Running

Header: STUDENT AFFAIRS EMPLOYEE REFLECTION PAPER

Katie Bates
November 24th, 2015
Student Affairs Employee Reflection Paper
SDAD 5800
Allison Lau
Seattle University

STUDENT AFFAIRS EMPLOYEE REFLECTION PAPER

For my student affairs employee interview, I connected with the Title IX

Director at South Seattle College, however she invited the VP of Student Services to
join so I could also get a student perspective. South Seattle College is a community
college that is part of the Seattle Colleges District. I interviewed Kathy Vedvick, who
is the Director of Human Resources and Title IX Coordinator, and Rosie Rimando-
Chareunsap, who is the Vice President of Student Services. This interview was
interesting because both answered my questions in tandem and were able to speak
to the employee and student side of how law and policy plays out at South Seattle
College. The Director of HRs roles are to adjudicate employees, ensure policies are
compliant with district, state and federal guidelines, and be the primary Title IX
coordinator on campus. The Director of Student Services is the head of student
conduct and policies, and acts as an informal Title IX officer if it involves students.
There were many laws that impacted the work of both Kathy and Rosie
encounter in their work on campus. Kathy stressed that the college is under the
control of federal laws because they receive federal money (personal
communication, October 30, 2015). She also talked about the fact that Title VII has
always been the driver on sexual assault and harassment, and that Title IXs focus
has mostly been on students. South Seattle also has to abide by state and City of
Seattle laws. Kathy talked about the City of Seattle adopting the $15 minimum wage
and the fact that South did not have to grant this to employees because they are a
state agency. However, since South employees so many people that live in Seattle,
they decided to abide by the $15 Minimum Wage. On the student side, FERPA with
restrictions around privacy is the biggest law effecting students. Rosie talked about

STUDENT AFFAIRS EMPLOYEE REFLECTION PAPER

some hot topics with laws, such as HB 1079 allowing colleges to serve
undocumented students. She stated that one of the complexities is when laws
intersect with one another, such as federal and state laws around weapons on
campus and the ruling on marijuana. I was struck by the multiple layers of laws they
have to know and interpret on a daily basis. I think as a new practitioner it will be
difficult to serve students or put on programming that is contentious of these laws. I
now see how important it will be for me to be in constant communication with my
supervisor in order to navigate these laws.
When Rosie and Kathy spoke about how to develop policies from the laws, I
began to truly understand how much of a tightrope walk this process is. Kathy spoke
to the complexity of working with unions for faculty and staff. She said that at times
they are dealing with requirements from four different unions, plus state and
federal regulations (personal communication, October 30, 2015). As much as
possible you want to have a policy that is comprehensive, but sometimes things are
decided on an individual basis because of all of the moving parts. I asked explicitly
what policy looked like working within the Seattle Colleges District. Rosie said that
there were many practices that acted like a policy at their school, but were not
officially mandated as policy (personal communication, October 30, 2015). This is
because each of the three schools is organized differently and they need to have
practices that make their system work. I can imagine this can be a tough system to
navigate for each campus. Policy is meant to streamline, but I would imagine there
would be times that the policy contradicts some of the norms on that campus or
creates a convoluted process for each campus.

STUDENT AFFAIRS EMPLOYEE REFLECTION PAPER

Moving deeper into ethics, both interviewees mentioned that they draw their
ethical practices from WAC, produced by the Washington State Executive Ethics
Board. They spoke about the impact of many guidelines, such as the guideline
addressing personal gain, which states that no state officer or state employee may
employ or use any person, money, or property under the officer's or employee's
official control or direction, or in his or her official custody, for the private benefit or
gain of the officer, employee, or another (Washington State Legislature, 2015).
Rosie spoke to the need for supervisors to engage young professionals in this
discussion around ethics more often (personal communication, October 30, 2015).
She said that supervisors need to explicitly talk about the details of these ethical
guidelines instead of assuming that professionals know them intuitively. The goal is
to get young professionals more comfortable with dealing with the gray areas of
ethics. As an emerging professional, I can relate to what Rosie was saying. I did not
know that these state mandated ethical guidelines exist, let alone have I grappled
with what they might mean in my current context. Before this interview, I have
never thought of ethics as something that could be regulated by the state, but I need
to be aware of these mandates to protect my institution and myself.
When it came to talking about student groups with different social identities,
Rosie brought up a couple of groups of students I do not usually hear much about
when she choose to talk about different policies surrounding students with a
criminal record and registered sex offenders. There are decisions to be made about
who needs to know this sensitive information, especially if these students are
seeking employment on campus (personal communication, October 30, 2015). This

STUDENT AFFAIRS EMPLOYEE REFLECTION PAPER

is a challenge, because it will require hiring managers to make a judgment about the
student and will be information that might affect how that student is treated
throughout their employment. For students who are sex offenders, the policy is
much more defined and sates It is the policy of the Seattle College District to make
appropriate notifications to the college community concerning sex and kidnapping
offenders who are enrolled, employed, or otherwise present on or about the
campuses, as authorized by RCW 4.24.550 (Seattle Colleges Policy and Procedure,
2015). This means that students are required to report their status to the college.
Often these students are very limited in their involvement and movement
throughout campus, even if they are a level 1 sex offender. Depending on their
crime, they may be restricted from utilizing personal spaces such as the library. For
me, this brings up issues of access and equity. If these students cannot access
resources on campus, it gives them even more barriers to overcome. However, this
seems to be a gray line where my personal ethics need to be put on hold for the sake
of policy.

Kathy and Rosies answers throughout my interview expressed the

challenges of intersections of legal, ethical and cultural factors throughout their

work. However, they highlighted the fact that many of these laws come as unfunded
mandates. Kathy spoke about changes within the American with Disabilities Act in
particular as an unfunded mandate (personal communication, October 30, 2015).
She said this makes the work exceptionally hard, as they do not have money to hire
people to implement the laws. This need to stay current is a constant challenge, as
New accommodation requests and justifications will undoubtedly arise, and college

STUDENT AFFAIRS EMPLOYEE REFLECTION PAPER

leaders will need to develop policies to address emerging issues that were
unrecognized even a few years ago (Lee, 2014, pg. 42). Often practitioners are
working hard not to be in violation of these laws, but they are not able to provide
the level of service they would like because of their limited resources. This really
stuck with me, as there are many issues I see as opportunities where administrators
should be stronger advocates. However, I am sure there is a tension between what
administrators wish to do and what is financially and physically possible to do.
This interview was really enlightening because it showed the balance that
practitioners have to find when it comes to development of policies enacted on
campus. As Rosie pointed out, the VP of Student Services and Director of HR are at a
level where they are informing their policies from what they know of federal, state,
and city laws and from engaging with student practice. They have to develop
systems and policies that support their campus operations, but also to keep the
institution safe from lawsuits. This is a tough job that requires collaboration
between many people on campus and resources that can keep administrators
current on the ever-changing legal field. I will enter the college system knowing that
I need to get more comfortable with navigating gray areas and will seek to be an
informed student development professional.

STUDENT AFFAIRS EMPLOYEE REFLECTION PAPER

References
Lee, B. A. (2014). Students with Disabilities: Opportunities and Challenges for
Colleges and Universities. Change, 46(1), 40-45.
Seattle Colleges Policies and Procedures. Retrieved from
http://www.seattlecolleges.com/district/policies/policies.aspx?policyID=pol
255.
Washington State Legislature. (2015, November 20.) Retrieved from
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=42.52.160.