Yesterday was the deadline to submit a proposal to the American Educational Studies Association (AESA) conference in November (in Pittsburgh, my hometown!). I barely made it.
I offered to expand on a theme I discovered in my Foundations of Student Personal class last Fall. We were asked to write a Philosophy of Student Affairs at the beginning of the class and revisit it at the end. In the end, I asserted that the profession of Student Personal may be considered an ill-conceived effort to hold the Rationalism of the faculty at bay. The rise of the Research University and Student Affairs matches a period in which reason was radically dissociated from praxis. Teaching, perhaps best understood as Mentoring, was divided into scholarship, spear-headed by faculty, and student development, first the role of Deans, then faculty “generalists,” then finally Student Personal professionals. Student Affairs was bound to lose in this dualistic value-system favoring rationalism.
I believe that Postmodernism is largely a rejection of Rationalism, and as such see evidence of a need to reintegrate student services into the academy. Faculty are being called upon to have a more engaged role in the lives of students. Thus we might expect Student Affairs to be more bold in its assertion concerning the value of its role. Perhaps we might even see Student Affairs gain a stronger foothold in the academy and be seen as an equal partner.
Unfortunately, a negative outcome of this positive change, however, is that there is a segment of faculty which view Student Affairs activities as non-academic, and attempting to rob faculty of influence. This will result in power struggles over resources. The future of the Student Affairs, as a profession, may rest to the degree we are seen by faculty as partners in the complex task of mentoring.
Postmodernity and the future of Student Affairs
Yesterday was the deadline to submit a proposal to the American Educational Studies Association (AESA) conference in November (in Pittsburgh, my hometown!). I barely made it.
I offered to expand on a theme I discovered in my Foundations of Student Personal class last Fall. We were asked to write a Philosophy of Student Affairs at the beginning of the class and revisit it at the end. In the end, I asserted that the profession of Student Personal may be considered an ill-conceived effort to hold the Rationalism of the faculty at bay. The rise of the Research University and Student Affairs matches a period in which reason was radically dissociated from praxis. Teaching, perhaps best understood as Mentoring, was divided into scholarship, spear-headed by faculty, and student development, first the role of Deans, then faculty “generalists,” then finally Student Personal professionals. Student Affairs was bound to lose in this dualistic value-system favoring rationalism.
I believe that Postmodernism is largely a rejection of Rationalism, and as such see evidence of a need to reintegrate student services into the academy. Faculty are being called upon to have a more engaged role in the lives of students. Thus we might expect Student Affairs to be more bold in its assertion concerning the value of its role. Perhaps we might even see Student Affairs gain a stronger foothold in the academy and be seen as an equal partner.
Unfortunately, a negative outcome of this positive change, however, is that there is a segment of faculty which view Student Affairs activities as non-academic, and attempting to rob faculty of influence. This will result in power struggles over resources. The future of the Student Affairs, as a profession, may rest to the degree we are seen by faculty as partners in the complex task of mentoring.