Category: Volume 21, Issue 4

Abstract 

This case study examines and explores the challenges of maintaining honesty, openness, and transparency during the Resident Assistant application selection process. It focuses on a current Resident Assistant who is reapplying for this position and has provided false information in her application. As a supervisor, this case study explores how to go about approaching supervisees and how to effectively have a conversation addressing dishonesty in a constructive conversation. The situation becomes more complex when the supervisor was not given the application to review, but just stumbled upon it while seeing who on staff submitted applications.

Keywords: Resident Assistant, Application, Accountability, Dishonestly Misrepresentation

Primary Characters 

Lucy (she/her): A professional Community Director, who has been in her position for three-plus years. Lucy directly supervises Zoey and has a strong relationship and bond with Zoey and the rest of her Resident Assistant staff.

Zoey: (she/her): A sophomore majoring in Psychology, she is a first year Resident Assistant, who is passionate about inclusivity and leadership. She has a strong connection and community of residents on her floor and is highly ambitious when it comes to both working on a team and completing her responsibilities within the Resident Assistant (RA) job. Zoey wants to reapply for the RA position because it is a huge financial relief for her and is something she truly is passionate about.

Context and Case Study 

Zoey has had ongoing conversations with her supervisor Lucy this month about reapplying for the Resident Assistant position. Zoey has stressed how she enjoys the work, feels she makes a difference, and has grown in the role. She has also been transparent with Lucy about how big of a financial impact this job is for her. Zoey is a strong, passionate, ambitious Resident Assistant on the RA staff for this building. Lucy approves of Zoey reapplying and believes she will be a great asset to the returning RA staff as well as a genuine support for new RAs for the upcoming academic year.

While Zoey is in the process of working on the RA application, she notices that it asks a lot of crisis management questions. This is something Zoey has not yet experienced in the RA job. Crisis response is something she has talked to Lucy about. Zoey has said more than once in a supervision meeting, “I want to continue working on my emergency response skills. It always seems to be someone else who is on call when a crisis comes up. I have a lot to learn, but I also feel like I have a lot of strengths in this area.” Zoey shared she wants to gain more confidence in this area.

Because of her strong relational skills, Zoey is hoping to be placed in the first-year residence building next year. She feels her skills will be helpful as students transition to college, learn from making mistakes, and as they navigate roommate conflicts which tend to be a common issue in the first-year student community.

Zoey has not only talked with Lucy but has also had countless conversations with senior RAs about her application. They have suggested that the crisis response section is the most important part of the application for returning staff. One RA Zoey particularly looks up to even said, “I don’t know that anything else really matters other than administration skills on the application. They really want people who can train new RAs on emergencies. That’s what matters the most.” Zoey respects this person, and it makes her even more nervous about her chance of being re-hired.

Around the same time, Zoey gets a call from home. Her mom tells Zoey that Zoey’s father has been injured at work. Zoey’s mom says, “I don’t want you to worry too much. Things will be fine. I just wanted to let you know about your dad’s fall in case you want to come home and see him in the next few weeks. Money is going to be a bit tight for a while as he works through this recovery, but we will be fine in the long run. Of course, your dad doesn’t want everyone knowing about this, so if you could not say anything to anyone for the time being.”

Zoey doesn’t share this with anyone, including Lucy, fellow RAs, and friends at school.

With a lot of things weighing on her mind, Zoey puts off filling out the application until the day before it is due. While Zoey is completing her application section on crisis management, she doesn’t have any examples to share. Due to her stress and anxiety she decides to make up something for this part of her application. She begins making up situations related to conflict and crisis management issues. She says that these fabricated situations have been ongoing on her floor all semester. She describes her responses to these situations in ways she thinks align with what full-time staff would want to have happen. She builds a complex story of lies about her approach, communication, and conflict style.

She shares some minor crises but focuses primarily on an in-depth story line about roommate conflicts. She writes at length about how she has managed to solve these roommate issues, has redesigned roommate agreements with tremendous success, and how she has continued keeping a positive environment on her floor for all the residents.

During her interview, Zoey talks about how much she enjoys this work and hopes to continue to be a part of an RA staff. She shares that based on her experiences; she thinks she would be a good fit in a first-year community. When the interviewers ask specifically about her conflict style, Zoey doesn’t say much, simply stating, “I meet students where they are and help them find good solutions to their situations.”

During the interviews, Lucy does not interview Zoey as the department tries to have staff who don’t know candidates interview them. Between her own interviews Lucy is thumbing through files to see who on her staff has reapplied. She pulls three files of potential returners and skims them. When she reads Zoey’s file, she is surprised and confused about what Zoey has shared. Lucy doesn’t know if Zoey has handled these things and not communicated with her or if Zoey is making these issues up. Either way, Lucy has concerns about this application.

The evening after Zoey’s interview, she can’t sleep. She feels guilty about lying, worried about her father, worried about finances, and is not sure what to do. She doesn’t want to let anyone down but feels she has gotten herself into a corner.

Discussion Questions

1. What are the ethical implications for Lucy in terms of reporting Zoey even though she wasn’t evaluating the application or the candidate?
2. With whom should Zoey consult about this situation?
3. What conversation should Lucy have with Zoey?
4. What should Zoey do?
5. Should Zoey still be considered for a position? Why or why not?

Author Bio

Sarah Berchtold (she/her) is a second-year graduate student in Clemson’s Master of Student Affairs program. Sarah’s assistantship is with Clemson Home as a Graduate Community Director. Prior to attending Clemson, Sarah graduated from Florida Gulf Coast University in Spring of 2023 where she worked for three years in the Housing and Residence Life department. She is passionate about working with Resident Assistants and supporting students through the on-campus living experience.

Abstract

This case study examines the challenges academic advisors face when supporting their students’ personal and professional development, particularly looking at first-generation transfer students, who often face extraordinary pressures and challenges. While first-generation college students bring a number of strengths and talents with them to higher education, they often enter colleges and universities that are not fully prepared to meet their needs. For example, these students frequently navigate higher education with added strain from financial concerns, familial aspirations, and uncertainty of what career path they will take, all while adjusting to the rigorous demand of the university experience. Academic advisors play a critical role in supporting these students by fostering a trusting and supportive relationship, supporting students as they explore various career paths, and providing resources that help students make informed decisions that honor both their internal desires and family and other external expectations. Practicing a holistic approach to academic advising can be essential for promoting the well-being and long-term success of first-generation transfer students.

Keywords: Academic Advising, First-Generation, Holistic Support, Parental Expectations

Primary Characters

Jasmine (she/her/ella) is a first-generation college student who has been at Lakewood State University for a semester after transferring from her local community college. She excelled in her general education courses at community college, but once transferred and taking courses for her major, she is realizing her current career path is not for her. However, her parents expect her to stick with Business Administration due to their belief in the stability of that career choice and likelihood she will get a job that pays well. 

Sarah (she/her) is an academic advisor in the Office of Student Academic Support Services and has been at the institution for six months, and she has an interest in supporting first-generation and underrepresented students, as she is first-generation herself. She holds a master’s degree in Higher Education and Student Affairs (HESA). Sarah’s approach to advising is a student-centered, holistic support that incorporates both academic and personal development.

Context

Lakewood State University (LSU) is a mid-sized public institution located in a suburban community outside of a major metropolitan area in the Midwest. With approximately 12,000 students, LSU is known for its strong academic programs, including its highly regarded College of Business. LSU has developed a centralized framework for advising students in a holistic manner, which includes a strong academic advising team who follow the framework that emphasizes personalized, student-centered guidance that helps students navigate the complexities of college life. With nearly 30% of LSU’s students identifying as first-generation, academic advisors are equipped with information and resources such as mentorship programs, financial aid counseling, and student organizations dedicated to advocating for first-generation students.

Case

Sarah is a relatively new professional working as an academic advisor with the Office of Student Academic Support Services at LSU. She is focused on working with first-generation college students and other students who have not historically had access to higher education. Following LSU’s holistic approach to advising, Sarah hopes to build a reputation of being empathetic and highly focused on her students’ personal, academic, and professional development.

One afternoon she meets with Jasmine, a junior who identifies as first-generation, majoring in Business Administration. During their meeting, Jasmine shares that she has growing doubts about her major and is uncertain of whether or not this current career path is for her. Jasmine tells Sarah about how her parents heavily influenced by selection of her current major. “They want me to make sure I have a financially stable future in the career I choose,” she shares. Jasmine then goes on to tell Sarah that she has an increasing interest in non-profit work and social justice, interests that have grown through her volunteer work on campus.

“I’m struggling in my business classes, but this means so much to my parents,” Jasmine confides in Sarah. To deal with her struggles in some business classes, she attends study groups and her TA’s office hours. Jasmine shares with Sarah that her family looks forward to her visits home and hearing about what she is learning in her classes. “My parents didn’t have the opportunity to go to college,” Jasmine says, “So they like hearing about my experiences in and out of classes on campus.” Jasmine hesitates to share the difficulties she is having with her family, so she tends to only tell them about the positive things that occur.

As an advisor who specializes in working with first-generation students, Sarah recognizes and empathizes with Jasmine’s complex situation. She understands that these students often experience emotional and familial pressures that weigh on them. This is because first-generation students are not only navigating their academic journey, but also work to meet the expectations of being the first in their family to attend college. 

Discussion Questions:

1. What are potential long-term consequences for students such as Jasmine, who prioritize their family’s expectations over their desires and wishes?
2. What are some strategies Sarah can share with Jasmine when it comes to advocating for herself?
3. What institutional resources could be beneficial in helping first-generation students manage the emotional and academic stresses they feel from their families?

Author Bio

Monica Tomarchio (she/her) is a current second year graduate student at Northern Illinois University in the Higher Education & Student Affairs program. In the future, Monica is interested in working in areas such as Student Involvement, Academic Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and Academic Advising.

Abstract

This case study closely examines the real-world struggles that Supplemental Instruction (SI) leaders and their graduate assistant supervisors at Saints University face when trying to tackle a common problem on campuses. Students are not showing up for academic support sessions like they did earlier in the semester. Jackson Manuel, a graduate assistant who cares deeply about helping students succeed, teams up with SI Leader Emily White who shares his passion for making a difference. Together, they set out to figure out why attendance at SI sessions is dwindling and what they can do to change that. This study tells the story of two people who refuse to give up in the face of challenges and offers a glimpse into the human side of tackling institutional issues, all in the name of helping students succeed.

Keywords: Supplemental Instruction, Student Engagement, Academic Support, Institutional Barriers, Student Success

Characters

Emily White (she/her): A dedicated SI leader and Mechanical Engineering student, Emily cares deeply about helping her peers succeed. However, she feels discouraged when she sees only a few students showing up, even after preparing detailed and engaging sessions.

Dr. Taylor Davies (they/them): The SI program coordinator at Saints University focuses on providing guidance to the SI leaders. Dr. Taylor recognizes the broader systemic issues that affect student participation and strives to advocate for more support for the program.

Alex Kean (he/him): A second-year student who initially attends SI sessions but gradually stops coming. He’s balancing a busy schedule and believes SI sessions are primarily for struggling students, discouraging him from attending regularly.

Context and Case

It is early afternoon on a warm fall day. Jackson Manuel is sitting in his office at Saints University, scrolling through the attendance reports for the Supplemental Instruction (SI) sessions he oversees. The student participation numbers are not promising. Similar to the previous two semesters, the data shows that attendance is dropping, especially among the students who could benefit the most. As a graduate assistant in the Supplemental Instruction program, Jackson has invested much of his time supporting SI and working closely with the leaders to enhance their sessions, but despite their efforts, fewer students are coming than did in the first weeks of the term. As for the students who do attend the sessions, it is the same familiar faces each time.

Across campus, Emily, one of Jackson’s SI leaders, feels a similar frustration. She spent hours preparing for her SI session last night, crafting interactive activities to help students grasp difficult concepts from their mathematics class. When only three out of 75 students showed up, students already performing well, she could not help but feel disheartened. “Why aren’t the students who need help coming? What is preventing these students from taking advantage of entirely free sessions?” she wondered.

In addition, because of her frustration, Emily has considered leaving her SI position after this term. She loves the work but feels like she might make more of an impact in a different role supporting students in the future. She does not want to leave this job, but the disappointment is starting to weigh on her and she is not sure what to do.

At about the same time, Dr. Taylor met and talked with Alex, a second-year student, one day after class about the SI program and its benefits to students. Alex admitted attending a few SI sessions early in the semester but said he started feeling like he did not belong there. “I’m not failing,” he said, “so I don’t need extra help, right?” Before Dr. Taylor can respond, Alex says he has to run to a meeting about a group project for another class.

Later that week, Jackson meets with Dr. Taylor who is the SI program director and Jackson’s supervisor. They discuss the program’s challenges: students do not seem to understand the purpose of SI, some think it is remedial, and others, like Alex,  just cannot fit SI into their busy schedules.

Jackson feels the weight of the problem and reflects on what Dr. Taylor mentioned about students’ perceptions about supplemental instruction; their attachment to seeking help affects their participation. It is not just about making sure SI sessions are well-run. It is about shifting student perceptions and tearing down the barriers preventing students like Alex from accessing help. The problem runs deeper than attendance numbers. It is about creating a culture of academic support where students of all performance levels feel comfortable attending SI sessions. But how? Jackson knows it will not be easy with limited resources and institutional constraints. Still, he is determined to make a difference.

Later that evening, Jackson reaches out to Emily. They brainstorm ways to promote the program and make it more accessible. Emily suggests tweaking the messaging in their communications to students. “We have to emphasize that SI is for everyone, not just those struggling. Maybe we can get some of the top-performing students to speak out about how it helped them, too,” she says.

Jackson suggests seeking faculty buy-in by engaging professors about the SI program. “If we can get more professors to speak highly of the program, students may feel comfortable attending sessions and contributing excellent ideas to benefit their colleagues,” Jackson states.

As they talk, they form a vision. What if SI was not just an academic safety net but a community of learners supporting one another at all stages of their educational journey?

Discussion Questions

1. How can Jackson and Emily reshape students’ perceptions of SI as a resource for all, not just for struggling students?
2. What strategies can Jackson implement to increase attendance while balancing limited institutional resources?
3. How can Dr. Taylor advocate for additional institutional support or flexibility in scheduling to accommodate more students?
4. What role does peer influence play in overcoming the stigma attached to academic support programs like SI, and how can this be leveraged to encourage participation?
5. How can SI leaders like Emily assess the effectiveness of their new approaches in engaging more students and improving academic outcomes?
6. How can Jackson and Emily convince faculty to show interest in the SI program?

Author Bio

Richard Manu (He/Him/His) – Is passionate about diversity and inclusion in higher education, focusing on enhancing support for international students in the United States. Richard is a graduate student at Clemson University’s Master of Student Affairs Program and an administrative assistant for the Supplemental Instruction (SI) Program at Clemson University. In addition to scholarly pursuits, Richard Manu actively serves as the Welfare Officer for the Ghanaian Students in Clemson organization, providing resources and support to ensure a smooth transition and positive experience for Ghanaian students.

References and Resources

Supplemental Instruction Program Manual, Clemson University 2023

Arendale, D. R. (2022). Understanding the impact of Supplemental Instruction on student outcomes. Journal of Academic Support Services.

McGuire, S. Y. (2015). Teach students how to learn: Strategies you can incorporate into any course to improve student metacognition, study skills, and motivation. Stylus Publishing.

Abstract

As student affair practitioners, we often place significant emphasis on student development theory to inform our practice. However, there are times in which student leadership and involvement does not align with the theoretical models many practitioners learned in the classroom. Despite students sharing a similar talent, experience, passion, and leadership potential, those with flashy resumes and interview skills often are more successful in securing positions. As a result, students who may not have had the support to develop their resumes or interview skills, yet who are still more than capable, are left at a distinct disadvantage. This case study explores the complexity of such situation as student affair practitioners navigate creating equitable access to leadership and involvement opportunities on their campus.

Keywords: Student Activities, Student Organizations, Student Leadership, Student Involvement, and Sense of Belonging

Primary Characters

Logan (he, him, his) – Logan is an entry level practitioner currently serving as a full-time Assistant Director in Student Activities. He recently graduated from his Higher Education and Student Affairs master’s program and has only been in this role for two years.

Alice (she, her, hers) – Alice is a heavily involved junior who holds leadership roles in a variety of offices and student organizations on campus. She is well known and respected among faculty and staff at the university for her charisma and ability to easily engage with others.

Bethany (she, her, hers) – Bethany, a first-generation college student, is an extremely motived and passionate junior. However, she feels as if she continues to miss the mark when applying for leadership roles in a variety of offices and student organizations on campus. In the past three years, Bethany has grown to resent Alice for her success in securing opportunities. Bethany does not understand what she is doing wrong and her sense of belonging on campus is beginning to be compromised.

Context

Bishop-Lake University (BLU) is a small private university outside of a mid-sized city in the Midwest. Attracting diverse students from across the country, BLU is extremely competitive with an acceptance rate of about 12%. Many students enjoy the university’s proximity to the nearby city, which has become one of the country’s up-and-coming places to live for young professionals.

While most students choose to start building their skills and connections early through a variety of internship and co-op experiences built into the university’s curriculum, some students seek more ‘traditional’ opportunities of on-campus leadership and involvement through offices and student organizations. These positions tend to be led by a select group of students who are heavily involved throughout the university. A common saying on campus about these students is “Once on track, never look back.” This comes from the idea students get involved their first semester on campus and move into leadership roles as soon as possible.

The staff members in the department of Student Activities have worked hard to help diversify student leadership and involvement to create more equitable access to such opportunities on their campus. However, they have faced significant obstacles engaging the greater student body as many students are uninterested in campus positions as their focus is on the internship and co-op experiences offered in partnership with the city.

Case

Quickly nearing the end of their third year at Bishop-Lake University, Alice and Bethany are sitting outside on the lawn with some of their friends reminiscing about how far they have come since entering college a few years ago. The friends are reflecting on what they are looking forward to in their upcoming senior year, when James, one of the group members, asks Alice if she has heard back from a leadership position on-campus which he knew she was interested in. Unknown by the friend group at the time, both Alice and Bethany happened to have interviewed for such role. With her curiosity intensified by James’ question, Alice goes to check her email on her phone only to find out she has been offered the position.

Congratulating their friend on her success, the group fails to realize Bethany, frazzled by the news, is franticly checking her own email only to confirm she did not get offered the position. As she reads the words ‘Thank you for interest in our office’s student leadership position. This year we had many great applicants, and we regret to inform you…” her eyes sink as she struggles not to cry in front of the group.

Bethany has been actively seeking various on-campus student involvement and leadership positions since her arrival three years ago and yet always seems to miss the mark from being offered such roles. Though Bethany has joined student organizations, she has not been able to land a leadership role. Bethany, like many of her friends (including Alice), are not interested in the internship and co-op opportunities BLU prides themselves on. Since they are seeking to attend graduate school, they are not as focused on field experiences as others at BLU who hope to find direct employment opportunities through their experiences in the nearby city.

Over her time at Bishop-Lake, Bethany has come to resent her friend Alice because she always seems to get offered every student leadership and involvement opportunity she wants. Both Bethany and Alice are highly motivated, engaged, and passionate students. In fact, the two share extremely similar experiences from their time prior to Bishop-Lake and have similar leadership styles and strengths.

Unlike Alice, Bethany is much more reserved when it comes to networking and self-promotion. Given what she feels is constant rejection, Bethany has begun doubting herself and questioning her own skills. She is struggling to feel the sense of belonging at Bishop-Lake she once had and is growing increasingly concerned about her development as she feels her resume is lacking compared to her peers.

Unsure of her next steps, Bethany has scheduled a meeting with Logan in the Department of Student Activities. Bethany has met with Logan many times and he always gives her sound advice. During the meeting, Logan acknowledges her struggles and encourages her to keep working for the opportunities she wants; Bethany feels seen and heard but walked away unsure about her next steps of action.

After their conversation, Logan felt a deep sense of empathy for Bethany who has always come to their meetings engaged and open to any advice he provides. However, this meeting seemed different to him. He felt apprehensive after their discussion and was puzzled how to move forward.

Unknown to Bethany, Alice met with Logan in her first semester on campus and explained how important being successful in college was to her. Alice comes from a low socio-economic background and was only able to attend Bishop-Lake because she received a presidential scholarship from BLU. Alice actively seeks out leadership opportunities while masking the feelings of imposter syndrome by projecting an elevated level of confidence.

On the other hand, Logan sees Bethany struggling with rejection and failure. He wants to help both students find on-campus leadership and involvement opportunities, but fears that Bethany is not learning from the adversity college has brought and sees her losing connection to the university.

Although both students are equally willing, passionate, and share similar strengths, Logan has been able to directly see how the two students’ paths differ as Alice continues to secure opportunities, whereas Bethany has been unsuccessful in her attempts. While Bethany attributes Alice’s success to her strong networking and professional interview skills, she is much less aware of the experiences Alice has had motivating involvement and leadership journey. Regardless, Bethany feels isolated and defeated.

Discussion Questions

1. What developmental theory might Logan use in devising a plan to support Bethany?
2. What systemic issues might be affecting student leadership and involvement at the university?
3. As a department, how might Student Activities combat the current access to leadership and involvement opportunities on campus?
4. How do student affairs practitioners create a greater sense of belonging for the students at their university when connection opportunities may be limited?
5. How can Logan focus on the developmental needs of both Alice and Bethany?

Author’s Biography

Jacob Maddox (he, him, his) – Jacob is a second-year graduate student in the Clemson University Master of Counselor Education, Student Affairs program. He proudly serves as the Graduate Assistant for Bridge to Clemson Academic Advising and Success Initiatives. Prior to attending Clemson, Jacob graduated from Baylor University in the Spring 2023 and is passionate about large-scale event planning and helping students find their sense of belonging on-campus.

Abstract

McKenna, a student at Pine Valley University, struggles with understanding her future career aspirations. McKenna shares these concerns with her supervisor, Emily, who encourages her that her talents would be excellent in the field of student affairs. McKenna and Emily’s relationship as mentor and mentee upsets another one of Emily’s supervisees, who feels Emily pours all her energy into McKenna’s future because of their shared interests. McKenna pursues a career in student affairs but begins to feel that she may not be drawn to the field as much as she enjoyed her former role in the Student Engagement Office.

 

Keywords: Advising and supporting, student leaders, careers in student affairs, student influence, self-authorship, ethic hiring processes

Primary Characters

McKenna Lowell (she/her) is a third-year student at Pine Valley University PVU). She is a communication major but is struggling to find a fulfilling career in this field. McKenna is a member of the Pine Valley Student Government Association (PSGA), an orientation leader, and President of the Pine Valley University Ski Club, which she helped establish on campus. In PSGA this year, McKenna serves as the Student Affairs Chair and works closely with the PSGA advisor and Assistant Director of Student Organizations to fulfill her responsibilities.

Andrew Brown (he/him) is a third-year student at Pine Valley University. He is majoring in biology and has a minor in Spanish. Andrew has dreamed of going to medical school since he was a little boy; both of his parents are surgeons. He is very intelligent student who works hard to build his professional and personal resumes in preparation for medical school applications. His extracurricular involvement incudes biology club, campus tour guide, Dance Marathon, and Pine Valley Student Government Association (PSGA). This year, his leadership commitment increased to include the Head of Programming for PSGA. In this position, he will work closely with the Assistant Director of Student Organizations for the university to plan events on campus.

Emily Parker (she/her) is the Assistant Director of Student Organizations at PVU. Emily graduated with her bachelor’s degree in marketing in 2019 and her master’s degree in College Student Personnel in 2021. Both of her degrees came from PVU. While completing her master’s degree, Emily held an assistantship in the Student Engagement Office at PVU. She continued her work in this office after graduation when she accepted the Assistant Director of Student Organizations role. Emily now works closely with PSGA to support student’s programming needs and leadership development. Emily’s favorite parts of her job includes mentoring and supporting students as they move through their undergraduate career.

Institutional Context

Pine Valley University is a private liberal arts college in the Midwest. The primarily residential institution has six colleges and over 40 majors. It is the home to about 4,000 undergraduate students and 500 graduate students. Moderately selective, PVU is a primarily white institution. Students tend to be highly involved, with over 80% of students involved in at least one student organization on campus. The university prides itself in providing students with autonomy to learn, grow, and lead in their own way, and students are oftentimes highly involved in the decision-making process in many student affairs offices throughout the university.

Pine Valley Student Government Association (PSGA) is a 20-member organization dedicated to enhancing the student experience. Members of PSGA work closely with various student affairs professionals and functional areas at PVU to solve problems and advocate for student needs across campus. The PSGA Student Affairs Chair (McKenna’s position) reports to the Assistant Director of Student Organizations and has weekly office hours in the Student Engagement Office to carry out their duties. The Head of Programming of PSGA (Andrew’s position) also holds weekly office hours in the Student Engagement Office and works closely with the Assistant Director of Student Organizations to organize PSGA’s events. Both positions within PSGA are paid positions.

The Case

As the semester begins, Andrew and McKenna have been spending lots of time in the Office of Student Engagement holding their PSGA office hours, working on campus-wide projects, and interacting with student affairs professionals. McKenna comes to the office during her down time to chat with staff members and complains about her major more frequently as the semester moves ahead. She feels bored and unmotivated by her communications classes and struggles to see a future in the field.

As she leaves the office for class one day, she comments to Emily, “I wish I could spend all day here! It is way more fun than going to class.” Emily laughs, as she remembers feeling the exact same way during her undergraduate years. She loved her time in extracurricular activities much more than her time in the classroom.

Emily notices that McKenna stresses about her future career roadblock and starts to invest extra time and support into her. She treats her to coffee, provides her with her personal phone number, and talks to her almost daily. The two develop a strong, but casual and informal connection. They discuss McKenna’s passions and interests, and Emily loves to point out how similar the two of them are. One day, as they are preparing for a full-team PSGA meeting, Emily asks Mckenna, “So, have you ever considered working in student affairs? You would be so great at this! It suits you.”

McKenna thinks a lot about what Emily said. She really appreciated the affirmation, as she looks up to Emily in many ways. It felt nice to hear validation from someone who inspires her.

Discussion Questions

1. Where is McKenna at in development in Baxter-Magolda’s self-authorship theory?
2. Which of Chickering and Reisser’s seven vectors could McKenna’s be in developmentally at this point in her college career?
3. How does Emily’s influence as a mentor impact McKenna’s development and possible career choice?

Case Continued

As the semester progresses, Andrew, who is frequently in the Student Engagement office with Emily and McKenna, notices the two of them spend a lot of time together. He understands they have similar interests, but he sometimes feels left out. He hears Emily and McKenna talking about potential graduate programs for McKenna to apply for and sees them hanging out together on campus sometimes. Andrew understands that McKenna is exploring the possibility of going into a similar career field as Emily, but he feels frustrated and annoyed.

While he is confident and self-assured in his future career, not only is he missing the career mentoring, but he also gets less support in his PSGA role than McKenna does. He feels he has been unable to develop a strong relationship with Emily. He does not feel comfortable going to her with questions or for support, because she is always with McKenna. He decides he will not return to PSGA and is looking forward to the end of his term when the semester concludes.

As Andrew eventually drops out of PSGA, McKenna starts to focus on applying for graduate programs in student affairs. She relies heavily on Emily for support and mentoring and looks forward to being in a role like Emily’s. She tells Emily one day, “I can’t wait to be just like you!” Emily feels proud for successfully supporting and mentoring McKenna in this decision-making process.

Discussion Questions

1. What elements of the environment contributed to Andrew’s lack of sense of belonging?
2. How could Emily have balanced supporting both Andrew and McKenna, despite the shared interest she and McKenna’s have in the field of student affairs?
3. How could Emily navigate career conversations with students and balance providing encouragement with space to navigate their own path?

Two Years Later

McKenna applies and is accepted into the College Student Personnel master’s program at PVU. She secures a graduate assistantship in academic advising. Throughout her graduate school experience, McKenna learns that student affairs is more than and different from what she experienced during her undergraduate studies. She struggles to understand her new role as a professional and misses the support and love she was given as a student. She faces a lot of challenges specifically related to shifting from being a student leader to a graduate student. McKenna begins to question her role in student affairs and her motives for entering the field.

Discussion Questions

1. What role does Emily play (if any) in McKenna’s dissatisfaction in student affairs?
2. If McKenna approaches Emily with her frustrations, what suggestions can Emily provide and how should/can she shift more decision-making responsibility and accountability to McKenna in this situation?

Author Biographies 

Lyndsey Johns (she, her, hers) is a second-year graduate student at Bowling Green State University in the College Student Personnel program. In addition to pursuing her master’s education, Lyndsey serves as a graduate assistant in the C. Raymond Marvin Center for Student Leadership and Civic Engagement. After graduation, Lyndsey hopes to fund a full-time role dedicated to empowering students through leadership development and community and civic engagement.

 Samantha McDonald (she, her, hers) is a second-year graduate student in the College Student Personnel (CSP) master’s program at Bowling Green State University. She currently works as a graduate advisor in the Thompson Scholarship Program, where she advises a caseload of students and supports different leadership and service-learning initiatives. After graduation, she hopes to find a full-time position working in orientation, transition, or first-year experience.

Abstract

The number of high school students participating in dual enrollment programs has been steadily increasing, yet so have the equity gaps within these programs (Fink, 2024). Despite this growth, dual enrollment programs continue to struggle with enrolling students from historically minoritized backgrounds. Black students, for example, represent only 8% of dual enrollment participants (Fink, 2024). Students from historically marginalized groups face a variety of barriers that can impact both their academic success and personal well-being. These obstacles often arise from systemic inequities, underrepresentation, and limited support networks within predominantly white educational institutions. This case study will explore how these factors, alongside the rigor of college-level coursework taken during high school, could affect a Black student’s academic performance, self-esteem, and sense of belonging.

Keywords: dual enrollment, academic advising, minoritized first-generation student, belonging

Characters

Zuri (she, her, hers) – Zuri, a 17-year-old high school junior, is a first-generation, low-income Black student enrolled in a dual credit program that allows her to earn college credits while completing her high school education. As the first in her family to pursue higher education, Zuri feels a deep sense of responsibility to succeed. Her goal is to earn her associate’s degree through the program and transfer to a four-year university to continue her education.

Quinn (he, him, his) – Quinn is an academic advisor for the dual enrollment program at BBC, with several years of experience helping students navigate the transition between high school and college. A proud Black man from a middle-class family, he believes strongly in the value of hard work and determination. He enjoys working with high-achieving students and is passionate about helping them excel academically, drawing from his own experiences as a dedicated college student.  However, his professional background has been shaped by his own privileges and his experiences working with students from affluent backgrounds, limiting his exposure to the unique challenges first generation and low-income students face.

Context

Bridgewater Community College (BCC) is a predominately white mid-sized institution located in a rural region in the Midwest. The college serves approximately 6,000 students annually, offering a diverse range of associate degree programs, technical certifications, and workforce development courses. With a strong focus on community engagement, Bridgewater prides itself on being an accessible and affordable option for students seeking to jumpstart their education and careers.

Case Study

Coming from a family background where college is not the norm, Zuri has faced challenges beyond the classroom. Financial stress is a constant concern, as her family struggles to make ends meet.  To help support her household, Zuri juggles a demanding academic workload with a part time job. Despite limited resources, her strong work ethic, intelligence, and determination have allowed her to pursue higher education through a dual enrollment program. Although dual enrollment gives her an opportunity to pursue higher education it adds pressure for her to succeed and prove herself academically.

Although Zuri’s support network is limited, she brings a wealth of cultural knowledge and perspective to her school environment. As a first generation, low-income student of color, she often contributes valuable viewpoints shaped by her background, enriching discussions in her classes.  However, many of her teachers and peers, though well-meaning, do not fully understand the unique struggles she faces. This often leaves Zuri feeling isolated at school, unsure of who to turn to for guidance and support. While her family is proud of her achievements, they are unfamiliar with the complexities of higher education, making it difficult for them to provide the academic and financial support she needs.

Despite her ability to persevere, Zuri finds herself overwhelmed by the weight of balancing her studies, financial responsibilities, extracurriculars, and the high expectations placed on her, both by herself and others. She is enrolled in five rigorous courses at BBC and is involved in the National Honors Society and Women in STEM club at her high school. She often stays up late completing assignments, resulting in chronic fatigue. The mental and emotional stress of being a high-achieving student from a marginalized background is beginning to take its toll.

One afternoon, Zuri has a meeting with BBC academic advisor, Quinn to discuss her progress. Although she had intended to talk to him about her struggles, when the time comes, she hesitates. Quinn congratulates her on her academic achievements and encourages her to keep pushing toward her goals, but he does not ask how she is managing the workload or if she is facing any challenges outside of academics. Zuri, not wanting to appear as if she is struggling, smiles and thanks him for his support. After the meeting, Zuri feels even more isolated. She wishes she could tell someone about the constant pressure she is under, the long nights spent studying, the financial stress, and the fear that she will not be able to handle it all. Without the right support or encouragement to open up, Zuri continues to internalize her struggles

The pressure intensifies when Zuri gets caught plagiarizing a paper in one of her college-level courses at BCC. She begins to question whether she can complete the program. She feels guilty for not meeting her own high expectations, and she worries that if she doesn’t succeed, she will let down not just herself, but her family.

A week later, Zuri schedules another meeting with Quinn to finally discuss her challenges and seek advice on managing her workload. However, when she arrives Quinn appears to be   juggling several student meetings and only briefly reviews her academic progress, again praising her achievements without holistically checking in with her. However, Zuri’s current grades do not reflect the paper she plagiarized. Zuri does not feel like there is time to talk about her personal struggles, so she leaves the meeting without bringing them up.

Discussion Questions

1. How might Quinn, create a more open and supportive dialogue? What questions or communication approaches could Quinn use to help Zuri feel more comfortable sharing her challenges?
2. What strategies could Quinn utilize to better assess Zuri’s needs and provide her with resources that align with her specific challenges?
3. How can Quinn support Zuri as she works to prioritize and manage her academic and personal responsibilities? How can he collaborate with her to set realistic, achievable goals that align with her strengths and current challenges?
4. How might others (high school counselor, student conduct hearing officer, faculty, etc.) engage with Zuri to help find her support and resources?

Author Bio

Alexus Hughes (she/her/hers) is a second-year graduate student at Northern Illinois University’s (NIU) perusing a Master’s of Higher Education and Student Affairs. She currently serves as a graduate assistant in the Academic Advising Center at NIU.

References

Fink, J. (2024, August 26). How many students are taking dual enrollment courses in high school? New National, state, and college-level data. Community College Research Center. https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/easyblog/how-many-students-are-taking-dual-enrollment-courses-in-high-school-new-national-state-and-college-level-data.html#:~:text=Black%20students%2C%20which%20made%20up,every%20state%20except%20for%20Massachusetts.

Abstract

Field-related experience can be essential for students to secure jobs upon graduation, and student affairs practitioners are often tasked with supporting students through internships and other high-impact practices. This case examines ethical boundaries between employer and university relations in the context of internships. It specifically addresses how to support students experiencing discriminatory or inappropriate behaviors from employers who have ties to the university.

Key Words: workplace discrimination, employer/university relations, career services, advising and support

Primary Characters

Nora (she/her) serves as the Internship Preparation Coordinator in the Career Center. In this position, Nora meets with students for career counseling appointments and provides internship preparation workshops to guide students through all stages of the application process. She is in her third year in this role and finally feels like she has her feet under her.

Tim (he/him) is the Industry Partnership Coordinator in the Career Center. In his role, he is responsible for establishing partnership programs with local employers and hosting campuswide career fairs. Tim has been in his current position for the past six years.

Jayda (she/her) is a senior industrial engineering student. Last year she attended several of the internship preparation workshops put on by Nora. She completed an internship this summer at Manufacture It, a large manufacturing company local to the area that donates heavily to CSU. She is attending this semester’s career fair in hopes of finding a full-time job.

Dominic (he/him) is a Project Manager at Manufacture It. He is an alumnus of CSU and started at the company as an intern after he got connected to them at a career fair. He has been with Manufacture It for five years full-time and loves to recruit at CSU because he can talk about his experience transitioning from intern to full-time. He particularly emphasizes the family feel of the company and says coming to work every day feels like hanging out with the bros.

Marie (she/her) is a sophomore mechanical engineering student. Prior to this year’s career fair, she attended several internship preparation workshops hosted by Nora and now feels confident she can land an internship at the fair.

Institutional Context

Central State University (CSU) is a mid-size public four-year institution located in a metropolitan area in the southeastern United States. Due to CSU’s low in-state tuition and generous merit-based scholarships, most of its student population are in-state residents. The University prides itself on contributing to the city economy while preparing students for the job market through several strong industry partnerships with local companies. CSU has a strong Career Center that facilitates these partnerships and puts on several campuswide career fairs to connect students with internship and full-time job opportunities.

Case Study 

Nora is excited about the career fair this semester. Over the past couple of years, she has seen several students who attended her internship preparation workshops leave the career fair with interviews and secure offers shortly afterward. For the past few weeks, she has hosted workshops and met with several students one-on-one to help them prepare for the career fair. At this fair, she is working the student information desk. She enjoys being right by the student check-in, so she can see the students she has worked with and encourage them.

Toward the start of the fair, Nora notices one of her former students, Jayda, at the student check-in. Nora has not seen Jayda since she completed her summer internship at Manufacture It. Nora wants to hear about Jayda’s experience and her goals for the fair.  Jayda meets Nora’s enthusiastic greeting with apprehension. When asked about her summer internship, Jayda’s responses are short and vague. Jayda says she’s looking for a full-time job in “anything but manufacturing.”

After some follow-up questions, Jayda admits that she had a rough internship experience. She was the only female-identifying intern in her division, and she received fewer projects than her male intern peers. Of the projects she did receive, none of the line workers took her improvement suggestions seriously, so she was unable to make substantial progress. When she brought these issues up with her supervisor, Dominic, he dismissively said, “If you’re going to make it in manufacturing, you need to man up.”

Jayda says she only met with Dominic five times and that the interactions were 15 minutes at the most. The recurring theme was for Jayda to try harder, but he did not give any specific additional guidance or suggestions. However, Dominic met with the male CSU intern weekly for at least an hour and regularly took him out to lunch.

Nora thanks Jayda for confiding in her and says that she will try to identify changes to ensure other students do not experience this. Nora adds that because Manufacture It is a CSU industry partner, she is not sure how it will go, but she will do her best to address this issue. Jayda is grateful for Nora’s support and says she will follow up with her about how the fair goes.

Nora knows Dominic is working the Manufacture It table today, but she wants to avoid a confrontation with the employer. She schedules a meeting with her colleague Tim to discuss the situation after the fair.

As the fair starts to wrap up, Nora spots Marie with whom she worked extensively to prepare to find an internship. She asks Marie how the fair went. Marie says she has some good leads but was a little disappointed by her top choice, Manufacture It. Since Marie wants to go into manufacturing engineering and they are the leading manufacturer in the state, she was hoping to get a spot in their CSU internship partner program.

However, after having a good conversation with the recruiter and handing him her resume, she noticed later that he had reached out to add her on Snapchat. Marie is concerned because her Snapchat is not associated with her full name or linked anywhere on her professional documents, as she only uses it to share photos with close friends. Marie shows her the message that was sent with the request, which says, “Hey it was great meeting you. We should talk more about manufacturing someplace more chill than a career fair.” Nora notices from the screenname that the recruiter is Dominic, the same employee that Jayda expressed concerns about. Marie says she is uncomfortable because, given the context of the message, she is not sure of his intentions. However, she is worried that making a negative impression could impact her future in manufacturing.

Nora encourages Marie to pursue the leads she has from companies she feels more comfortable with. Nora is not sure what other advice to give Marie without consulting with more seasoned professionals first. She schedules a time to meet with Marie next week to discuss the situation further.

A few days after the fair, Nora meets with Tim. While she has information that fits with the inappropriate behavior Marie experienced, she does not have anything other than Jayda’s word about that situation. Nevertheless, Nora decides to bring up both issues in her meeting.

Tim says he is “honestly shocked by this information.” He reveals that he was at CSU with Dominic and they were part of the same fraternity, and he couldn’t see him doing this. Tim also brings up how Manufacture It is one of CSU’s strongest industry partnerships, so he is worried these allegations may negatively impact that. He tells Nora he would need more evidence of Dominic’s behavior and proof that these are recurring issues before he would feel comfortable bringing this situation to higher-ups and possibly jeopardizing the relationship CSU has with Manufacture It.

Nora is discouraged after meeting with Tim. She believes his judgment may be clouded by his connection to Dominic and is not comfortable with the decision he made. She feels a responsibility to support the students and make the workplace safer for them. However, Tim outranks her in role and years of experience, so it would not be wise to go above him with these concerns. Nora is not sure how to approach this situation in a way that aligns with her values and ethics but also respects her coworker’s decision and the employer’s partnership with CSU.

Discussion Questions

1. How would you respond to this situation if you were in Nora’s shoes?
2. What role does gender play in the power dynamics present in this case study?
3. How could you ensure the students’ concerns are heard while not jeopardizing this partnership?
4. What parameters could Nora put in place so students do not run into similar issues in the future?
5. Who else might Nora consult with about this situation?

Author Bio

Lia Fiore (she/her) serves as the Assistant Director of Undergraduate Off-Campus Internships in the Center for Career and Professional Development at Clemson University. She is also pursuing her Master of Education in Student Affairs through Clemson.

Abstract

This case study examines an issue advisors face, in splitting their time and energy between students when time is a finite resource. Graduate students with assistantships advising students throughout the fellowship application process may struggle with dedicating time to eligible students who may not be competitive candidates. This issue can be particularly difficult when students come from diverse backgrounds with access to a wide range of opportunities.

Keywords: equity-based advising, fellowship advising, study abroad, first-generation college students

Institutional Context

Oceanside University is a medium-sized public institution in the Southeast. Due to its coastal location and recent elevation to R2 designation, the school has been growing steadily. The top three reasons students apply to Oceanside are the beautiful campus, strong STEM programming, and proximity to destination cities. The Office of External Awards at Oceanside is only five years old and is staffed by a Director and Assistant Director. This is the first year they have had a graduate assistant.

Primary Characters

Claire (she/her) is a first-year graduate student completing her assistantship as a fellowship advisor. In this role, Claire primarily advises for international awards and opportunities. She studied abroad in Argentina which was a transformative part of her undergraduate experience, and she hopes to help make study abroad accessible for other students.

Alyssa (she/her) is a 21-year-old junior marine biology major with a 3.65 GPA. She is an in-state, first-generation college student. In selecting her undergrad institution, she prioritized affordability, proximity to her family, and research opportunities to pursue her interests in wetland ecology.

James (he/him) is a 19-year-old sophomore pre-business student with a 4.00 GPA. He is an out-of-state student who wanted to attend a school in the Southeast for the nice weather. He is an Honors College student, and many of his AP classes from high school provided  him with transfer credits when he started at OU.

Case

In her graduate assistantship Claire advises and supports undergraduate students through the application process for nationally competitive scholarships. Currently, her energy is dedicated to helping students apply for the Bryant Scholarship as the application closes tonight, a Friday. This US State Department-funded award will cover the cost of attendance for undergraduate students to complete a 16-week study abroad, which includes covering travel to and from the host institution and a modest stipend adjusted based on cost of living by location.

As the mission of this scholarship is to further the goals of the State Department and promote mutual and global understanding, winners are required to volunteer in their host community for at least 30 hours during their semester abroad. Winners often volunteer as English tutors, though some have completed more innovative projects like organizing community clean up or food drives.

To be eligible for this award, students must be United States citizens, have completed at least 60 credit hours toward their undergraduate degree, and select a semester-long study abroad program. Applicants must write two essays on the following prompts:

1. Why did you choose this study abroad experience? How does your coursework abroad connect to your short- and long-term career goals?
2. Describe and explain the impact of your proposed service project.

Students must also upload their transcript, and there is an optional third essay to explain any underlying circumstances related to their application. No letters of recommendation are required.

Meeting with Claire

Though most applicants this cycle have been working with Claire for at least a month to draft their essays, two students booked last-minute appointments. On Monday morning, Alyssa, who hopes to study abroad in Sydney, Australia, met with Claire. “I’m sorry I didn’t book an appointment sooner when I first learned about the scholarship, but I’ve been very swamped with exams and my job,” Alyssa shares, disclosing that ever since she started school Alyssa has held a job working 35 hours a week at a grocery store. “I hope I can still apply. This would be my first trip outside of the U.S. and the award package makes this more affordable for me than other opportunities I’ve seen.”

During this intake meeting, Claire showed Alyssa the scholarship requirements and helped her draft an outline for the required essays. Alyssa spoke to her interest in this study abroad program because she is a marine biology major, and while abroad she will be taking a lab course on coral reef conservation. Because she plans to stay in the Southeast after graduation, Alyssa shared how she can transfer this learning to her research on wetland conservation in her home state. She feels the least confident in explaining her career goals. “My marine biology professors are great, but I’d like to work outside of a university doing research in the field. I haven’t had a chance to fully explore my options, though.” Her proposed service project ties into the community service she currently does, teaching schoolchildren about their role in reducing plastic waste that could end up in the ocean.

She also plans to write the optional third essay, disclosing to Claire that she struggled adapting to working her job while attending school. She shares that as a first-gen college student she is trying to minimize any financial burden for her parents. “It took me a while, but I’m not really good at managing competing—and sometimes conflicting—responsibilities and my time.” Her transcript proves that her grades dramatically improved after her first semester. After this meeting, Claire feels optimistic about Alyssa’s ability to create a strong application.

Meeting with James

Claire then meets with James, who found out from his study abroad advisor about the scholarship that morning and immediately emailed Claire about an advising appointment. James shared in their meeting that he has been speaking periodically with an advisor in the study abroad office for the past year, because his dad said that he should study abroad. James is particularly interested in this opportunity because, as he said, “It would be cool to have the program paid for.” James has selected a program in Germany because he is interested in the beer culture there.

When pushed about how the coursework connects to his career goals, James said that he might be interested in international companies because they pay a lot, and so a study abroad would look good on his resume. When asked about the second essay, James proposes working as an English tutor as he is a native English speaker. Though he does not have any prior tutoring experience, James has performed well in his English classes as evidenced by his transcript. He does not intend to write the optional essay because, he says, “I don’t need to. I have a 4.00.”

After meeting with James, Claire is unsure if he will be able to make a clear case for why he deserves the award. However, there is no limit to the number of students a school can nominate for this award. In previous cycles, multiple students have been awarded this scholarship.

The Applications

On Wednesday, both students email Claire their first drafts. In her feedback Claire notes that Alyssa needs to add more transitions and descriptions, as her essay reads like a research paper. The essays James submits are well-written, but he needs to strengthen the connection between his coursework abroad and career goals.

Because multiple fellowships are due this weekend, the Office of External Awards is hosting drop-in advising during business hours on Friday. This event provides a space for students to work quietly and to ask advisors for last-minute synchronous feedback. Both the director and assistant director are busy working with other students applying for graduate school fellowships.

Alyssa and James both attend the drop-in event. Alyssa’s revisions are strong and her application requires only minor edits based on Claire’s feedback. During the event, Claire overhears James tell a peer that he used ChatGPT to write his essay and is editing his work by asking the site how to implement Claire’s feedback. The Office of External Awards has no official policy on the use of artificial intelligence, though Oceanside University at large has recognized the potential benefits of generative AI.

Discussion questions

1. How should Claire divide her time equitably between the two students during the drop-in hours? Which student, if either, deserves more assistance? Why?
2. After the workday ends, how should Claire respond to any last-minute emails from these two students?
3. What are the implications or consequences of Claire practicing equitable advising in her specific institutional context? How can she practice ACPA/NASPA competencies of Social Justice and Inclusion in her work?
4. What other resources on campus could Claire point these students to as they complete their applications?
5. How should Claire address the fact that James used ChatGPT? Why?

Author bio

Elise Blackburn (she/they) is a first-year student in Clemson University’s Master of Education in Student Affairs program and works as a graduate assistant for the Office of Major Fellowships. Elise studied abroad in Seville, Spain as an undergraduate and won a Fulbright fellowship to teach English at a university in Madrid. She is passionate about helping students tell their story and access funding for transformative opportunities like study abroad.

Abstract

Kobby Mensah, a second-year graduate student, works as a Graduate Assistant in the Office of Academic Advising at Sunnyvale University College. Kobby is tasked with advising new students and helping them build their class schedules under the supervision of Dr. Ram Madison, the Director of Academic Advising and Planning who oversees the University’s academic and advising policies. Brenda Finney is a Resident Advisor (RA) in Gaga Hall and is responsible for assisting students with getting acclimated to the residence hall and campus. A scheduling conflict for one of the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) students, Didi Wright, nearly leads to Didi dropping out of college. This case examines how institutional miscommunication and the absence of key leadership contribute to tensions between Academic Advising and Residence Life, affecting Didi’s ability to meet both academic and residence hall commitments. The extended residence hall program in Gaga Hall, designed to foster inclusion and relationship-building among a diverse student population, has become a source of conflict due to delayed communication between Residence Life and other departments and functional areas. The Office of Residence Life and Academic Advising are involved to demonstrate how leadership, planning, and coordination, must be incorporated in a holistic response to support Didi. 

Keywords: academic advising, residence life, retention, communication, STEM program

Characters

• Kobby Mensah (he/him), a second-year graduate student in the Higher Education and Student Affairs Administration masters program, works as a Graduate Assistant in the Office of Academic Advising
• Brenda Finney (she/her), a sophomore and a first-year Resident Advisor (RA) in Gaga Hall
• Didi Wright (she/her), a first- year student studying Computer Science and a resident of Gaga Hall
• Ram Madison (he/him), the Director of Academic Advising and Planning

Institutional Context

Sunnyvale University College is a mid-sized private institution with approximately 7,000 students in Grand Island, Nebraska, known for its strong STEM programs. The Office of Academic Advising works closely with The Office of Residence Life to ensure students’ academic and social needs are met. New students, particularly those in STEM fields, often face challenges in balancing academic schedules with residence life activities due to the demanding nature of their coursework. This academic year, Gaga Hall became home to one of the university’s most diverse first-year student cohorts, and during the first week of the semester, some students in the hall experienced challenges adjusting to the different identities, backgrounds, and cultures of their peers.

To address this, the Residence Life team implemented an extended residence hall program in Gaga Hall as a contingency plan to foster inclusion, bonding, and relationship-building among residents. However, due to the sudden departure of the Hall Director shortly before the semester began, there was limited time to communicate this new program effectively across departments and functional areas. This miscommunication created tension between Academic Advising and Residence Life, with students like Didi Wright sitting at the center of the conflict.

Case

Kobby Mensah, a Graduate Assistant in the Office of Academic Advising, plays a critical role in helping new students in STEM programs, plan their academic schedules. One of his primary responsibilities is advising students on course selection, ensuring they meet prerequisites and major requirements while managing their workload. Kobby reports to Dr. Ram, the Director of Academic Advising and Planning, who supervises all academic advising initiatives and policies of the university and supervises Kobby, supporting him.

The situation begins when Didi Wright, a first-year computer science student and resident of Gaga Hall, finds herself overwhelmed by a scheduling conflict. Her structured STEM curriculum requires her to attend a mandatory sequence of classes. The conflict arises when Didi realizes that her evening class schedules overlap with the new residence hall programs aimed at building community within the residence hall. Didi needs to attend these programs as part of her residence hall’s requirements for first-year students but missing any core classes will put her behind in her challenging STEM program. Sunnyvale University maintains a clear policy that academic commitments always take precedence over out-of-classroom activities, including residence hall programs. However, as a new student, Didi feels caught up between conflicting expectations and initially did not know how to seek help.

Brenda Finney, a first-time Resident Advisor eager to make a strong impression, stresses in an email to her residents, including Didi, that participation in all extended residence life activities is critical to fostering inclusion in Gaga Hall. RA Brenda, feeling the pressure of managing a diverse group of students without direct guidance from a Hall Director, highly encouraged attendance at the residence hall programs.

Didi, caught between her academic commitments and the hall’s social expectations, tells Kobby during an advising session: “I don’t think I can handle this. I didn’t even know who to talk to initially about this conflict and it feels like no one understands how much I’m struggling with school and my social commitments”. Kobby recognizes that Didi’s concerns extend beyond the immediate scheduling conflict and reflect broader issues of inclusion and belonging.

The Conflict Unfolds

Kobby consults with Dr. Ram, who emphasizes the importance of addressing Didi’s academic needs while collaborating with Residence Life to find a solution. In a meeting with a Residence Life representative and the Academic Advising Office chaired by Dr. Ram, the residence life member shares that Brenda is feeling unprepared to balance her responsibilities as an RA with the new residence hall program’s goals.

Additionally, the Residence Life representative explains that the program was introduced to address challenges related to diversity in Gaga Hall, but the lack of communication from Residence Life leadership has left Brenda uncertain about how to accommodate academic priorities. The Residence Life team assures Dr. Ram that Brenda has been informed that academic responsibilities come before residence life programs. The Residence Life Team assures Dr. Ram that they will officially communicate with Academic Advising and other offices about the new Gaga Hall program being implemented.

During the meeting Dr. Ram, the Residence Life representative, and Kobby propose a plan that involves adjusting Didi’s academic schedule to attend two early morning classes for the affected courses while allowing her to participate in the new residence hall program which runs through the first month of the semester. The changes are possible because the window for adding and dropping classes is still open.

Upon carefully considering the alternative schedules, Didi agrees to the new class arrangements, allowing her to attend the required core classes while also participating in key Gaga Hall programs. Kobby also arranges regular follow-up advising sessions with Didi to ensure she feels supported and to ensure that the new schedule works for her.

Discussion Questions

1. How can Brenda support Didi during Residence Hall program meetings?
2. How can Residence Life collaborate with the academic advising team to avoid conflicts with mandatory hall programs in the future?
3. How can institutions/student affairs professionals better support students who are balancing academic and social commitments?
4. What (if any) special considerations should staff bear in mind for supporting STEM students through their transitions into higher education?
5. What key leadership skills are needed to mediate conflicts between students and staff in higher education settings?
6. What strategies can graduate assistants employ to put their leadership skills into practice while maintaining positive relationships with their fellow staff members in their functional area or other functional areas within a university? 

Author Biographies

Ebenezer Kofi Asiaw (he/him): Ebenezer is a second-year graduate student in the College Student Personnel program at Bowling Green State University. Ebenezer’s assistantship is with the College Student Personnel program.

Kailah Williamson (she/her): Kailah is a second-year masters student in the College Student Personnel program at Bowling Green State University. Kailah’s assistantship is with The Office of Student Engagement as a Graduate Hall Director.

Abstract

The case study highlights the experience of a new white student affairs professional as she navigates a conversation with a Black female student who wishes to change her major from STEM to humanities but is struggling with having this conversation with her parent, who is passionate about her STEM studies.

Keywords: Students of color; major change; career services; parental support

Primary Characters

Charlene (she/her): Charlene is a new student affairs professional who is in her first year at State University, working in their Career Center as a Career Counselor. She is a White, straight, cisgendered woman. Charlene reports to Dr. Turftin.

Kammy (she/her): Kammy is a second-semester first-year student at State University studying a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering. She is a Black, straight, cisgendered woman.

Mark (he/him) Mark is a student affairs professional in his third year at State University and fifth year working in the field of student affairs. He is an academic advisor within the School of Engineering, who specifically works with Civil Engineering students. Mark is a White, gay, cisgendered male.

Bree (she/her): Bree is Kammy’s mother and works as a radiological technician at a teaching hospital three hours north of State University. Bree is a Black, straight, cisgendered woman. She is a single mother of two children. While Bree earned an Associate’s Degree  and has certifications for her career, she is extremely proud of Kammy for being the first person in their family to attend a four-year institution and as a woman in STEM.

Dr. Turftin (he/him): Dr. Turftin is the Director of Career Development at State University and Charlene’s direct supervisor. He is a White, straight, cisgendered man. He has been known to be very open about his religious and political beliefs, and how he believes they should play a larger role in university practices and policy decisions.

Context and Case

State University is a medium-sized, public, state institution. The school is located in the northeast United States and is a predominantly white institution (PWI). The university is known for its International Business program and its Civil Engineering program, though the entire School of Engineering is well-funded and highly ranked. Though the school is a PWI, the institution has made strides in diversifying the student body through recruitment efforts, improving the racial diversity of the campus by 3% in the past two years. That said, there is still plenty of work to be done. State U has made especially strong efforts to promote enrollment for BIPOC women in STEM, supported by competitive scholarship offers.

As a direct result of these efforts, Kammy, an 18-year-old Black woman, decided to attend State University for their Civil Engineering program. She made her decision in part because of the scholarship she received which covered a large portion of her tuition. Kammy is the first in her family to attend a four-year institution and knows that her family is very proud of her. Kammy likes civil engineering, but after taking English 101 and beginning English 102 for her general education credits in her second semester, she began to fall in love with reading, writing, and all things literature. Now, as she is planning her course schedule for the first semester of her second year, she is not excited about any of her engineering courses and wishes she could replace them with English courses instead.

On Monday she had her semesterly visit with her Academic Advisor, Mark. During the conversation, she confessed her feelings to him, saying, “I am worried that I have chosen the wrong path. I don’t enjoy engineering as much as I love other subjects and I don’t see a lot of peers in my classes who look like me. It’s been hard to feel like I belong here.” Though he said he would be sad to see her leave the Civil Engineering program, Mark recommended to Kammy that she could explore changing her major. He encouraged her to speak with staff at the university’s Career Center about her options. Kammy then sent an email to the Career Center requesting an appointment to discuss her options. As a first step, the staff member she spoke with recommended that Kammy take the Strong Interest Inventory, a career assessment that assists students with major and career change decisions. Kammy agreed and scheduled an interpretation session with Charlene.

At the Career Center appointment on Tuesday, Kammy met with Charlene, one of the Career Counselors in the office. Charlene and Kammy went through the inventory, which gave Kammy a “theme code” that could describe her professional personality and tendencies, and also a list of the top 10 careers that aligned with Kammy’s interests. Charlene said, “This inventory is not a ‘magic pill’ that can tell you exactly what you should do with your life.” She went on to explain that the results can be used as a tool to provide a starting point to see how Kammy’s interests aligned with other women certain fields. Some of Kammy’s top 10 careers included technical writer, editor, and multiple medical fields. Kammy’s test even said that she could be a bartender, which she was confused by until Charlene explained that her inventory had that too and most likely was because of her social and artistic nature, as presented in her “theme code.”

Kammy felt validated by the test, seeing that careers involving literature seemed to align with her, but she had fears about disappointing her mother. She confessed to Charlene that she was scared her mother would not approve of her decision to switch majors from something is STEM to something in the humanities, especially given Kammy’s STEM scholarship to State University.

Charlene and Kammy talked at length about how the decision is ultimately Kammy’s and depends on many variables, such as her financial situation, her relationships, her life and career goals, and her own values. Charlene proposed that if Kammy truly wanted to switch majors but did not wish to make that decision behind her mother’s back, Kammy could do research on the financial aspects of the decision, possible career future, and other elements before proposing the idea to her mother. Kammy agreed and decided to gather information and then speak with her mother later that week.

On Friday of that same week, the Career Center received a call from someone asking to speak with Charlene. When Charlene answered, she discovered that it was Bree, Kammy’s mother. On the phone, Bree says, “I am very disappointed in the way the Career Center interfered with Kammy’s education. I was so upset to hear how your advising convinced Kammy to abandon a very important career future in STEM for something that could disappoint her in the future and won’t give her the same financial security as her current academic program.”

Further into the discussion, Bree also mentioned that her daughter had shown her the Strong Interest Inventory results. “Your test told my daughter to be a bartender!” Bree asserted. “That isn’t something that should be used in major or career change decisions if it gives students these kinds of results. What kind of Career Center is this?”

In response, Charlene explains the inventory to Bree, saying, “The Strong Interest Inventory is a test that measures a student’s interests but does not have a means to measure values or current skills. It also sometimes pulls results such as bartender because of tendencies leaning towards enjoying social interactions or creativity.” Charlene also apologizes that Bree was disappointed in the test.

Bree also called the Director of the Career Center, Dr. Turftin, to inform him of her disapproval of the Career Center’s services and the results and subsequent advising the Strong Interest Inventory had given her daughter.

Dr. Turftin then called Charlene into his office. Without asking Charlene to explain her meeting with Kammy, he says, “I have just gotten off the phone with the mother of a student you advised on a Strong. You handled this situation poorly and should have understood the lengths that State University has made to bring in more women of color to our STEM programs. Once you found out about Kammy’s mother’s wishes for her career, you should have respected this and not interfered with her decision further. From here on, remember that we only provide the results of the inventory, not suggestions for how to use them.”

Charlene leaves the director’s office questioning her advising as well as the “office standard” she has just been informed of. Charlene wonders, “How can we empower students without providing them our complete advice or cutting ourselves short to only respect a parent’s wishes or concerns and not the student’s?”

Discussion Questions

1. How would you have advocated for Kammy in this situation, as a Black woman working to get into a field commonly populated by White men, wanting to change majors?
2. How would you have reacted to Bree, Kammy’s mother, during her phone call to the office?
3. If you were Charlene, how would you have navigated the conversation with your director telling you that you handled the situation poorly?

Taya Andrews (she/her) serves as an Academic Advisor within the College of Business and Technology at Winthrop University. She earned her M.Ed. in student affairs at Clemson University and graduated from the University of South Carolina with a Bachelor of Arts in English, emphasis in Creative Writing.

Hello, ACPA members.

I know for many of us this semester has been a challenging one – navigating the ever-changing environment of higher education alongside the national election, dealing with hurricanes and other natural disasters, as well as the myriad personal challenges we each are navigating may have taken a toll. In addition to the challenges, we hope that you each have had success, moments of inspiration, and have felt connected to individuals and communities as you have achieved so many things in the past months.

As you look ahead to the spring semester, we are excited to share a new set of case studies submitted by practitioners, students, and faculty. This set includes a number of cases on advising in a variety of contexts (Andrews, Asiaw & Stephens, Blackburn, Fiore, Hughes, Johns & McDonald, Maddox, Manu, Tomarchio), cases specifically focused on student conduct and ethical decision-making (Berchtold, Fonseca, Hammonds, Mertin, Mustin, Scott), the experiences of international students (Dadzie, Dawson-Amoah) as well as students planning to go to medical school (Espinosa, Reibestein). Finally, there are two cases about navigating trauma in the workplace. Burd and Dingle Robinson provide complex cases about attending the work in the context of practitioners needing success themselves.

We hope you find these useful in your trainings, staff development, classes, and in other contexts. As always, we have tremendous gratitude for the authors who took the time to submit interesting and challenging cases on timely and relevant topics.

All the best in 2025. As always, please reach out if you have questions or if you have an idea for an article you’d like to discussion. We appreciate you and hope you all make time to take a breath and begin again just like this year’s convention theme suggests. We hope you have a wonderful time connecting with others in Long Beach in February. As always, take care of yourselves as you take care of others.

Michelle L. Boettcher, Editor

([email protected])

 

Editorial Team

Samantha Babb

Ricardo Montelongo

Mary Dueñas