Running Head: LEARNING OUTCOME NARRATIVE

Learning Outcome Narrative

Student Development Administration Portfolio 2016
Seattle University

CAROLINE MARIE BUBBERS

Faculty Advisor:
Erica K. Yamamura
April 8, 2016

Learning Outcome Narrative

Bubbers 2

Strengths Learning Outcome Narrative

[LO# 1, 2, 6, 8 & 10] [Artifacts B, C, E, F & G]
Introduction
I came into the SDA program as an individual who thought becoming a graduate student
in higher education was equivalent to extending their student leadership experience. I was
emulating what I thought a graduate student should fit the mold of and I was not bringing
forward my authentic self. Guiding my development to authenticity is Marcia Baxter Magoldas
theory of self-authorship (Evans et al., 2010). Entering the program I was following the formula
that many of my mentors from my undergraduate experience had presented to me. I was to attend
an elite program for student affairs with an assistantship in the housing department. After my
first year I would have a competitive summer internship offer through ACUHO-I or NODA, all
in preparation for the well-known and daunting national job search event- The Placement
Exchange. When I was rejected from my first choice graduate program and then was not initially
offered a housing assistantship at Seattle University, I started the SDA program at a crossroads in
my journey to self-authorship. This made my initial transition into graduate school challenging
but has ultimately led me to become a more authentic person in all parts of my life. Through my
own identity development, integrating theory to practice, and collaboration with peers and
colleagues I have emerged as a more authentic professional who seeks to help students discover
their authentic selves to create the change they wish to see in the world (Artifact B). The
emerging theme of my strengths developed through the SDA program is authenticity.
Sub Area 1: Identity Development [LO# 8 & 10] [Artifacts A, B, E &F]
The elements of Learning Outcome 8 include feedback, transparency and reflection. The
elements of Learning Outcome 10 include passion, faith, and direction.

Learning Outcome Narrative

Bubbers 3

Holding many privileged identities, I had never reflected on the intersections of my

privileged identities before becoming a student in the SDA program. It was in Student
Development Theory, Research and Practice (SDAD5400) when I wrote my first
autoethnography where I began to reflect on my identities, my family, and my choices through
college. I had to be transparent when reflecting on my experiences and process the feedback of
my peers from the experiences and perspectives that I chose to share. Artifact B, exemplifies
how I have cohesively and effectively communicated my integrated personal and professional
mission (LO#8). Specifically, I seek to be loyal and authentic in all of the relationships I build
inside and outside of my role as a student affairs practitioner. I have exemplified this through my
relationships with my co-workers whom I work with on a daily basis and also look forward to
spending time with outside of the office on the weekends. Additionally, Artifact B also
represents the passion I have developed to fearlessly have the faith that there is no experience
that equates as a no-win scenario for student growth (LO#10). I developed this framework from
my experience as a conduct officer and integrating Chickerings Vectors of College Student
Development and Baxter Magoldas Theory of Self Authorship (Evans et al., 2010). For
example, I had a conduct hearing for a student who had been transported to the hospital for
alcohol poisoning. In the conduct hearing I was able to see that she was in a place of
development of wanting to make amends for the impact she had on her community that night. In
addition to the required sanctions of an alcohol education class, I assigned her a reflection paper
that focused on what she wants her experience to be at Seattle University. Allowing the student
to reflect on her actions and intentionally think about what she wants her experience to be,
allowed her to start intentionally owning her experience. Holding students accountable for the

Learning Outcome Narrative

Bubbers 4

impact of their actions in a conduct hearing is a gateway to fostering intentional self-reflection

and a conversation focused on meaning making of their holistic experience.
Artifact E, my ACPA and NASPA competency analysis, exemplifies my authentic
reflection on my experiences while in the SDA program giving transparency to where my
competency is as a professional leaving the SDA program. When I originally completed the
competency analysis in Foundations of the Student Affairs Profession (SDAD5300) I felt as if
there was no reasonable way for me to become a competent professional in timeline of 2 years
with all of the different components in the grid. I am not completely competent in any one
section but the benefit of always having more competency to strive for as a professional is part of
the beauty of becoming a lifelong learner and enhancing my professional identity (LO#10). I am
most proud of my growth in Student Learning & Development because I have been able to
integrate what I have learned in SDAD5400 Student Development Theory, Research and Practice
with my experience as an Assistant Resident Director. Specifically, when I was able to share with
my Resident Assistant staff the foundations of Student Involvement Theory and give them a
deeper understanding of why the work that they do is important and impactful I knew that I had
reached a level beyond understanding the theory when I was able to share it in my practice
(Astin, 1999). Artifact F, my 5 year professional development plan, was created by reflecting on
my current experiences (Artifact A), seeking feedback from colleagues and mentors about where
I need to develop, and growing to place where I am comfortable with transparently sharing my
goals and plans with others. Because Artifact A and F were both strictly limited, it was essential
for me to effectively communicate my current experiences and skills as well as experiences and
skills I want to develop (LO# 8 &10). As an individual who is strongly introverted, values
privacy, and takes a longer time than most of my colleagues to open up to others, sharing my

Learning Outcome Narrative

Bubbers 5

professional development plan is much easier for me as I am graduating from the SDA program
compared to when I was entering the program.
The direction of how I want to develop as a professional was fostered in Leadership and
Governance in Higher Education (SDAD5760), and Leadership in Education I (EDAD5700)
through case studies examining what and how decisions are made by senior student affairs
officers. I have always been fascinated and captivated by understanding the why behind
decisions are made; examining case studies allowed me to reflect on what type of professional
and leader I want to be. From Leadership in Education I (EDAD5700) I know that I want to
become a leader that makes others feel safe, particularly when I am unable to share the why
behind a decision. Artifacts E and F both holistically represent my passion for continuing to
learn how to better serve the students that I work with, the faith that there will always be an
opportunity for student growth, and the direction of how I want to develop as an authentic
professional. Specifically, I plan to enter in to a doctoral program within the next 5 years to build
on the research of Astins Student Involvement and burnout within highly involved students
(Astin, 1999).
Sub Area 2: Theory to Student [LO# 1 & 2] [Artifacts B,C1, C2, C3, G]
The elements of Learning Outcome 1 include history, context and innovation. The
elements of Learning Outcome 2 include intersection, challenge, and care.
Before entering the SDA program I was a self-centered student leader who in many ways
still viewed the world dualistically in the framework of Perrys ethical development (Evans et al.,
2010). I knew that other students had different experiences from my own but I viewed their
experiences from a deficit lens because I felt so strongly about my own. My framework of
thinking was challenged in Student Development Theory, Research and Practice (SDAD5400)

Learning Outcome Narrative

Bubbers 6

when I was introduced to Perrys theory of Ethical Development; I was able to effectively
synthesize multiple theories exploring intersectionality of student development in Artifact C1.
Student Development Theory, Research and Practice (SDAD5400) directly helped me
understand how students develop and how student issues can be framed in several different
intersections of identity (LO#2) which prepared me for my internship in Housing and Residence
life at Seattle University as well as my internship at the University of Massachusetts, Boston
represented in Artifacts C2 and C3. The student leaders of Seattle University in Housing and
Residence Life are different in many ways from the leaders I worked alongside with when I was
an undergraduate student. I also recognize that I had become a different person in a
paraprofessional role when interacting with the student leaders of Seattle University.
Understanding the student issues of Seattle University while in my internship helped me
understand the students I was serving in my following internship. Working for an Office of
Housing at a university that did not currently have any residence halls directly challenged me to
understand the students and student issues in a short time frame during my internship (LO#2).
Expanding my frame of reference has made me a more cognizant professional of understanding
how students not residing in on campus housing may have their experience impacted by a
housing department intentionally or non-intentionally. For example, in a city that has limited
housing options, not having enough space on campus for students can create a culture of haves
and have nots thus fostering a non-equitable environment for students.
Artifact G is a direct result of participating in the 2015 NASPA National Graduate
Student Case Study competition; creating this artifact allowed me to explore the emerging nature
of how to integrate student development theory to serve students in a crisis while also caring for
the institution and faculty member(s) involved (LO #1). The framework of the case put my

Learning Outcome Narrative

Bubbers 7

teammates and I in a position that was much higher on an organizational chart than any of us had
been. We had to overcome a sizeable amount of imposter syndrome looming over us as we
began to form a plan of how we would move forward with addressing the presented issues. As
we began to realize that we as graduate students were the emerging nature of the student affairs
profession, we became more confident in our response plan for the case. Additionally, Artifact
G also exemplifies how centering care for a student (in crisis) is essential for understanding the
student and their needs (LO#2). Having all had on-call experience, my teammates and I
understood in practice how to center care for a student but this case study experience allowed us
to apply the theory to the practice of centering student care while in crisis.
Sub Area 3: Collaboration [LO# 6] [Artifacts A, G]
The elements of Learning Outcome 6 include investment, recognition, and flexibility.
In Leadership and Governance in Higher Education (SDAD5760) and EDAD5700
Leadership in Education I, I have been able to develop a greater understanding of leadership and
how leadership and collaboration are intrinsically connected. Effective leaders are invested in
their team as individual members as well as a unified entity. Investment in individuals means
understanding the extrinsic and intrinsic motivations of each individual and how those intersect
with others in the group. To understand these motivations, collaboration is necessary to capitalize
on the passion behind each individual to accomplish a goal. Artifact A shows how I have
developed and demonstrated skills in leadership while in my current position as a Graduate
Assistant Resident Director. Specifically, I have formally collaborated with Academic Affairs as
an advisor for two learning communities in addition to the in-formal collaboration between the
Resident Assistants I co-supervise with the Resident Director, the Desk Assistants I directly
supervise, and the Hall Council members I advise. LO#6 is also theoretically illustrated in

Learning Outcome Narrative

Bubbers 8

Artifact G where the case study members of my team and I agreed that collaboration with
Academic affairs would be necessary pending a formal investigation regarding the sexual assault
charges against a faculty member. Many of the discussions in Leadership and Governance in
Higher Education (SDAD5760) were centered on case studies and how to directly collaborate
with invested campus partners (LO#6). The experience of working through these case studies led
to my growth in knowing when to trust my chain of command and when to appropriately
advocate for a different perspective and action.
Conclusion
As I prepare for my job search at The Placement Exchange I find myself at times
recycling back to a similar crossroad from when I entered the SDA program. In one of my first
meetings with my faculty advisor in the fall of 2014, she presumed and named that I would be
nationally searching for a job when I graduate from the program. My mentors, colleagues and
peers throughout the program also continually reinforced the plan me attending The Placement
Exchange. In many ways this has added additional pressure to have an impressive load of
interviews at The Placement Exchange and to then have multiple on-campus interview offers
immediately following the interviews on site. However, unlike when I entered the program I
recognize that just because the plans that others have for me happen to align with my own plans
it does not make my plans, commitments or foundation any less authentic.