest, but she instead organized a rally of students who threw all sorts of objects and profanities at anyone attending the event causing multiple hospitalizations. Vice President Fort explains that the campus police are investigating and Alaina told them that Morgan was the one who asked her to protest. Vice President Fort says the university is exploring its options related to addressing the incident, the students involved, and Morgan’s role in the situation.

 Discussion Questions

  1. What are the ethical issues for each character in this case?
  2. How do you balance personal beliefs and your duty to support all students?
  3. How should the university respond to Morgan’s actions?
  4. Would you have done anything differently if you were Terrence? If you were Morgan? If so, what? If not, why not?

  

Author Bio

 Chris King, (he/him) is a current second-year graduate student in the M.Ed. Counselor Education – Student Affairs program at Clemson University and serves as a Graduate Community Director. He received a B.S. in Educational Studies, Social Welfare & Justice, and a minor in Human Resource Management from Marquette University.

Rookie Knight | Jurkiewicz & Friedrichsen

This scenario follows Clara Bishop, a first-year student, who is trying to join the chess club at her university. The chess club is very large and popular here, and it is said that it can be very selective with its members. Clara is at university on scholarship, and misses her meeting with her scholarship advisor, Julia. Clara sends Julia an email apologizing for missing the meeting, and Julia sets up a virtual meeting instead. During the meeting, Clara discloses some information about why she missed the meeting – an event known as “Rookie Knight” – that is alarming to Julia.

Keywords: hazing, student organizations, mandatory reporters

Primary Characters

  1. Clara Bishop (She/Her/Hers): New member of the Chess Club; first year; scholarship student
  2. Julia Scramble (She/They): Graduate Advisor Scholarship Program
  3. Taylor Queensly (She/Her/Hers): President of the Chess Club; senior
  4. Geoff Kingston (He/Him/His): Vice President of the Chess Club; junior

Campus Context

Castle University is a public university nestled in Providence, Rhode Island. There are about 20,000 undergraduates enrolled in the institution. The Chess Club at Castle University is very prestigious and was one of the first organized clubs created at the University.

Opening Context

Hi Julia,

So sorry about missing our meeting this morning. Chess club has been taking up a lot of my time. I actually missed all of my classes before our planned meeting. My legs have been so sore after our last chess event, so I haven’t been able to walk anywhere.

Can we reschedule for later this week?

Thanks,

Clara Bishop

Discussion Questions:

  1. What are your initial responses to this email?
  2. How would you follow up with this student?

Later That Day

In a virtual meeting later that day with Clara, Julia asks how the Chess Club has been going. Clara discloses that she was very stressed out leading up to the “Rookie Knight.” Clara states that she has been sore since that event. Julia asks for more information about “Rookie Knight” as they are unfamiliar with this event.

Clara is initially hesitant because she was told not to talk about it by the President of the Chess Club. Clara says, “All of the new people and I who want to join the club were invited over to the Vice President’s house off-campus for “Rookie Knight”. During the week leading up to the meeting, some of the current members would come up to those of us who wanted to join and give us clothes or props, and a white or black bracelet. I was supposed to be a “Knight,” so they gave me a stick horse, but other students who were supposed to be “Rooks” were given things like bags of bricks. We were told that we had to keep these with us and wear the clothes and bracelet for the full week and bring them to “Rookie Knight.”

Clara continued, “When we got there, all of us were brought to the garage and there was a large chalk chessboard on the floor. It was weird because there were only 32 of us and I didn’t see some of my friends that were also interested in the Chess Club. We were told to grab our props and stand on either side of the board wherever our pieces were placed. Once we were all in our places, we were told that the President and Vice President would be controlling us and we would be playing “Human Sized Chess.”

Julia listens attentively, which encourages Clara to share more about the event. “At first we thought it would be really fun, and we all were really excited to play. But then when the first piece got out, the President said that they had to go and wait in the basement and told us that the losing team would not be allowed to join the chess club. We got worried and started trying to give advice so that our teams would win, and the President and Vice President would stop the game for a few minutes to yell at us every time we did, making the game take longer. The president also told us that if we sat down at all we would not be allowed to join the club. I got out probably about 40 minutes of standing and moving around, and I went down to the basement. We weren’t able to see or hear what was going on, so we had no idea who was doing better until new people came down and shared updates.”

Clara’s voice cracks. little as she finishes her story. “The game lasted for another 30 minutes at least before all of the players with white bracelets were brought to the basement. Some of them were crying, and all of the players with black bracelets were brought back upstairs. We sat in the basement for a few minutes before the Vice President came down and started yelling at us, telling us he was disappointed in us and that we weren’t good enough to be in the chess club. He screamed for about 10 minutes while the other team was upstairs cheering. As the Vice President was about to leave, he turned back and said ‘Just kidding! Welcome to the chess club! You’re all in!’ and started laughing at us. We all came upstairs and there was food and cake in the garage, and chairs for us to sit in.”

Clara realizes she has told Julia everything and states she doesn’t want anyone to get in trouble and it all worked out in the end. She does not want to leave the chess club. Clara asks Julia not to tell anyone else about it, and says she is worried she might lose her scholarship for talking about it.

Discussion Questions

  1. How can Julia support Clara during the meeting?
  2. How would you define what happened to Clara and the other newer members?
  3. What were the red flags before, during, and after Rookie Knight?
  4. Why might Clara say that what happened worked out okay in the end?
  5. What are Julia’s next steps? Think about policies, student support, education, etc.
  6. What education do President Taylor and Vice President Geoff and other members of the Chess Club need related to leadership, personal values, organizational ethics, and campus policy?

Sara Jurkiewicz (she/her/hers): Sara is a second-year graduate student in the College Student Personnel program at Bowling Green State University. Sara’s assistantship is with Fraternity and Sorority Life.

Gavin Friedrichsen (he/him/his): Gavin is a second-year graduate student in the College Student Personnel program at Bowling Green State University. Currently Gavin is working full-time as a Coordinator for Student Conduct and Conflict Resolution in BGSU’s Office of the Dean of Students.

Revisiting the Basics | Heinzman

Abstract:

A residential student returned to the halls intoxicated from a fraternity party alleging they were sexually assaulted. The suitemates reached out for help and the individual took more substances. The student was released from the hospital only an hour after transport.

Keywords/Phrases:

Campus Police, Greek Life, Hospital Transport, Residential Community, Residential Community, Sexual Assault, Suicide Attempt, Title IX

Characters:

  • Angela Johnson (she/her) – Resident Assistant (19), Sophomore studying biology on the pre-med track. She is currently taking the Emergency Medical Technician class because she hopes to volunteer with the College Emergency Medical Services team the upcoming semester. Angela has been an exemplary RA! She actively engages with her residents, is on time with administrative work, is attentive and engaged at staff meetings. As a first year RA she is standing out on the team.
  • Sarah MaCaslan (she/her) – Resident of 728, first-year in-state student (19). Within her suite, she always tries to include everyone and make sure they spend at least one night a week all together. Sarah wanted to join a sorority because she was timid in high school and wanted to make more friends. She was thrilled when she was invited to join her top choice sorority. She has been busy attending events and getting to know the other women in the organization. She gets along well her suite mates. Her roommate Jill also went through the sorority recruitment process but is in a different organization. Sarah does not spend much time in the residence hall.
  • Jill Goldman (she/her) – Resident of 728, first-year out-of-state student, age 18. Jill picked this college because it is close to where her family used to live. They come back every summer to visit. She knows the area well. She participated in sorority recruitment and was invited to be a member of her first choice which is the same organization as her mother. Jill loves her roommate Sarah. They get along very well. Jill likes the other women in the suite. She was really nervous about living with people but she is happy it is working out well.
  • Christy Tucker (she/her) – Resident of 730, first-year in-state student (18). She picked this college because it was as far from home as she could get while remaining in the state (a requirement for her parents to help her with college). She was academically strong in high school but seems to be enjoying the social aspects of college. Christy has been involved in a few minor incident reports related to noise but there was nothing else. There are no known issues within the suite. Everyone is getting along well. They enjoy spending time with one another at meals or going out.
  • Alex Briney (he/him) – Residence Hall Director On-Call – Alex has been working for the college for two years. He attended a graduate program at rural institution. He loved the institution and wanted a new experience of working at an urban campus. The first year was a challenging as Alex transitioned to the full-time position and learned to set boundaries. He is feeling much more confident in his position this year. Alex oversees the apartment complexes on the other side of campus and has not spent much time in this residence hall.

Important Information

  • Rooms 728-730 are connected by a shared bathroom
  • Assume all protocols were followed at the time of the incident.
  • SRMH – Southern Regional Medical Hospital (one of three local hospitals)

Incident

You are the Director of Residence Life at a mid-sized public institution located in a mid-sized metropolitan city. The on-campus student population is predominately first year students. There a many nearby private apartment complexes which cater to the student population. These apartment complexes are so close that students frequently walk to campus, and city residents do not always know which buildings are run by the institution and which are privately owned. About 10% of the student population live farther away from campus and students frequently use ride shares as there in limited public transportation (only operational during the day).

In the early hours of a Wednesday morning, you are notified by the on-call Residence Hall Director that a student was transported to one of several local hospitals for public intoxication. You are informed that the person was alert, a little argumentative, and the EMS team evaluating the student determined it was best to transport the student to the hospital for a more thorough evaluation. According to the information your received and the institution’s standard operating procedures, no action was required by university staff in the moment and follow up in the morning was appropriate.

On Wednesday morning, you are in your office and you read the following incident report related to the overnight call:

On Tuesday, September 23rd at 11:30pm Resident Isobel MaCaslan knocked on Resident Assistant (RA) Angela Johnson’s door. MaCaslan explained that suitemate Resident Christy Tucker asked to speak to the RA Johnson but did not want public safety contacted. MaCaslan explained to RA Johnson that Tucker, MaCaslan, and Resident Jill Goldman were out at an off-campus fraternity party when they began feeling unsafe. MaCaslan and Goldman called a ride home and tried convincing Tucker to come with them, but Tucker refused. After MaCaslan and Goldman had gotten back to the Residence Hall, Tucker showed up telling them Tucker had been sexually assaulted at the party.

Upon hearing this, RA Johnson went to room 728 where Tucker was sitting on the floor crying. MaCaslan and Goldman were in the room as well. RA Johnson tried to talk to Tucker for a while but Tucker was switching between sobbing and yelling. RA Johnson could not get Tucker to calmly talk to RA Johnson. Tucker was slurring her speech and was unable to focus. RA Johnson called Campus Safety at 12:28 am. RA Johnson went to meet EMS at the building entrance. Before RA Johnson went to meet Campus Safety, Tucker asked for food. RA Johnson left Tucker with MaCaslan and Goldman as she went to meet Campus Safety. While RA Johnson was escorting Campus Safety and MaCaslan was making food, Tucker drank half a bottle of Nyquil and took 5-6 Cyclobenzaprine.

At 12:30am, Goldman contacted RA Johnson (who was waiting for EMS) stating Tucker had taken more prescribed pills and was fading in and out of consciousness. Campus Safety and EMS arrived at 12:38am. Upon arriving on the scene, EMS used a sternal rub to wake Tucker who was unconscious. The sternal rub woke Tucker who immediately began to yell and swear at everyone. Tucker insisted they were fine and did not need to be transported to the hospital. Tucker said it is their norm to drink Nyquil and take pills every night to sleep. Tucker was screaming at RA Johnson for calling Campus Safety. Tucker was screaming at their suitemates for not letting them sleep and for leaving them at the party. Tucker became so worked up that she was incoherent. Campus Safety and EMS told Tucker they needed to transport Tucker to the hospital because of the loss of consciousness. Tucker was loaded into the ambulance and transported to one of the local hospitals.

RHD Alex Briney (RHD on-call) was called by RA Johnson at 12:48am. Tucker was taken to the hospital at 12:50am. RHD Briney collected the relevant information and relayed it to the Director of Residence Life.

At 1:32am Tucker began calling MaCaslan and Goldman as well as sending threatening messages. Tucker arrived back at Freedom Residence Hall at 3:40am where she began knocking loudly on MaCaslan and Goldman’s door and her door 730 (Resident Tucker did not have her key) as well as screaming. Tucker then went to RA Johnson’s room loudly knocking and screaming to open the door. Residents on the floor called Campus Safety. At 1:35 am, Campus Safety arrived at Freedom Residence Hall.  All of the students gathered in the hall immediately scattered into rooms with closed doors. Campus Safety did a complete walk through of the building, passed through the seventh floor again. There was not further noise or disturbance. Campus Safety left the building.

As you finish reading the incident report, your office phone begins to ring. On the other line it is your supervisor, the Dean of Students, who has also just finished reading the incident report. Your supervisor wants to know your plan.

Discussion Questions

  • What information do you (the director) need to gather to assist with follow up?
  • What immediate steps do you need to take?
  • What are the mid-term and long-term steps you would take?
  • What offices need to be involved?
  • How do you support your staff?
  • What additional training does your staff need to be prepared for situations like this?
  • What (if any) procedural changes would you like to address?
  • What (if an) relationships need to be strengthened to help prevent situations like this from happening again?

Advanced Discussion Questions

Imagine that you are new to the department. During your first six months, you have learned that the department is very siloed and communication between departments has been challenging because everyone is so focused on making their programs succeed. Which office would you want to work with to better support this student in crisis and her suitemates? What steps would you take to build relationships across campus?

Author Bio:

Joy Heinzman (she/her) is the Associate Director of Residence Life at the College of Charleston. She started at CofC in July 2017, as a Residence Life Coordinator then as Assistant Director for Residence Life. Joy attended the University of New Hampshire and earned a dual bachelor’s degree in Spanish and Psychology. She attended graduate school at the University of Maine where she obtained her Master’s in Education in Student Development in Higher Education. Before coming to Charleston, Joy was a Residence Hall Director at Christopher Newport University and the Assistant Director of Student Learning Initiatives at James Madison University.

When Community Isn’t Constructive | Hassenstab

Abstract

This case study focuses on a sexual misconduct incident within Fraternity and Sorority Life. The issue involves student leaders as well as the university’s Title IX office. Student conduct, well-being and safety are also discussed.

 Keywords: Fraternity and Sorority Life, Student Leadership, Conduct, Safety and Well-Being

Characters

  • Emery (she/her): Chapter President, Delta Nu sorority.

Emery is a second-semester junior at State University and a third-year member of Delta Nu sorority. This is her second term on the sorority’s Executive Board and her first semester as Chapter President. Previously, she served as the Vice President for Standards and Ethics.

  • Marley (she/her): Vice President of Standards and Ethics, Delta Nu sorority

Marley is a second-semester sophomore at State University and a second-year member of Delta Nu sorority. This is her first term on the sorority’s executive board, previously serving as the chapter’s Wellness Chair.

  • Maddy (she/her): Member, Delta Nu sorority.

Maddy is a second-semester sophomore at State University. This is her first year in Delta Nu sorority, having gone through sorority recruitment as a sophomore earlier in the year. She has been a highly involved member since joining and has always been in good standing with the chapter.

  • Quinlan (she/her): Executive Chapter Advisor, Delta Nu sorority.

Quinlan is in her third year of advising the Delta Nu chapter at State University. She spent two years as the Standards and Ethics Advisor and became the Executive Chapter Advisor at the beginning of this school year. Quinlan was an active member of Delta Nu at a different college as an undergrad and worked as a full-time Leadership Consultant for Delta Nu in the year after she graduated, prior to taking the advising position with the chapter at State University. She has been Emery’s advisor for the past two years, and the two have a very honest and trusting relationship.

  • Stephanie (she/her): Fraternity and Sorority Life Coordinator, State University.

Stephanie is in her second year as the Fraternity and Sorority Life (FSL) Coordinator at State University. She was hired for the role immediately after graduating from State University’s Student Affairs program, during which she served as the Graduate Assistant for FSL.

  • Kristy (she/her): Title IX Coordinator, State University.

Kristy is in her 13th year as the Title IX Coordinator at State University. She frequently deals with issues relating to student organizations and has a strong understanding of the FSL community at State University. She and Stephanie have not worked with each other on any other issues prior to this situation.

Context

State University is a mid-sized, public institution in the Midwest with a total enrollment of 12,000 students (9,000 undergraduate, 3,000 graduate). Fraternity and Sorority Life at State University is relatively small, with the campus having four fraternities, five sororities, and three multicultural Greek organizations. Approximately 10% of the total student population is affiliated with one of these chapters, with the average chapter size being 60 members.

Case Study

Emery, the current Chapter President of Delta Nu sorority, paces back and forth in the hallway of State University’s Student Union. She has just left a meeting with the university’s Title IX Coordinator, Stephanie, about an ongoing issue between members of her chapter and one of the fraternities on campus, Omega Sigma. It’s only February, two months into her presidency, and she can hardly believe the intensity of the issues she’s had to face.

The concerns with Omega Sigma began a month earlier when Delta Nu’s Social Chair announced that the sorority had been paired with Omega Sigma for their upcoming mixer. These mixers help promote a sense of community among chapters on campus. Each fraternity and sorority has to partner with every other chapter on campus at some point during the academic year; these functions are generally opportunities for the paired chapters to socialize. Failure to partner with every other chapter on campus would result in the offending chapter being placed on social probation through the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Life the following semester, causing the chapter to lose the privilege of hosting any formal or semi-formal events.

In the week following the mixer announcement, Maddy, a sophomore who was in her first year of membership, asked to meet with Marley, Delta Nu’s Vice President of Standards and Ethics. In that meeting, Maddy shared concerns about the reputations of several Omega Sigma members, including screenshots of inappropriate and suggestive messages that were sent to Delta Nu members, including Maddy. Maddy expressed concern for the safety of her sorority sisters and shared that she and other sorority members would be more comfortable if the chapters did not host an event together. Marley assured her that she would express her concerns to the Chapter President, Emery, which she did the following day.

After discussing Maddy’s concerns, Emery and Marley brought Quinlan, their sorority advisor, into the conversation. Not wanting to put chapter members in harm’s way, they called a meeting with Stephanie, the FSL Coordinator. During this meeting, with Maddy’s permission, they shared the screenshots that had been shown to Marley and expressed their concerns about the upcoming mixer. Stephanie explained that it was FSL policy for them to host an event with every chapter and was unwilling to make an exception, citing that it wouldn’t be fair to the other chapters on campus if they were not all held to the same standards.

Fearful of facing social probation, Quinlan assisted Emery in making a formal Title IX complaint through State University’s Office of Compliance and Equity Management. Kristy, the Title IX Coordinator, processed the complaint and was willing to meet with the sorority officers and Stephanie about the situation. Unfortunately, they were unable to reach a resolution during the meeting, as Kristy did not have jurisdiction over the policies of the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Life, and Stephanie was adamant that the fraternity members had not violated the FSL Code of Conduct, as no inappropriate actions could be proven.

As she mulled over what had happened in the meeting, Emery couldn’t help but feel as though she was caught between protecting her sorority sisters and maintaining the chapter’s good standing on campus. She could never have imagined having to face such intense situations prior to being in this role, and she didn’t know what the best course of action was. All she knew was that acting in the best interest of her sisters and keeping the chapter in good standing at the same time seemed impossible.

Discussion Questions

  1. How do we protect the well-being of members while fostering a robust FSL community?
  2. How do we protect the well-being of chapter presidents and standards chairs while still giving members trusted individuals to go to when these types of situations arise?
  3. What are some ways that the Title IX Coordinator and the FSL Coordinator could work together more effectively in addressing this situation?
  4. How might the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Life work proactively to address or educate about situations of sexual misconduct among members of the FSL community?

Erin Hassenstab (she/her) is an advocate for an accessible, meaningful college experience for all students. A second-year master’s student at Clemson University, she is obtaining her M.Ed. with a focus on Student Affairs. In addition to her degree program, she serves as the Graduate Assistant for Residential Learning. Her involvement across her college campus on numerous executive councils led her to want to help other students have a meaningful college experience that would equip them with skills to help them succeed in their professional lives.

Gossip and the Gray Area: Navigating Friendships and Boundaries between Students and Staff | Gonzalez

Abstract

This case study examines ethical leadership issues for both student leadership roles and university employees interacting closely with students, specifically looking at gossip and overstepping boundaries. Graduate students in Student Affairs graduate programs may struggle to name inappropriate behaviors or report them properly if they have not had to do so before or if they lack a role model or mentor to demonstrate how to hold peers and students accountable. This can be particularly difficult when the behaviors are not necessarily violations of policy but rather contribute to a negative environment or culture.

Primary Characters

Giovanna (she, her, hers, ella) – Giovanna is a first-year master’s student in the Student Affairs in Higher Education program. She is an out of state student, excited to work with the Center for Multicultural Engagement and specifically in advising multicultural student organizations for her Spring Practicum experience. She was a member of her undergraduate institution’s Association of Chicanx Activists (ACHa) and is eager to serve as the primary advisor to the organization as part of her practicum.

Anais (she, her, hers, ella) – Anais is a junior pursuing a degree in Behavioral Neuroscience with hopes of becoming a pediatrician in an underserved community much like the one she grew up in. She is one of three programmers in ACHa for the academic year and is passionate about community service and wellness.

Cameron (she, her, hers) – Cameron is the Assistant Director for Student Organizations within the Center for Multicultural Engagement. She was the graduate assistant for the center in the previous academic year before she was offered a full-time position.

Daniel (he, him, his) – Daniel is the Director of the Center for Multicultural Engagement and both Cameron’s and Giovanna’s direct supervisor in their respective roles.

Keywords: student organizations, student leaders, peer influence, advising

Context and Case

Institutional Context

Sagewood University is a medium-sized private, liberal arts university in the Southwest region of the United States. Throughout SU’s history 16-20% of its undergraduate students identify as Hispanic or Latino, and Latino/a/x students have built strong networks within the institution as well as enduring identity-based student organizations. Other minority groups have also formed respective student organizations though their overall number of students participating in these groups are consistently low. SU’s Center for Multicultural Engagement has been a steady supporter of these student organizations as well as a respected and well-known office on campus.

Case

Giovanna is a month into the spring semester of her first year in the Student Affairs and Higher Education master’s program at Sagewood University and feeling positive about her practicum site. She was initially hesitant to work in the Center for Multicultural Engagement as an advisor to the Association of Chicanx Activists (ACHa) and program coordinator for Sexual Assault Awareness Month in April in collaboration with the university’s Women’s Center. As a former ACHista (member of ACHa) at her undergraduate institution, she was nervous to sell herself short by potentially repeating an experience she had as an undergraduate. Those fears quickly subsided as she met executive board members and learned about the various issues they advocated for. She enjoyed attending body meetings and looked forward to one on one’s with each executive board member.

Today, Giovanna meets with Anais, one of three programmers in ACHa. Anais’ passion area is health and wellness, and she enjoys incorporating that lens into ACHa’s activism and community service. With Sexual Assault Awareness month on the horizon in April, the e-board unanimously voted for Anais to lead programming efforts and speak on behalf of ACHa at any public events. ACHa participates in annual programs such as relationship skill building workshops, Take Back the Night march, and Denim Day among other campus-wide events in collaboration with the campus’ Women’s Center.

Anais’ big task now is to present ACHa’s efforts at the next Multicultural Commons Coalition meeting and encourage peers to participate. The coalition meeting includes executive board members and regular members from the campus’ Black Students Union, Asian Students Association, Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanx de Aztlán (MEChA), and International Students Organization.

When Giovanna mentions the coalition meeting and asks if Anais has thought about what she would like to say, Anais grows quiet and looks down at her feet. Giovanna lets Anais know that its normal to be nervous and they can work on her remarks together if she’d like. “It’s not that,” Anais says. Giovanna is uncertain about what to say next; she has never seen Anais like this and is concerned. Anais says, “I don’t want this to change how you see me, but I was sexually assaulted in my freshman year. I went through the Title IX process, and nothing really happened, and I’ve gone to counseling for this so I’m better now, but I just don’t know if I can handle being the face of all our Sexual Assault Awareness events.” Anais continues to share how she wants to be a team player and support her peers, especially since they believe in her so much, but she is unsure if she can handle being immersed in the topic from here until May.

Giovanna asks if Anais has shared this with any of the ACHa executive board members; she’s seen their dynamic and believes that if they knew, they would understand and ask someone else to lead. Tears welling up, Anais shares, “I want to, but I just don’t think I can. We’re all friends but everyone always gossips and shares each other’s business with everyone, especially in the coalition.” Anais continues, “I even feel weird right now because I’m talking to you about this and not Cameron. But she also talks a lot with the e-board members about people’s lives and I don’t want them talking about me.” Giovanna feels heat coming to her face- she is struggling to imagine Cameron gossiping with students, especially as a new full-time employee.

Before leaving her one on one, Giovanna tells Anais that she will discuss this with her supervisor, Daniel, without letting Cameron or the executive board members know, to see if there are alternative ways for Anais to engage with the events without necessarily leading them. Giovanna knows Cameron has a good relationship with Daniel and the various executive boards as she had been the graduate assistant for the Center for Multicultural Engagement last year. Giovanna feels awkward approaching him with this topic and sharing Anais’ concerns about gossip. While she has not personally seen Cameron engage in gossip with students, Anais’ words and emotions feel too vulnerable to ignore.

Discussion Questions

  1. How might you have responded to Anais in this conversation? How would you navigate Anais’ concerns regarding a full-time staff member engaging in gossip with students?
  2. What responsibility does Giovanna have in this situation? What about Daniel?
  3. What follow-up (if any) should there be with Anais? With Cameron?
  4. What are Anais’ options in this situation? What coping strategies might she use to support herself, or seek support from Giovanna if she remains the lead for SAAM programming?

Author Bio

Alexa Gonzalez (she/her/ella) is a second-year student in Clemson’s Master’s of Student Affairs program and currently serves as a Graduate Community Director. Prior to coming to Clemson, Alexa graduated from the University of San Diego in 2021 and worked at San Diego Community College’s Dreamer Resource Center.

Because of How I Sound: Regional Dialects and Institutional Response | Farmer

Abstract

Boucher et al. (2013), along with Kinzler and DeJesus (2013), have shown negative perceptions toward those speaking with a variation of the “Southern” accent, even when saying the same thing as a more “Neutral” speaker. This case follows a first-generation college student from the southeast, now in a different region of the U.S., who experiences just that. Other students, staff, and faculty respond consciously or subconsciously to this situation in different ways, while the student finds solace in others with similar struggles.

Keywords/Phrases

First-generation college student, dialect discrimination, institutional intelligence model, sociocultural theory

Primary Characters

Riley Miller—First-year student, Howell University (he/him/his). Riley is a first-generation college student from a rural area of the Southeast. Coming from a blue-collar background, Riley’s father works in a large factory that gins cotton during the week and operates a sawmill part-time. His mother worked at the local grocery store as a cashier and is now unable to work physically. The Millers raised four kids in a small, run down trailer.

Riley is the only one of his siblings to go to college—he was chosen for a new scholarship that Howell is offering to those from economically disadvantaged areas. Riley’s academic performance was above average, which was quite the feat, considering he was still working a job himself and providing as best as he could for his family. Before travelling to the northeast to attend Howell, Riley had never been outside of his home state. While the scholarship is a full-ride, he had to work extra shifts at his landscaping job back home in order to afford to move his few items up to the university.

Sarah Rae Hoosier—Junior, Howell University (she/her/hers). Sarah Rae is a first-generation college student who grew up in an environment very similar to Riley’s. She was raised by her grandparents—h er father passed away from a drug overdose when she was an infant and her mother was incarcerated several years ago and is still in prison and has no contact with Sarah Rae. Sarah Rae was also an average student academically but attended Howell on a volleyball scholarship (this was the only scholarship she received). Without this scholarship to Howell, she would not have been able to go to college.

Dr. Johnathan Pratt—Chair (he/him/his).  Dr. Pratt grew up in an elite suburb in the northern Midwest. Now in his sixties, he serves as the Department Chair for economics at Howell, a position he has held for the past 10 years. Dr. Pratt is known for running a tight ship and having a singular focus on academics. If he’s not editing journals, or in his study which is a library of textbooks, he is teaching the economics core course, ECON 1000, which lays the foundation for students. He made sure when he took the Department Chair role that he retained this teaching appointment, as he wants a students’ first impression of higher education to be with him.

Callie Owens—Staff Conflict Manager, Howell University (she/her/hers). Callie is a young, energetic, and empathetic employee who started at Howell eight months ago. She grew up in, and obtained degrees from, the west coast. When Callie’s husband got a lucrative job in the area, Callie moved and recently started as the Staff Conflict Manager. She works with the campus Ombuds, human resources, and other key campus partners to assist with conflict resolution and mediation among staff.

Randolph Hamlin—Director of the Ombuds Office, Howell University (he/him/his). Mr. Hamlin has been assisting in Faculty and Student conflicts in the Ombuds Office at Howell for the last 23 years. Because he has had this position for so long, he has become increasingly lax in his duties. He is from the same town that Howell is in but has such a reputation for his longevity at the institution, some may say he has “Checked out.”

Institutional Context

Howell University is a private, research university in the Northeast. Howell’s has a reputation for academic excellence. The tuition is high, the GPAs are high, the snowfall is high, and the research dollars accumulated by faculty at Howell are also high. To graduate from Howell is very prestigious. Within the past several years, Howell has instituted a scholarship program at the undergraduate level, to assist in recruitment of students from disadvantaged areas and backgrounds. The general public has been wary of this effort, with social media comments saying that it was just to “Check a box” and that a few scholarships to students from a tough upbringing is a drop in the bucket to Howell’s expenditures and is just a way for administrators to say they’re “trying” to improve diversity (economically, demographically, etc.) at the university.

Case

Riley was nervous as he attended his first class, ECON 1000, at Howell University. He still couldn’t believe he was at a place like Howell. He thought back to hearing his name called for the scholarship during his senior year of high school. He blushed and walked up on stage, speechless. He knew he had performed well academically, and that Howell chose those with great potential from areas with little economic opportunity or mobility. But he had so many other responsibilities and worries in his life with his family, that he never dreamed something like this scholarship would be possible. He remembered his mom was so proud, she told everyone at Sunday School that week. But his dad didn’t really say much other than in his slow southern drawl, “Don’t get the big head with that award.”

Riley had kind of chuckled internally when he went to the cafeteria for breakfast that morning. He thought fondly back to breakfasts that “Mama” cooked. Grits, homemade sausage gravy, biscuits, and Riley’s favorite—the “Fried ‘taters.” But breakfast at Howell wasn’t the same. Fruit trays, bran muffins, a custom yogurt station. It was good, but wasn’t what Riley was used to.

As he sat in class, toes tapping with nervousness, Dr. Johnathan Pratt walked in sporting a white beard and a thick wool blazer. Riley thought to himself that he needed to get some thick wool clothes – It wasn’t this cool in September where he was from. Dr. Pratt announced to the class of fifteen, his name, accomplishments, and reputation. He did so in a way that was poetic, fancy, and embellished. He then asked the class if they would introduce themselves, giving their name, background, and what brought them to Howell.

Riley marveled as he heard his classmates introduce themselves. The students were from all over the country, and the world. Oregon. New York. Canada. China. Indonesia. Belgium. Riley’s toe-tapping got faster the closer they got to him. He thought internally that he had nothing that would match up with these students. They had perfect 4.0’s. Travelled globally. Liked English literature, the ballet, playing the saxophone. Even the way they spoke matched Dr. Pratt’s tone and style. Finally, it was Riley’s turn.

Riley knew he had inherited a drawl from his father and mother. Where he was from, you were looked at oddly if you didn’t speak that way. Even so, Riley did his best to hide that as he scrambled to think of something and cautiously uttered:

Hey y’all, I mean…ever-body…uh, hi everyone. Um, my name is Riley Miller, and I’m from a purty sma—I mean um a little town, a place, down south. I ain’t…I don’t, I mean, got any big umm stories to tell…we didn’t have much to do ‘cept work. On Sund-ee (clears throat)…Sun-day….we’d all go eat dinner at mamaw’s…uh granny’s…um um my grandmother’s house, and so that was fun. But yeah, I’m tickled…um, happy I mean…to be here.

Riley could see everyone in the class cringing as he let out a final statement to try and save it with humor, “And my diddy…my father… told me to learn summ’n. So, I’m here to learn summ’n.” That comment didn’t save his introduction. The class looked at Riley as if he had three heads.

Dr. Pratt mumbled under his breath (loud enough for the entire class to hear) that he knew who wouldn’t be presenting during group projects. The class laughed. He then interjected to the class that they should address this body with professionalism. He reiterated that it was no place for colloquialisms or backwards speech. This was a place of higher learning, and he expected everyone to carry themselves as such. He cajoled the class to speak a “Standard” and “Proper” way, and that to not do so would most certainly result in not living up to what Dr. Pratt called “The Howell Standard.”

Riley didn’t speak the rest of the class. For the next week, Riley shuffled into the class, sat in the back, and kept a low profile. He was so self-conscious; he became a recluse in his dorm. He didn’t want to speak for fear of being singled out and looked down upon. He didn’t want to venture out because he constantly compared his hand-me-downs to the expensive clothes of the other students. He didn’t ask questions in class, or look for clubs to join, or even call home to check on his family.

Two weeks in, he got up the courage to go back to the cafeteria. He choked down another bran muffin, and granola yogurt. A young woman sat down by herself a couple of seats away, on a phone call. He was surprised to hear a familiar twang in her voice as she talked with her earbuds in. This was the first time since Riley had moved to Howell that he had heard someone speak in a dialect similar to his. There was that drawl! Riley feared he had forgotten what a drawl was. After she hung up, Riley went to introduce himself.

The two hit it off immediately. Sarah Rae Hoosier was from the state next to his, and she too had roots that showed in her voice and way of life. They connected as if they were lifelong friends who had been reunited. Riley told her about feeling like a fish out of water, and what had happened in ECON 1000 with Dr. Pratt—saying that he felt discriminated against “Because of how I sound.” Sarah Rae encouraged Riley, saying that she had felt much the same when she came two years ago. But during this time, she became familiar with the works of James Gee, and Rosina Lippi-Green’s book English with an Accent. These works and others, grounded Sarah Rae in her own identity, and confirmed what she knew (and subsequently passed along to Riley) that their way of talking—while different than most around Howell—was as complex, unique, and deserving of respect as any other. She pointed out that the students from across the globe now at Howell spoke differently than Dr. Pratt and other professors—but because those ways of speaking didn’t necessarily have negative connotations like the way she and Riley spoke, those students were not reprimanded or stereotyped. Sarah Rae encouraged Riley to speak to a campus Ombudsperson about this incident and the way he was feeling.

Riley called and emailed the Ombuds but could never get a follow up or a meeting. Riley then reached out directly to the director of the office, Randolph Hamlin, on Hamlin’s individual email. He had reviewed Mr. Hamlin’s bio on a website and felt this situation—and lack of response—needed running up the ladder to him. Unfortunately, the result was the same. No response to emails. No calls back to Riley’s voicemail. When Riley would stop by, the door would be closed with a sign that said “Out.”

One day while checking at the Ombuds office and seeing Mr. Hamlin’s door closed again, Riley noticed a young woman sitting in an office on the other side of the hallway. At his wits end, he went in and introduced himself and asked if she knew when Mr. Hamlin would be back. She sighed and said she didn’t know either and apologized for the frustration. She introduced herself as Callie Owens, Staff Conflict Manager. Riley liked her personality and empathetic spirit. “Mind if I sit down?” he said, and she obliged. He began to pour his heart out to Callie, who listened intently. When he concluded, Riley mentioned that he knew she could not do anything because she was there to help staff with situations, and not students. Callie said that she would see what she could do—she was new too but wanted to help him. Riley went out the door with his head hung low, but at least at peace that he had shared it with someone.

Callie was appalled at the behavior of Dr. Pratt and felt it needed to be brought up to the Dean and maybe even the Chancellor. But this wasn’t her purview–It was Mr. Hamlin’s. He was supposed to work on student and faculty issues. Being new, she was afraid that reporting this would put her under the microscope, and worried that Mr. Hamlin—a man who had been there over two decades—would throw her under the bus for “Going above his head” on an issue that should be his, and that administration would not take her anonymous report seriously because it had to do with a legendary faculty member. Still, she empathized with Riley and felt he was being prejudiced against just because of the way he sounded. Callie wrestled with this internally for the next week, with no sign of Mr. Hamlin in his office.

 

Discussion Questions

  1. How should Callie balance wanting to help Riley while keeping in mind her new position at the university? What does her body language say about her initial feelings of the university that she has gathered in her short time there?
  2. What are things about the university that Callie needs to know and understand to help Riley and do her job effectively? How might she go about getting that information?
  3. How can both Riley and Callie—new in their student and staff roles at Howell respectively—find their place, implement change, and remain true to their ethics?
  4. What should the university’s response be to Dr. Pratt? What repercussions would be appropriate?
  5. What are other areas where Riley may be struggling at Howell? What other questions could he ask Sarah Rae in regard to how she overcame similar struggles? What other questions might Cassie ask Riley in order to provide him the best support?

References

Boucher, C. J., Hammock, G. S., McLaughlin, S. D., & Henry, K. N. (2013). Perceptions of Competency as a Function of Accent. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 18(1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.24839/2164-8204.jn18.1.27

Gee, J. P. (2015). Social linguistics and literacies : ideology in discourses. Routledge.

Kinzler, K. D., & DeJesus, J. M. (2013). Northern = smart and Southern = nice: The development of accent attitudes in the United States. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(6), 1146–1158. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.731695

Lippi-Green, R. (1997). English with an Accent. Routledge.

Author Bio

Jeremiah Farmer (he/him) is a PhD student in the Literacy, Language, and Culture program at Clemson University. In his full-time role, he works as a Student Services Manager for Clemson’s Department of Automotive Engineering. Motivated by his upbringing and love of storytelling, old traditions, and the agricultural lifestyle of times gone by, his intended research topic centers on biases against, and perceptions, of the “southern accent” (of which there are many variations), how that may lead to accent dilution or loss in certain geographical areas, and techniques and cultural shifts to preserve these old dialects specifically. Before working in higher education, Jeremiah spent over five years in the country music radio industry. He holds a Master of Human Resource Development (MHRD) from Clemson University, and a BS in Political Science from Appalachian State University.

Working in the Crosshairs: Complex Decision-Making in Anti-DEI Political Times | Evatt

Abstract

Student affairs practitioners are faced with myriad decisions each day, some of which conflict with their personal beliefs and institutional values. This case highlights the complexity of decision-making in the era of anti-DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) legislation. As with many public universities in the South, the institution finds itself in the political crosshairs of anti-DEI legislation, thus having a ripple effect on campus life. Cam, the Assistant Director for Student Activities and Leadership, experiences internal conflict while supporting a student organization’s Anti-DEI Celebration Rally. This scenario provides an opportunity for exploration and reflection on the tensions between policy enforcement and equity-minded decision-making.

Characters

  • Cam (he/him) serves as the Assistant Director for Student Activities and Leadership in the Office of Student Engagement. Cam, a white, queer, cis-gender man, joined the institution two years ago after graduating with his master’s degree in Higher Education Student Affairs (HESA). He has developed strong relationships with students and colleagues over the last two years and prides himself on being a social justice advocate for minoritized students on campus. Cam advises the 400+ registered student organizations on how to effectively lead their student organizations while at the same time upholding the University’s policy expectations.
  • Erin (she/her) is an undergraduate student majoring in political science and serves as the newly elected president of the Smoky Mountain Freedom Allegiance Club. She is a prominent student leader on campus and is known for mobilizing students toward action.
  • Edwards (she/her) is the Vice President for Student Affairs at Smoky Mountain University and has served in this role for the past 22 years. Although committed to student development and engagement, Dr. Edwards is perceived by students and colleagues as being “out of touch” with current student needs and DEI practices.

Context

This case is set at Smoky Mountain University (SMU), a regional, public four-year institution located in the Southeast region of the United States. SMU is a predominantly white institution and enrolls around 15,000 students (12,000 undergraduates, 3,000 graduates). As a public institution, SMU is part of a state system of higher education and is governed by a Board of Governors composed mostly of conservative-leaning business leaders and politicians. According to the institution’s mission statement, the university seeks to “prepare students to meet the great challenges facing our state, nation, and our world.” Furthermore, SMU shares the following DEI statement on their website: “We affirm the importance of a diverse and inclusive campus community, one that is enriched by persons of different backgrounds, perspectives, cultures, socioeconomic status, and other diverse characteristics.” Similar to most public universities in the Southeast, SMU finds itself in the political crosshairs of anti-DEI legislation. The majority of student affairs practitioners at SMU embrace the values of equity and inclusion and pride themselves in creating welcoming and inclusive spaces where all students can take part in campus life. However, they often find themselves having to tip-toe around DEI topics because they are not sure what they can and cannot say. This unspoken institutional norm between talking about equity and putting words into action (McNair et al., 2020) plagues staff, faculty, and administrators at the institution.

Case Study

It is around 12:30pm on a Wednesday, and Cam is finishing lunch in his office before his next one-on-one student meeting. It has been a fairly calm week, and he is looking forward to some downtime this weekend after a hectic start to the semester. As he looks at his calendar, he remembers that his 1:00pm meeting is with Erin, the newly elected president of the Freedom Allegiance Club. The club has an active membership roster of 125 students, and according to their constitution, the mission of the Freedom Allegiance Club is to “protect and defend conservative values and mobilize others toward action.” The club is known around campus as a group who is not afraid to push hot button issues, especially through a politicized agenda that will garner attention. While in the food court the other day, Cam overheard a group of students exclaim that, “Freedom Allegiance Club is fueled by racists and homophobes… All they do is create an unsafe place.”

Cam had a good working relationship with the previous club president, but this is the first time Cam and Erin have officially met. During the meeting, Erin shares that the Freedom Allegiance Club is planning to host a Celebration Rally on campus in favor of the anti-DEI legislation that has passed in states across the country over the last several months. The event is scheduled for this coming Friday afternoon (two days from now) with nearly 500 people having already RSVP’d on social media. According to Erin, the club is expecting a “huge turnout” on the main University Quad, and they have contacted local news stations for coverage of their event. When Cam asks Erin the purpose of the event, she says that the club wants to generate excitement on campus in support of anti-DEI legislation. During their meeting a few weeks ago, many members felt that the university administration does not support conservative students on campus. Erin shares that the goal of the event is to “rally the troops around our ideals and to call out radical left beliefs that are harming our country and local community.”

Much to Cam’s surprise, the club has already completed all the required space reservation agreements and coordinated the appropriate event setup needs through the Events and Reservations Office. As he reviews the approved forms, he thinks to himself, “How did this event slip through the cracks without follow-up?” As they wrap-up their meeting, Erin shares that Cam is the only staff member that explicitly knows about the rally. Although Cam wants to maintain trust with the student, he realizes he has a responsibility to share this information with others. Cam tells Erin that he plans to review their event needs in greater detail and will be in touch with additional information. The meeting concludes around 1:35pm. About 20 minutes later, you receive the email below from Dr. Edwards, Vice President for Student Affairs:

Hi Cam,

I have received several messages of concern from the Chancellor’s Office and faculty members about a rally that is allegedly taking place this Friday on the Main Quad in favor of recent Anti-DEI Legislation. Looking at the Freedom Allegiance Club’s social media pages, it appears that over 500 people have already confirmed their attendance at the event. Of greater concern, it appears that many of the attendees are not current students or campus affiliates, and the event has been promoted widely to public audiences. In fact, I received a phone call just a few minutes ago from a local news station asking if I would like to make a public comment on the event and the university’s stance on DEI-related issues. Please share with me your recommendations on how to ensure that all students on both sides of this issue are being fully supported and that we are maintaining equitable practices. As you know, this is a tedious topic on our campus, so please give it your fullest attention to detail. Thanks for all that you do for our students.

After meeting with Erin and reading Dr. Edwards’ email, Cam feels deep internal conflict and a sense of responsibility. This event runs counter to Cam’s core values and ideals of equity and inclusion. Importantly, he is aware of the harmful impact this event could have on minoritized students, faculty, and staff on campus. At the same time, he is responsible for upholding university policies so that all students, regardless of ideology and beliefs, have access to campus space and resources. He finds himself struggling to navigate the situation.

Discussion Questions

  1. What are the tensions that Cam needs to consider in preparing the campus community for this potentially controversial event?
  2. How can Cam use university, state, or federal policies or guidelines to inform his decision?
  3. How might Cam mobilize others to support him in this endeavor? Which individuals or groups need to be at the table in this process?
  4. How can Cam ensure minoritized community members feel safe and supported in the coming days and beyond?
  5. Looking internally, how might Cam reflect upon his own positionality and values to make deeper meaning of this experience to enhance his leadership capacity in the future.

References

McNair, T. B., Bensimon, E. M., Malcolm-Piqueux, L. (2020). From equity talk to equity walk: Expanding practitioner knowledge for racial justice in higher education. Jossey-Bass.

Author Bio

Dr. Dustin Evatt (he/him) serves as an Assistant Professor of Practice in Higher Education at Western Carolina University where he teaches courses in the Higher Education Student Affairs (HESA) program, Educational Leadership doctoral program, and the undergraduate Leadership Minor. Before joining faculty, Dustin worked as a scholar-practitioner in higher education for over 13 years in the areas of student engagement and leadership, career development, equity and inclusion, and young alumni engagement. Dustin’s research explores critical leadership and equity-mindedness in college administrators and students using critical whiteness and queer theories. Originally from South Carolina, Dustin received his Ed.D. from Appalachian State University, M.Ed. from the University of Vermont, and a B.S. degree from Winthrop University.

Career Confusion | Ebri

Abstract

This is a case about Linda, a recently divorced, indigenous first-generation college student. She has been guiding herself through her academic program because she did not trust her previous academic and career advisor Dr. Anne Whatley. Linda now has an appointment with Nancy Whitehead, her new advisor. Linda is unhappy with her current major though she is doing well in her classes. She needs to decide if she will stay with the major, but this is complicated because she has changed her major several times. She has interests that are not congruent with her current major.

Keywords: Indigenous, first-generation, lack of trust

Primary Characters

Linda (she, her, hers) is a recently divorced low-income indigenous woman. She has no trust in the academic and career advising office. She believes that her former advisor discriminated against her due to her heritage. She only worked for a few years and stayed home with her young children and has now returned to school to complete her education.

Nancy Whitehead (she, her, hers) is a white woman with a middle-class background. She is a seasoned academic advisor with a master’s degree in social work. Nancy was just hired to replace Linda’s previous advisor, but she has only worked in a small elite predominantly white institution.

Context and Case

Linda is a 26-year-old indigenous female who graduated high school at seventeen with a 3.82 GPA. She is a first-generation college student in a small liberal art public university in the southeastern United States who has returned to complete a degree she left eight years ago. She married her high school sweetheart, Tom who joined the United States Army immediately after their high school graduation. She dropped her classes while majoring in drama in a four-year institution because Tom told her that it was a waste of time. Instead, she decided to pursue cosmetology in a community college. Upon graduation, she worked in a dermatologist’s office doing aesthetics. These skills helped her earn a small income as she travelled around the world due to Tom’s military postings.

They have two daughters, and Linda is recently divorced.  She is raising her daughters alone because Tom has no interest in the girls. She has some family support from her parents who own an animal feed store, younger brother and sister, and Tom’s parents. Her parents’ flexible schedule allows them to assist with school pickups when she needs them to because they are proud of her and want her to stay focused in school. They also chose this major for her because they believe that she will be guaranteed a job upon graduation. cannot wait for her to graduate since she will be the first college graduate in their family and so that she can begin to earn a proper living. They do not support her poetry performances.

Her daughters miss their dad, but Linda’s efforts to get him to be a responsible father have been ignored. This depresses her when she sees how dedicated her sister’s husband is to his little girl. Linda noted that her previous advisor Dr. Whatley was always very impatient and dismissive with her and never gave her the time and acknowledgement that she gave her other advisees who did not look like her. Linda cannot relate with anyone at the center, and her previous experience is why she does not trust the advisors. However, she has decided to go to this appointment because she has been referred to Nancy, a new academic and career counselor, by her friend who told her that she benefited from an interaction with Nancy earlier that semester.

Linda is motivated to finish her degree to be a positive example for her daughters; however, she has changed her major a few times. Linda’s current major is Medical Laboratory Technology (MLT), and she chose it because her parents want her to have job security. She has stellar grades, but she is not looking forward to doing this type of work.

During her appointment, Linda tells her advisor she is a poet and loves to perform. She also tells her that she is self-published using Amazon as her sales outlet and loves modeling and make-up as well as volunteering in the community with causes to support women. She also wants a career that will allow her time with her daughters and provide for them. Many years ago, she loved and dreamed of a career on stage and could still pursue it now that her husband is gone but she has given up on that ambition due to her parental obligations. She does not see herself working behind the scenes because she will be bored since she likes to socialize. However, as a highly motivated individual, she believes in a positive outcome for what she ultimately decides.

At the appointment, even though Nancy has never worked with a diverse student body, her caring nature makes her inquire about how Linda is coping with school, work, and her children. Linda tells her she is always tired and exhausted because she works round the clock, either studying or working, and cannot keep up with the kids. She is sad and breaks down crying saying that she cannot attend all her daughters’ soccer games and school meetings because of her own classes. Linda also shares her concerns about not getting many poetry opportunities because of her gender and race.

Nancy: Looking at your grades, you are doing very well in your classes.

Linda: Thank you.

Nancy: Based on everything that you have told me, is there any reason you would not want to pursue a business minor?

Linda: I am not sure. How will that help me if I finish the MLT program?

Nancy: You will be able to manage your side business should you decide to pursue writing or theatre full time.

Linda: I never thought of that. But I have dreamt of owning my own cosmetic line. What will my schedule look like and how will this fit in with my clinicals?

Nancy: First thing is I recommend that you visit Ms. Jessica at the Financial Aid office to discuss your financial aid situation. Since you have taken a lot of classes, your aid package could be affected.

Next, I want you to write down 10 things that you love, appreciate, and enjoy doing with your time and where you see yourself five years after graduation. I also want you to take a career assessment. This test will help you learn more about your personal interests and careers that match your interests. I will send you a link for the assessment. We will follow-up in two weeks.

Linda: Thank you so much for your help. I will be back in two weeks.

Discussion Questions

  1. What career and student development theories might help in understanding Linda’s career dilemma?
  2. What other interventions (beyond those already suggested by Nancy) might be effective to help Linda with her career exploration and decision making?
  3. How may Nancy help Linda take care of non-academic needs so that she can handle her diverse issues?
  4. How does Nancy’s multiculturalism assist in the relationship with Linda?

Author Bio

MarySheila Ebri (she, her, hers) is currently pursuing a master’s degree in academic advising at Kansas State University. She has worked in Higher Education for over 19 years in various roles. She is currently employed as the Transfer Student Specialist at Methodist University in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

Staff Support Needs | Davies, Goetzinger, Hood

Abstract

Chance identifies as a cis Latinx male. He is a new professional at a large research institution working with TRIO, a college access and support program. Chance is new to the state and adjusted well during his first year out of graduate school. However, during the second year in his role Chance experienced a campus evacuation due to a bomb threat. Chance provided extra support to his mentees after the lockdown which stretched his emotional bandwidth. A few weeks after the lockdown two of Chance’s mentees passed away in a car accident. Chance began to struggle with his mental health due to the incidents which impacted his performance at work. Chance discussed his experiences with his supervisor and trusted colleagues but was still struggling with his mental health. Chance decided to talk to a mentor to help process how to move forward.

Keywords: Latinx, campus lockdown, student death, mental health, supervision, advocacy, mentorship

Primary Characters

Chance (he/him/his) is a 26 year old higher education professional who recently graduated with a B.S. in Business and a M.S. in Higher Education Administration. Chance is a cis Latinx male and is a first-generation college graduate.

Nyla (she/her/hers) is a Black cis woman in her 40s and has been at Valketta University for 10 years. Nyla worked in Housing & Residence Life before transitioning into TRIO. Nyla has two college aged sons who attend Valketta university.

Luna (they/them/theirs) is a 32 year old white, non-binary new professional. Luna has worked as the university’s Basic Needs Coordinator for four years. Luna met Chance during a division meeting and the pair instantly connected over their love for astrology and Taco Bell.

Marcella (she/they) is a Afro-Latinx cis woman in her late 40s. Marcella has worked in higher education for 15 years and met Chance at a conference three years ago. Marcella mentored Chance during his last year of undergrad and throughout graduate school. Marcella currently services as the Director of the Center for Inclusive Excellence at a university in New Mexico.

Context

Valketta University (VU) is a large public research university in Arizona. VU is located in the capital city of Phoenix and serves 40,000 undergraduate and graduate students. The campus community at VU is rooted in student activism and enrollment is increasing due to a recent change to allow nearby out-of-state students in-state tuition.

The Case  

Chance recently started a new position as the Student Support Services (SSS) Coordinator at Valketta University after completing his Higher Education Administration degree. As the SSS Coordinator Chance will oversee the tutoring program for TRIO students and coordinate leadership and mentorship programs. Chance was a first-generation college student who began his collegiate journey at community college before transferring to a nearby satellite campus to complete a Bachelor of Science in Business. He has a passion for serving historically marginalized communities and helping them achieve their goals. Additionally, Chance values student/staff mentorship because of the personal impact it had on his college experience.

During the first academic semester into the role, Chance was intentional about familiarizing himself with the campus and community since he moved from New Mexico to Arizona. He attended various division meetings and trainings to build relationships across departments. Chance was transitioning well into the role and was able to make several close relationships with different colleagues in his department and others. Chance developed a positive relationship with his supervisor Nyla. Nyla noted on Chance’s end of the semester evaluation that Chance was exceeding expectations in administration, department vision, and relationship building. Chance felt confident in the work he was doing and was looking forward to the next semester when he was going to start a new mentoring program for the SSS students.

Chance spent the next semester working hard to get a new mentorship program running and recruited 20 students. In addition to coordinating the mentorship program, Chance oversaw the tutoring and leadership development programs offered by the department. Chance developed supportive relationships with the students he mentors and tutors he supervises. At the end of the calendar year of his first professional role, Chance felt confident going into year two. Chance had developed a strong support system socially and professionally that aided in his success.

Early in the next fall semester, Chance was in the Union going to the package center when a building alarm went off. Chance headed toward the exit expecting it to be the building fire alarm but saw a university alert on his phone that stated there was a bomb threat in the Union. Once outside and in the evacuation zone set up by campus police, Chance saw some of his mentees and went to check in with them. Many were frightened by what was happening and one began to have a panic attack. Luckily, Chance and this student had talked about their panic attacks before and Chance knew how to help reduce their anxiety. Chance stayed with the group and provided additional emotional support until campus was clear.

In the weeks after the situation, Chance and other student facing student affairs professionals provided additional support to students through 1:1 and group meetings and programming. Chance started noticing his own sleep disturbances, headaches, and exhaustion in the context of this work. Chance took a few days of PTO, but when he returned to work on Monday, Nyla informed him that two of his mentees were in a car accident over the weekend and passed away. Nyla stayed with Chance while he processed through the news and provided resources via the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) such as a few sessions of counseling with a mental health provider.

Chance attended the funerals for his mentees and helped the other mentees organize a vigil at the university. Many of the mentees started to hang out in the TRIO office more than usual in order to be in community together. Chance tried to offer support for the students while managing his workload. Chance became overwhelmed at work, started experiencing detachment from things that normally bring him joy, and was in a state of extreme sadness. Other coworkers commented on Chance’s change in behavior and missed deadlines. In Chance’s 1:1 with Nyla, Chance shared that he was struggling with his mental health and didn’t know how to improve it. Nyla validated Chance’s experiences and encouraged Chance to seek help from a mental health provider. Chance was unsure about seeking professional help since the few sessions he tried through the EAP left him more exhausted talking about his grief, however, he agreed he would talk with trusted individuals about what he is experiencing.

The next week Chance set up a lunch meeting with Luna, the Basic Needs Coordinator, who Chance met at a division meeting the previous year. Chance and Luna have a good working relationship and have partnered on various events. During the meeting Chance asked how Luna was doing with the events of the semester and Luna stated that they were managing things decently and were glad they already had a therapist in the area. Chance and Luna talked more about Chance’s mental health and coping with the loss of his students. After the meeting, Chance felt a little relieved and supported but started thinking about other ways to cope with his emotions. Chance decided to reach out to his mentor, Marcella, to process through his struggles at work and mental health.

Marcella and Chance met via Zoom as they work at different institutions in different states. After catching up about Marcella’s new baby, Chance shared that he was struggling at work with boundaries with students and his inability to focus causing his performance to not meet his expectations. Marcella thanked Chance for his vulnerability and asked open ended questions to learn more about the situation. Chance stated, “I don’t know. I feel like I just need a break. This is a lot to deal with and I don’t know how I am supposed to take care of myself and my mentees and supervisees.” Marcella asked Chance if he had taken time off since either situation. Chance stated that he took two days off after the bomb threat, but nothing else. Marcella encouraged Chance to take some more PTO or utilize FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act) if he needed additional time away from work. Chance said he did not know what FMLA was, and Marcella explained that FMLA entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family and/or medical reasons. Chance and Marcella talked for another 30 minutes about whether Chance could afford to take unpaid leave and questions to ask a university Leave Coordinator before wrapping up their conversation. Chance thanked Marcella for talking with him and agreed to check back in a few weeks.

Discussion Questions

  1. What additional support could Nyla offer to Chance as his supervisor?
  2. What department and institutional resources could each of the characters utilize in this situation?
  3. Besides talking with Nyla and Marcella, what other resources might Chance use on campus before deciding to take FMLA?
  4. If Chance chooses to use FMLA, how can Nyla support the rest of the team and students until Chance returns?

Author Bios

Amber Davies (she/her/hers) – Amber is currently serving as a Residence Director at Johns Hopkins University where she oversees a second year community and serves in capacities including student recruitment and first year experience. Amber has obtained her bachelor’s degree from Stockton University and a master’s degree from Clemson University.

Victoria Goetzinger (she/her/hers) – Victoria is currently serving as a Community Director at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill where she oversees a multi-year community, Residential Learning Program, and serves in leadership roles for Student Staff Training & Development. Victoria is a proud first-generation college graduate receiving a master of education in Student Affairs & Counselor Education from Clemson University and a bachelor of science in Sociology from Emporia State University.

Kayla Hood (she/her/hers) – Kayla is a recent graduate with a Master of Education in Counselor Education, Student Affairs with interests in social justice theories/practices, intersectionality, and holistic wellbeing. Kayla currently works at Davidson College as the Assistant Director for the Center for Student Diversity and Inclusion.

I’m Putting My Supervisor Hat On | Chaney & Russ

Abstract

Flora Wilson (she/her) is a second-year graduate student working over the summer for an internship at Bell Tower University. Flora was tasked with supervising undergraduate Orientation Leaders (OLs) and had a successful first week. A few weeks into Orientation, Flora began noticing the OLs were neither meeting expectations nor receptive to her feedback. There was an incident before a late-night programming event that Flora had to address right away. This event was a turning point in Flora’s perception of her role as a graduate supervisor.

Keywords: orientation program, graduate supervisor, student leaders

Primary Characters

Flora Wilson (she/her) is a second-year graduate student and is studying Higher Education and Administration at Lake Shore College (LSC), a mid-sized institution. She attended LSC for her undergraduate degree and has knowledge and understanding of the institution’s student culture and life. Flora decided to enter an internship portal that helps match masters’ students to different institutions’ orientation programs like Bell Tower University.

Lewis Hensley (he/him) is a first-year graduate student at Bell Tower University. While not familiar with BTU’s specific orientation program, Lewis is very familiar with orientation programs in general as Lewis’s undergraduate institution is also very well known for their comprehensive programming. Lewis was an Orientation Leader for two years and served on the Orientation Leadership Team as a supervisor for one summer. Lewis is excited to use his previous knowledge and experiences from orientation to lay the foundation for success at Bell Tower University.

Grady Anderson (he/him) is the Assistant Director (AD) of the Office of New Student Orientation and has served as the AD for two months. Before accepting this new role at BTU, he was a coordinator of orientation at his previous university. This is his first summer in New Student Orientation at Bell Tower University. His primary role as an assistant director is to supervise the graduate interns (Flora and Lewis) for New Student Orientation. His secondary role is the supervision of the Orientation Leaders.

Megan Stanley (she/her) is the Director of New Student Orientation and serves as Grady’s supervisor. Megan has been the director for two years.

Harris Brown (he/him) is an undergraduate Orientation Leader (OL). He is an Education major in his fourth year at Bell Tower University. This is his first and only summer as an OL.

Institutional Context

Bell Tower University (BTU) is a large, highly selective, predominantly white institution with over 40,000 students. With over 8,000 new students committing to BTU each year, there are approximately 26 orientation sessions over a 12-week period. BTU’s orientation is a two-day process. The first day of orientation focuses on student life with activities such as small groups, skits, and late-night programming. The second day is fall registration. As part of their training, Flora and Lewis reviewed expectations and met with various campus partners to gain institutional context. They also met with off-campus partners and were assigned tasks and responsibilities for the summer.

Case

Flora Wilson (she/her) was excited to accept a graduate intern position at Bell Tower University (BTU) for the summer of 2023. As a graduate intern for the New Student Orientation program this was her first supervisory role, something she did not do in her primary graduate assistantship. The first week of training, Flora met her counterpart, Lewis. They discussed the different tasks they had been assigned, noting that they would both be supervising undergraduate Orientation Leaders (OLs). Flora was responsible for tracking inventory, coordinating songs and dances for opening introductions, and planning parent/family support events. Lewis oversaw social media, late night programming and preparing skits for programs.

One week before orientation began, the OLs spent the week training. Flora emphasized expectations, daily OL duty schedules, and locations and assignments for programming and events. OLs practiced inclusivity, professionalism, and etiquette when working with small groups. Lewis led sessions on giving and receiving feedback, emphasized attire expectations, and discussed the importance of disaffiliation from their organizations. By the end of the training, Flora and Lewis were feeling good about the upcoming week when students would arrive.

 

Week 1

The first week had flown by for Flora. The OLs were doing great. They were meeting expectations, having fun, and showcasing the spirit of BTU. Megan and Grady were integrated in the framework of the program, too. They were both primed and ready for their first summer working together. They prided themselves on the transitional support they provided students. Megan and Grady both felt Flora, Lewis, and the undergraduate students were doing a great job.

 

Week 2           

The excitement of the first week of orientation had begun to decrease. Although the students were still invested in their roles, Flora noticed a shift in some of her supervisees’ behavior. A few started showing up late and were unprepared for their events, and OLs had several small but consistent dress code violations. Flora decided to mention it to a few students informally; some were receptive and seemed sincere in their apologies. A couple of students, however, were not as receptive. Flora felt their apologies were disingenuous, and the students seemed to brush off what she was saying. Her feedback was consistent with how students said they wanted to receive feedback during training, so she was confused. Flora decided to chat with Grady. Being new, Grady had not had time to build much rapport with the OLs but said he would mention something when he saw them next. Grady reinforced that the steps Flora took were appropriate and encouraged her to brainstorm additional ways to provide feedback. Grady wanted to empower Flora since the graduate interns were responsible for the direct support and supervision of OLs. 

Week 4           

With an upcoming break for the orientation team, Flora noticed a significant shift among the OLs. They seemed more tired than normal and got more lax with attire and professionalism. They were slow to complete tasks, leaned on one or two of their peers excessively, and were not working as a cohesive team. Grady was busy with his work and Megan had already left for vacation. Flora decided to chat with Lewis. He noticed that Flora’s OLs were slipping, as were some of his, so he understood what she was going through. Flora said her feedback to OLs was not well received and problems persisted. She admitted she was unsure in her supervisor role and hadn’t addressed students more formally because she did not want to ruin the rapport she had built.

 

Discussion Questions:

  1. Does talking with Grady diminish Flora’s credibility as a supervisor? Why or why not?
  2. Should Flora have talked with Grady or the students first? Why?

 

Case Continued

Week 4 | Thursday Evening

While waiting to get on buses to go to the rec center, the OLs played music to keep students hyped-up. One OL, Harris Brown, started playing an inappropriate song while other OLs were singing and dancing. New students started recording the scene on their cell phones. With Megan on vacation and Grady at the rec center preparing for the event, Flora and Lewis were left to take action.

Concerned for the program’s reputation, Flora told Harris he needed to change the song. When he refused, Flora knew her reputation was on the line. She said, “I’m putting my supervisor hat on. I’m telling you one more time to change the song before there are consequences.” Then Harris turned off the music, but other OLs responded with eye rolling, and loud sighs. One student even said, “I’m going to protect my peace and walk away.”

Week 4 | Friday Morning

After the incident on Thursday evening, OLs gave the orientation leadership team the cold shoulder. Flora decided to formally meet with Harris to discuss the situation. Harris was confused by the response from Flora and Lewis because he believed he was simply playing a song to keep students excited. He was frustrated that Flora asked him to change the song when the new students seemed to enjoy it.

Flora: It wasn’t really about the song. It was more about your response. When I asked for the song to be changed, nobody stepped up to do it. People were blatantly disrespectful. I put a lot of time, effort, and energy into you all and the least I expect back is the respect that you do something when I ask. Additionally, I need you to recognize that you are influential. When you behaved the way you did, your peers followed your lead.

Harris: I don’t understand why this responsibility has to fall on me.

Flora: We don’t always get to choose when we are leaders. You have done an amazing job up to this point and your peers recognize that. They trust you and look to you for direction.

Harris began to cry. Flora was not happy to see him upset but was relieved that he seemed to understand her point. She hoped this was a first step in rebuilding the group culture.

Flora then met with all the OLs to discuss what happened. She acknowledged that the situation began with a song but explained her concerns were about disrespect, the representation of the program, and the OLs’ failure to meet expectations. She emphasized the importance of working together as a team and setting a good example for the new BTU class. Flora’s conversation with the OLs was direct and honest. She held them accountable for their actions and expressed her desire to help them succeed.

Discussion Questions:

  1. What conversations should Flora have after the break with Harris, the OLS, Grady, Megan, and Lewis?
  2. What could Flora have done proactively before Thursday evening?
  3. In what ways could Flora have sought to understand the OLs’ experiences?
  4. What responsibilities do orientation staff have to their universities and campus reputation?
  5. What are the ethical implications regarding Flora’s decision to stop the music that was playing in line for the bus? What would you have done in Flora’s position?

Author Biographies

Katie Chaney (she, her, hers) is a second-year graduate student in the College Student Personnel (CSP) master’s program at Bowling Green State University (BGSU). She worked in secondary education for three years prior to the CSP program, and currently works as a Coordinator for Leadership in the C. Raymond Marvin Center for Student Leadership and Civic Engagement at BGSU. Katie is passionate about student leadership development and is inspired by the students she teaches and advises.

Mikayla Russ (she/her) is a second-year graduate student in the College Student Personnel (CSP) master’s program at Bowling Green State University (BGSU). Mikayla is currently the Graduate Student Trustee on the BGSU Board of Trustees, the supervisor of the Leadership Facilitation team in the C. Raymond Marvin Center for Student Leadership and Civic Engagement, and the BGSU Assistant Cheerleading Coach. Additionally, Mikayla is an Instructor for the Leadership Institute, a first-year leadership course and is passionate about student learning and development.

The Best for the Job | Campbell

Abstract

This case study examines the hiring processes, communication, and decision-making of academic administrators. It will address the importance of national searches, university culture, and transparency in selections. It is designed for readers to reflect on how selection processes can affect staff, trust in policies and process, and the ability to lead.

Keywords: academic leaders, executive searches, transparency, ethics, trust, qualifications

Primary Characters

Dr. Barbara Stead (she/her/hers) is Department Chair for the Department of Finance within the College of Business. She has held this position for seven years and was part of the hiring process for the previous dean. She is a white female in the midst of her professional career with aspirations for future advancement either at her current university or elsewhere.

Dr. Regina Nelms (she/her/hers) is Professor of Economics within the College of Business. She leads the college with significant research grants. Dr. Nelms has been at this university for ten years. She arrived at university under the previous dean who invested heavily in research. She has several NSF grants and closely with governmental agencies on high priority projects. This is the last place that she will work as she is close to retirement.

Angela Warren (she/her/hers) is the Director of Operations for the Dean of College of Business. Ms. Warren’s position focuses on logistics and ensuring that the college operates smoothly. Her role involves developing processes of communication between the dean’s office and the departments as well as the building operations. She is a young employee who has been in her position for four years. She is interested in advancement and wants to be recognized for her commitment to her job and her attention to detail.

Dr. Beatrice Thomas (she/her/hers) is the School of Business Senior Associate Dean of Undergraduate Programs and Professor of Economics at a research one university in the southwest. She has held this position for four years. She is a Black female and an external candidate for the Dean of College of Business.

 

Dr. Carol Meadows (she/her/hers) is an Assistant Dean of Academics and Research for College of Business and Associate Professor of Finance. Dr. Meadows works at a research one university in the south and has held this position for five years. She is a white female and an external candidate for the Dean of College of Business position.

 

Dr. Brad Smith (he/him/his) is Director of the Center on Marketing within the College of Business. He has been director for three years. The center was founded by donors who were cornerstone to the establishment of the College of Business. Dr. Smith is a white male in his early forties. He is the internal candidate, and he has a close relationship with the university president and the cornerstone donors.

 

Context

A large research one university in the Pacific Northwest conducted a national search to fill the position of Dean of the College of Business. This position serves on the provost’s leadership team and leads the College of Business. The College of Business is the most financially strong college at the university and often acts independently. It has a large physical footprint at the university and has a strong alumni presence.

This position is to steer the college of business through vision, strategy, and financial decisions. The dean’s role involves promotion and tenure of faculty, academic programming for the college, and resource allocation. Additionally, the dean must be able to engage in fundraising, work with university leadership and industry partners, and engage with faculty. The dean is responsible for the success of the academic programs as well as the experiential programs including global engagement, the career center, marketing, packaging, and community programs.

The university hired a nationally recognized executive search firm to lead the confidential search process. Additionally, a search committee was formed on campus led by the Director of Operations for Business School, Angela Warren. While staff across the university were aware of the posting for the Dean of the College of Business, few details were shared. Other than the chair, the members of the search committee were not made public.

Once the search and process were shared across the university, employees within the College of Business began to talk amongst themselves about the lack of transparency with this search. They complained that the search committee members were not known. As the process progressed, there was no transparency about applicants, the screening committee criteria, and a timeline for the process.

Approximately three weeks after the closing date, three candidates were invited to campus. Two of the candidates were external selections. Both currently held Associate or Assistant Dean positions. Both external candidates were female and one woman self-identified as Black. The remaining candidate was a white male currently employed at the institution serving as a director of a business school program. He has a relationship with the President, the business school donors, and the university’s leadership team.

Concerns from the College of Business staff (Dr. Barbara Stead and Dr. Regina Nelms) were:

  • the internal candidate was preselected
  • from the onset the search was ceremonial and just an exercise to fulfill hiring practices
  • the external candidates were more ably qualified and had positions that prepared them for the position.
  • the internal candidate is not professionally qualified or ready for the position
  • his selection is due to favoritism at the university.

They claim to represent voices of colleagues and others who are afraid to speak. Each spoke to individuals within the university with the promise of confidentiality. Both spoke with officers of the Women and Gender Commission. Dr. Stead spoke with the Title IX officer and Dr. Nelms reached out to the University Ombuds.

These employees are afraid to speak publicly because the new hire will be their boss, but they are very frustrated by the search process. Barbara and Regina believe that the university works in a bubble, is resistant to change, and chooses its own people. They don’t believe they can do anything but want to know how and why a man with seemingly lesser qualifications would be chosen over well-qualified women.

Discussion Questions

  1. In what ways are Barbara and Regina’s concerns legitimate? Of all the things they would like to know, what can university realistically and ethically provide?
  2. How can their concerns be addressed?
  3. What role can the university commissions play?
  4. What are ethical and legal/policy considerations related to the selection process?
  5. What are the implications of hiring the internal candidate when the staff is already disgruntled and resistant?
  6. What options does the university have for coping with the tensions? What
    are some strategies for moving forward?
  7. How can the university avoid this lack of trust and dissension in the future?

Biography

Marjorie Campbell (she/her/hers) is the Director of Inclusive Excellence and Technology Initiatives for Clemson’s Computing and Information Technology (CCIT). The Technology Support Program that she founded in 1998 with colleagues has evolved into a CCIT staple with dedicated employees assigned to support technology. Marjorie holds a B.A. degree from Converse College and a M.S. degree from the University of South Carolina.  She is currently enrolled in Clemson’s Educational Leadership Ph.D. program. Her research interests focus on women’s leadership, neurodiversity, and how to rethink assumptions and address inequities.