Is Student Affairs Relevant for the 21st Century? Tony W. Cawthon ...

Is Student Affairs Relevant for the 21 st Century?
Tony W. Cawthon
Clemson University
Karen D. Boyd
University of Central Florida
Robert “Beau” Seagraves, Jr.
University of Georgia
1

Is Student Affairs Relevant for the 21 st Century?
This monograph attempts to provide readers with thoughts and questions about the
relevancy of student affairs in the future. As we began our work on this monograph, we struggled
with how to approach it as none of us has a crystal ball nor can we predict the future. In addition,
a number of recent publications have addressed this same topic. The final report of the Task
Force of the Future of Student Affairs, Envisioning the Future of Student Affairs, (ACPA &
NASPA, Task Force of the Future of Student Affairs, 2010) and the report provides excellent
information on the future of student affairs. More recently, the Journal of College and Character
offered two articles on the mission of student affairs. The first article Does Student Affairs Have
an Enduring Mission (Sandeen, 2011), investigates if it is possible to agree on an enduring core
mission and purpose of student affairs. The second article Redefining Our Mission: What Does
Higher Education Need from Student Affairs? (Porterfield, Roper, L., & Whitt, 2011) focuses on
the premise that student affairs’ ability to remain relevant is reliant upon our ability to redefine
our mission, structures and best practices in conjunction with the needs of the institution.
To begin our work on this manuscript, we began by identifying four questions we hoped
to address. The questions used to frame this manuscript were:
(1) In the last 10 years, how has the state of the economy, politics, and other social
variables changed the mission of student affairs?
(2) How will the mission of student affairs change in the next 10 years in the following
areas?
-Will our organization structures remain the same? If not, then how do you predict
Student Affairs will be organized in 2020?
2

-Which current priorities are sustainable? Which are not?
-What excites you about student affairs in 2020?
- What concerns you about student affairs in 2020?
(3). When thinking about our colleagues in higher education (administration, faculty and
students), do you believe they view student affairs professionals, programs and activities
as relevant to the needs of our respective institutions and student bodies? Please explain
why or why not?
(4). In 2012, we will celebrate the 75 th anniversary of the Student Personnel Point of
View. (SPPV). With that in mind, “Is student affairs relevant to institutions, society and
is it still guided by the SPPV?
To address our work, we began by reading these three recent documents mentioned
above. In addition, we thought it was important to refamiliarize ourselves with the key historical
documents that have influence student affairs. Many documents have been written, but our
approach was to utilize the documents housed on Student Affairs History Project website
(Bowling Green State University, http://www.bgsu.edu/colleges/library/cac/sahp/). From this
site, we reviewed the following documents: (a) The Student Personnel Point of View, 1937; 1949
(American Council on Education, 1937, 1949); (b) Student Development in Tomorrow's Higher
Education: A Return to the Academy (Brown, 1972), (c) The Future of Student Affairs (Miller &
Prince, 1976); (d) A Perspective on Student Affairs (AAHE/ACPA/NASPA, 1987); (e) The
Student Learning Imperative: Implications for Student Affairs (ACPA, 1994); (f) Powerful
Partnerships: A Shared Responsibility for Learning (NASPA, 1998); (g) Learning Reconsidered
(2004) and Learning Reconsidered 2 (2006) (ACPA 2004, 2006). It is our belief that these
current and historical documents have guided and will guide our future work.
3

This article begins with an introduction exploring current and future influences on the
work of student affairs. To add to the richness of the discussion, we asked two practitioners to
reflect and respond to the framing questions. Robert “Beau” Seagraves is a new professional
having worked in student affairs for six years, and Karen Boyd is a seasoned professional with
over 25 years of experience as a SSAO and faculty member. Their insights offer the reader
contrasting perspectives on the future of student affairs. We conclude the manuscript with our
thoughts on the future and relevancy of student affairs.
What is Influencing Future Student Affairs Work?
Ask any student affairs professional to describe their work during the last five years and
the responses will often elicit negative comments and responses. In our interaction with many
chief student affairs officers we have heard such comments as “most challenging time of my
career”, “always being asked to do more with less” “restructuring is a way of life” and “concerns
about our future as a division”. As Hulme (2011) reported, “Senior Student Affairs Officers
(SSAO) will remember the years 2008-2011 as a difficult period in higher education
administration” (p. x).
As professionals we are burying our “heads in the sand” if we believe our traditional
models for student affairs will remain effective and will survive the changes higher education is
experiencing. Organizing student affairs units around the assumption that campuses will be
comprised of traditional, fulltime, residential students will not serve us well. Our traditional
models have served our students, but as higher education changes; they are not likely to survive.
Ten years ago, our concern was would the student affairs organization be reporting to the
Provost; today, we are worrying if student affairs will be eliminated. The preferred
organizational model of a Senior Student Affairs Officer reporting to the President has come
4

under attack in recent years. Recent changes at Texas Tech University, North Carolina State
University, the University of California Santa Cruz, University of Kansas, and University of
Delaware reflect such changes. These are only a few examples of how Student affairs
organizations are changing. As Moneta and Jackson (2011) reported, “student affairs operations
are being drastically reduced, and while not a trend, it is a cautionary tale” (p X). Furthermore,
they argued most would agree that student affairs is not indispensable on campuses. If student
affairs was eliminated, students would continue to arrive each fall, select majors, get involved in
campus, and graduate. In short, the organizational models of traditional functional units
reporting to a SSAO will continue to be challenged.
Factors such as economic conditions, increased accountability, increased focus on student
learning, campus retirements, and changing student demographics are impacting the
organizational structure of student affairs divisions. It is our opinion that our campuses will
become more fragmented as student affairs serves two distinct populations: (a) traditional age, on
campus students, and (b) online students. One of the most significant changes in higher
education that is likely to impact the future of student affairs is the increase in students
participating in alternative delivery. Van Der Weft and Sabatier (2009) reported that “only about
one half of institutions believe that in 2020 their enrollment will be primarily made up of
traditional-age, full-time students “(p. 5). They added that by 2020, one third of higher education
institutions expect that approximately 60% of students coursework will be completely online.
With the proliferation of online institution and degrees, the retail nature of higher
education will intensify. Newman, Olson, Laws, and Whitney (2010) reported that if student
affairs is to remain relevant, SSAO must become entrepreneurial leaders. Failure to do so is
ignoring the current conditions of higher education. This retail focus will only strengthen as
5

students demand convenience—they will demand more online courses, allowing them to enroll
at multiple institutions. With the increase in online institutions and online degree programs,
student affairs professionals much think creatively on how to deliver the work of student affairs.
Our traditional methods of delivery will not work with this population, and in fact, if innovative
approaches are not embraced, student affairs might be eliminated as we currently know it at these
institutions.
Obviously not all institutions will eliminate their student affairs divisions; however even
for those campuses, change is inevitable. Changes in economic conditions and increased
accountability are likely to impact these campuses. These changes will also impact and redirect
the competencies needed by student affairs professionals. Moneta and Jackson (2011) identified
the following competences for successful SSAO in the next future as: (a) understanding of
student’s educational and developmental needs (b) knowledge of legal mandates and statues, (c)
understand the global nature of higher education, and (d) issues of accountability. In short as
stated by Iwata (2011), the bottom line is that student affairs professionals can no longer simply
function and lead as usual. Student affairs professionals must “not only manage change; they
must lead change (p. X).
Karen D. Boyd’s (seasoned practitioner) Perspective on the Future and Relevancy of Student
Affairs
“…heightened competition, changing revenue streams, demographics, technology, and
altered public perceptions are creating serious threats and opportunities for higher education…”
The future of higher education: A view from CHEMA
(The Council of Higher Education Management Associations), August 2006
6

There is widespread agreement that change is coming for the organization and delivery of
higher education and student affairs in particular. The Council of Higher Education Management
Associations’ prediction and the other prognostications cited earlier accurately identified the
catalysts, if not the magnitude coming 2 years before the economic collapse, of our current
reality. Higher education and student affairs/services in particular are at a juncture (Goldstein,
2006; The National Taskforce on Civic Learning and Democracy, 2012). The opportunity to
influence the direction higher education takes will pass student affairs by if we do not embrace
the challenge, rethink our work, and take quick and intentional action.
At this rare moment filled with the possibilities and pitfalls inherent in dramatic change,
it is my belief that student affairs finds itself in need of clear purpose and visionary leadership.
Students and society value a college degree, but both groups are beginning to question the
quality, priorities (administrative and otherwise), and cost of higher education. The past 10 years
in higher education was filled with explosive and anxiety-producing news of shootings, deep
recession-driven budget cuts, expanding student protests, critical associational self-studies and
governmental reports, and increasingly intrusive legislative oversight of campus life, costs, and
finances. Simultaneously, increasingly diverse student populations gained access to college only
to find that the interculturally competent college communities and supportive educational
environments necessary to their success were not entirely in place. Each layer of issues and
corresponding public expectations bring with it a sense of growing public distrust and the work
of higher education and student affairs becomes more complex.
Though distressing, these events are not new if looked at within a historical context. Each
reflects long-observed trends that may portend an evolutionary trek, but are not precursors to
cataclysmic change. Student violence, disruption, economic trends and the ebb and flow of
7

public trust reflect or launch the rebalancing of power between higher education’s constituencies
and resulting structures, functions, and priorities. My concern for the future of student affairs is
a matter of priorities – the order and balance of those priorities to be precise.
The confluences of these trends exposed a philosophical and historical divide in student
affairs that we cannot seem to be able to breach. Sadly though, the most recent merger dialogue
did not address this divide and therefore could not focus on getting and keeping the order of our
priorities straight. Ultimately, the only concrete recommendation from the task force on the
future of student affairs – the creation of one voice, not one association, for student affairs - was
at the minimum not accomplished and in the worst interpretation ignored. A
legitimate/thoughtful balance of these goals and objectives is sustainable, what is not sustainable
is our failure to come to common ground. The notion of student personnel work cannot continue
to be all things to all people. We must make, and are making, choices. My fear/concern is that
the needs of the moment are driving and will create the mission of the future without regard for
what is genuinely the best for students’ educational experience and higher education’s purpose.
Maybe the question to answer is what makes this moment uniquely filled with the potential for
long-term change?
In my experience, a student affairs professional is a mix of educator, counselor (life
skills, career, and crisis), advisor/risk manager, environmental manager, and administrator. Each
role represents an institution goal of student affairs sitting roughly in that priority order. The
good student affairs professional balances the service-oriented objectives of each goal with its
education-oriented objectives taking precedence if there is a conflict, as seen below.
The traditional mission outlined in the SPPVs balances these tasks. The events and trends
of the last 10 years have reordered the role/goal priorities toward the administration of the
8

student experience and disrupted the balance of objectives to tilt toward a service orientation. As
a result, our profession has moved toward the increased specialization of numerous functional
areas reliance on professionals armed with administrative issue-specific expertise (e.g., jurist
doctorate, masters of business administration) absent a student development theoretical
foundation or an appreciation for the counseling dimensions of the work.
Traditional
Roles/Goals of Student
Affairs
Balancing Objectives to Achieve Goals of Student Affairs
Service Orientated Objectives Education Oriented Objectives
Educator Educational Event Planner Provider of general education
learning experiences
Counselor (helping,
career, crisis)
Support Challenge
Advisor/Risk Manager Monitor Mentor/Guide
Environmental Manager Maintaining Order Facilitating Learning
Administrator Efficiency Effectiveness
These trends have not taken us too far from our origins. Promising practices such as the
expansion of conflict resolution in student conduct processes and the growing interdisciplinary
approach to real world problem solving and integrative education provide opportunities for
philosophically grounded and theoretically knowledgeable student affairs professionals to
significantly contribution to institutional excellence. However, the more we respond to these
external pressures, the further we stray from our understanding of the value and subsequently
commitment to the SPVV’s mission and vision for Student Affairs. It is yet to be seen whether
9

the magnitude of these trends will solidify irreparable changes in our mission to the detriment of
our students and institutions.
What I find compelling and heartening are the self-studies and critiques that challenge us
in an attempt to influence the evolution of higher education’s mission toward a student-centered,
learning focus. Recent higher education manifestos - Greater Expectations (2002), Learning
Reconsidered (Keeling, 2004), Learning Reconsidered 2 (Keeling, 2006), and Liberal Education
and America’s Promise (AAC&U, 2007) - produced a road map of campus-wide integrative
learning outcomes and partnerships designed to guide the higher education into the 21 st century.
The implied distrust and assumed need for accountability communicated in the Spellings Report
(2006) reinforces for us the need to commit and validate the quality of our work - currently
indicated by retention and degree attainment rates, but soon likely will be measured by
effectiveness, impact, and learning - through assessment, which if taken constructively will only
make us stronger. The latest report, A Crucible Moment (AAC&U, 2012), makes the argument
that these outcomes we are aspiring to, civic engagement in particular, have gravitas for the
country and are requisite components of a quality education.
Possibly most promising for the future of student affairs is the growing learning dialogue that
reaffirms that there is a place for all institutional players in achieving this vision. AAC&U’s
LEAP, Core Commitments (personal and social responsibility) and Civic Engagement initiatives
established cross-discipline and administration implementation committees fostering a seamless
learning environment through dialogue across the different academic cultures. As a result of
these initiatives, faculty and administrators are engaged in basic and applied research examining
constructs that are typically relegated to the student affairs research agenda, institutions are
beginning to map student affairs learning outcomes and experiences to the institution’s general
10

education requirements, and more sophisticated tools are being generated to assess progress
toward these goals. This metacurricular approach is creating genuinely comprehensive campus-
wide integrative learning. This repeated drum beat for purposeful quality collegiate learning
experiences and outcomes is exerting an influence on the work of higher education and hopefully
balance the forces buffeting student affairs’ mission.
Expectations change over the span of a decade or two, while missions evolve over a much
greater period of time and typically with clarity of purpose. Therefore, it is my contention that
the most pressing question is whether student affairs leadership will choose to make
philosophically- and empirically-informed macro decisions (macro) or evolve through micro-
decisions responding to challenge as each arises without intentionality or direction. Losing sight
of our core values, philosophy and purpose threaten that vision of the future more than any other
reality of higher education today.
Organizational efficiency is taking precedence over a commitment to the development of the
holistic student (SPPV). The attention being paid to retention and graduation rates, instead of
learning effectiveness, is further evidence of this shift. Divisions of Student Affairs prioritizing
organizational or academic administrative concerns are not sustainable. When the move toward
the primacy of administration takes hold in a student affairs division or function, the division
becomes indistinguishable from the administrative division or units on campus. The next
reasonable step would be for these functions to be (and possibly should be) organizationally
aligned with those units/divisions and led by content experts (i.e., MBAs, JDs) not student affairs
professionals. The educational service contributions of our work will continue, if not in our
functional areas, then in academic offices across the institution. These organizational models are
increasingly present today. What will be lost if these organizational trends continue without a
11

clear vision of student affairs unique contribution to higher learning is student development
awareness, theoretical and empirical knowledge, and ability to recognize and shape the
institution’s in and outside of the classroom impact on the aggregate student body. Also, lost will
be the presence of professionals charged with institutionally maximizing the positive learning
potential of all student interactions.
Higher education, and student affairs along with it, will change. I share my thoughts about
our present and possible future knowing that events typically take us where they will. I strongly
believe in the founding and continuing relevancy of student affairs’ mission and foundations
outlined in the Student Personnel Point of View. It is my highest of hopes that student affairs’
positive contributions to the US collegiate experience to date – organizationally, interpersonally,
developmentally, and educationally – remain for students and the institution in whatever form
higher education takes in the future.
Andrew Carnegie’s words used to establish a college in his name best frames my thoughts
about the future of student affairs and higher education - “My heart is in the work. This choice of
words from another time of great change in higher education and the dawn of student affairs was
intentional. These six simple words convey an ethos, work ethic, and passion for creating and
providing quality higher educational opportunity. Like Carnegie, I believe that the enterprise of
higher education requires more than business acumen, disciplinary expertise, or intellectual
curiosity to be successful. It requires heart. Over the past century, student affairs staff and
functional areas philosophically, organizationally, and at times in reality, represented the
colleges’ heart to students. These comments were offered from my heart in hopes that, whatever
the future and form of student affairs takes as a collegiate functional unit, the heart continues to
beat and drive our “work” into tomorrow.
12

Robert “Beau” Seagraves’ Jr, (midlevel practitioner) Perspective on the Future and Relevancy
of Student Affairs
The idea of attempting to predict the future of student affairs appears daunting at first
approach. Who truly knows what the landscape of higher education will be in 2020? Could
anyone 10 years ago have predicted where student affairs would be in 2012, with the decline in
the economic realities for many institutions and students, the changing nature of the student
profile, and the increased national focus on access and accountability? With so much we cannot
change, like the economic situation, the demographics of the students choosing to attend our
colleges and universities, and national priorities regarding higher education, we must focus our
future on adapting to these new realities, embracing the guaranteed changes that will come, and
finding ways to positively impact the lives of students and the institutions we serve. To address
effectively what student affairs will look like in 2020, we must look back to how the economic,
political, and social variables have changed the mission and direction of student affairs.
The Last Ten Years
The best way to characterize the last ten years (2002-2012) in the United States is a
decade of uncertainty. A heightened focus on accountability within the K-12 education system
with the creation of the national No Child Left Behind legislation, increased vigilance and
attention on risk management after shootings on several campuses, and the major economic
recession that forced colleges and universities to reexamine traditional funding structures have
impacted the educational landscape. Each issue caused student affairs administrators to change
the “business as usual” approach to our work.
13

The national call for accountability in the K-12 education system through the No Child
Left Behind legislation has been coupled with a call for greater accountability within higher
education over the last ten years. Public policymakers are working to ensure that institutions are
meeting the expectations of key stakeholders, including students, parents, and business leaders.
Private institutions, on the other hand, must convince high school students and their parents that
spending greater sums of money at their colleges and universities is worth the investment. As a
result, accreditation bodies are increasingly focused on having institutions demonstrate that they
are setting specific outcomes for their students and measuring their success in attaining them.
Student affairs administrators are becoming more and more part of the conversations
regarding assessment. On some campuses, faculty members are turning to student affairs
colleagues for assistance in developing and measuring learning outcomes. The culture of
accountability permeates higher education, and student affairs administrators have begun to
capitalize on this phenomenon and find ways to make their programs and services more closely
align with the educational mission of the institution. Student affairs administrators also support
the academic environment by assisting with the creation and implementation of campus security
initiatives.
The shootings that occurred on several campuses in the mid-late 2000s highlighted the
vulnerability of college campuses. After those events, the general public called into question the
ability of colleges and universities to protect their students, faculty, staff, and visitors from
violent acts. Thus, many institutions have created new emergency management plans to account
for potential active shooters and alert members of the campus community when emergencies
occur. Further, colleges and universities have developed behavioral intervention teams to more
actively track students of concern who may pose a threat to themselves or others. Student affairs
14

administrators often play an active role in tracking students of concern and executing campus
emergency plans when called upon. Given that institutional leadership always hopes to avoid the
negative impact of such a public tragedy, student affairs administrators have become well-
positioned to use their roles and skills to serve a key institutional priority. The increased
emphasis within student affairs on crisis management has developed rapidly over the last five
years, with no end in sight for this important function. The most prevalent issue in the previous
ten years has been the impact of the economic downturn on both public and private higher
education.
Today, student affairs administrators on many campuses are paying closer attention to the
economic impact of programs and services available for students. Those functional units that
have traditionally generated revenue for the institution are being asked to do so at higher levels,
while fees being charged to students are increasing as well. Finding new revenue streams within
student affairs units is a major focus of the administrators’ work, as institutions with fewer
dollars to spend are choosing to place greater emphasis on funding the units most directly
supporting the academic mission of the institution. In addition to having to develop new revenue
sources, student affairs units have begun to more intentionally support institutional retention
efforts.
Many institutions spend considerable sums of money recruiting students, whose tuition
dollars are crucial to the fiscal health of the college or university. In today’s economy, these
same institutions are working hard to retain students and encourage them to persist through
graduation. Combating attrition often takes a coordinated institutional effort that involves
enrollment managers, faculty representatives, and student affairs administrators. Student affairs
is increasingly being called upon to provide a more “customer-friendly” approach to its work, as
15

colleges and universities cannot afford to lose students through attrition due to dissatisfaction
with their out-of-class experiences. This situation may cause some administrators to
compromise the learning and developmental approaches to their work, but finding ways to
support the academic mission of the institution through retention efforts increases the perceived
value for student affairs work within the academy.
Student Affairs in 2020
The next ten years will reflect as much change for student affairs administrators as the
previous ten years have. Growth in the economy will not yield instant restoration of lost
funding, and as such, leaders will continue to make decisions related to the viability of programs
and services. The federal government’s call to increase the number of students in the post-
secondary system, the proliferation of for-profit institutions and distance education, and the
expected influx of military veterans seeking further education will cause an even more
heightened focus on the academic mission of the institution. To retain its value in the academy
and in the eyes of institutional leaders and faculty, student affairs will be required to redefine its
mission to more fully embrace a recommitment to its historical roots that involve the provision
of services to students throughout the institution.
Student affairs units will experience continued organizational change. In some cases,
with continued focus on retention efforts, chief student affairs officer positions will be eliminated
or combined with enrollment management executives. Other institutions may reduce the scope
of non-essential student affairs programs and services, especially in the community and technical
college system where the lines between student affairs and enrollment management are already
blurred. Student affairs units that can demonstrate alignment with the institution’s academic
mission or serve an essential function (e.g. disability services, academic advising, etc.) will
16

continue to thrive. However, consolidation of the other units within student affairs is likely to
occur at institutions that cannot find alternative ways to fund these programs and services.
The reorganization of student affairs is predicated on student affairs administrators, in
conjunction with key constituents such as students, faculty, and other administrative units,
developing a clearer definition of its priorities. As a profession, student affairs cannot be
concerned with trying to gain the respect of faculty members and campus leaders. Worrying
about where or whether “we sit at the table” or fit organizationally both distracts us from doing
all we can to provide the best possible experience for students and undermines any legitimacy we
have on our individual campuses. We should be focused on contributing to student success and
engagement on our campuses through our work to enhance the academic and non-academic
experience of students. Over the next ten years, student affairs as a field must begin to recognize
that making significant contributions to student success involves providing services and
programs that both eliminate barriers to their persistence and achievement and enhance the
quality of the college experience.
Student affairs has a vital role to play in higher education over the next decade if it
recommits itself to the services that served as the foundation of the field while also evolving to
meet the realities of today’s students and institutions. Students expect a high quality educational
experience; students need advocates who encourage policies and practices that support their
success; students want experiences outside of the classroom that will prepare them for life post-
graduation. Regardless of institutional context related to size and mission, student affairs
administrators often are primary links to these key functions of colleges and universities. In the
next ten years, student affairs must become even more committed to these important elements of
17

our work. By focusing our efforts in these critical areas, student affairs will remain relevant in
and connected to the academy in ways that make a difference in the lives of students.
Concluding Thoughts
While we do not profess the ability to predict the future, we do have some concluding
thoughts about the future and relevancy of student affairs. These personal reflections are based
on our professional and personal experiences of working in student affairs.
1) The future of student affairs depends on our ability to support the mission of the
institution. It is not about terminology, who gets credit, or organizational location
that will determine our future. Simply stated, it is our job to support the goals,
objectives and purpose of this institution. We recognize the difficulty in this assertion
as nationally, we lack a common purpose because universities have different purposes
and missions. Sandeen (2011) stated many student affairs functions could be housed
in other divisions of the campus. To survive we must determine what makes our work
unique and essential to the campus. Whatever the institutional mission, we must
demonstrate our centrality to this mission. We will be relevant if we adhere to the
institution mission, if we do not, our relevancy will diminish.
2) It is not enough to say we contribute and value learning and student growth. We have
to do more than talk or use jargon and buzzwords. We must become experts in
learning theory, assessment strategies and tools, research methods and student
motivation. We must show how student learn by participating our student affairs
programs, activities and services. We must be able to move from assessing student
needs and satisfaction to assessing student learning and development. We must
18

provide our institutions with evidence that student engagement in our programs,
services and activities contributes to the student outcomes identified.
3) We must be innovative and open to new organizational reporting structures.
Historically, as students needs have changed and evolved, student affairs creates new
programs and services to address these needs. It is not uncommon to hear student
affairs professionals say “we are great at adding new programs, but we are reluctant
to eliminate programs”. While it is exciting to add new programs or redesign older
ones, financially we cannot keep adding new programs. We must be prepared to
eliminate programs and services that do not contribute to the institutional mission and
contribute to student learning. We also anticipate an increase in student services type
functions within academic colleges and schools. For example, at the University of
Arkansas, two academic colleges have created their own student affairs offices. As
such, we must eliminate operating in silos, but develop internal and external
collaborations with our constituent groups to enhance student success.
4) Many debate whether or not student affairs is a profession. It is our belief that student
affairs is a profession, albeit an evolving profession. As a profession, we cannot
remain fragmented. With two national generalist organizations and approximately 35
functional professional associations, our purpose and identity is fragmented. The
economic, social, and political circumstances are right for us to reinvent ourselves to
accommodate the changing climate of higher education. We have a prime opportunity
to show our centrality to the institutional mission and essential part we play in student
learning and development.
19

5) We need to train students more interdisciplinary. To be successful practitioners, our
set of competencies must be expanded beyond the traditional competencies. The
ACPA/NASPA competences are a great beginning, but we must go further. We need
to ensure our staff are competent in disciplines they have not traditionally be exposed.
Most would agree that with the publication of the Student Personnel Point of View 1937, the
foundation for student affairs work was established. As we celebrate the 75 th anniversary of the
Student Personnel Point of View 1937, we must ask ourselves is this document relevant and
foundational to our work. We believe that the core philosophy remains relevant, and we would
recommend that professionals re-familiarize themselves with this document. While we cannot
predict the future, professionals will benefit from reminding themselves that “the task of colleges
and universities is to vitalize the purpose of higher education and other educational purposes as
to assist the students in developing to the limits of their potentialities and in making
contributions to the betterment of society” (Student Personnel Point of View,
http://www.myacpa.org/pub/documents/1937pdf, p. 39). Furthermore, as stated clearly in the
SPPV, “educational institutions have the obligation to consider the student as a whole—his
intellectual capacity and achievement, his emotional make up, his physical condition, his social
relationships, his vocational aptitude and skills, his moral and religious values, his economic
resources and his aesthetic appreciations.” (Student Personnel Point of View,
http://www.myacpa.org/pub/documents/1937.pdf, p. 39). This remains at the core of effective
student affairs practice.
20

References
ACPA & NASPA, Task Force on the Future of Student Affairs. (2010, February).
Envisioning the future of student affairs. Retrieved from
http://www.naspa.org/consolidation/TF_final_narr.pdf
American Council on Education. (1937). The student personnel point of view
Report of a conference of the American Council on Education on student personnel work.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from the website of the Bowling Green State University
Student Affairs History Project at
http://www.bgsu.edu/colleges/library/cac/sahp/word/THE%20STUDENT%
20PERSONNEL.pdf
American Council on Education. (1949, September). The student personnel point of
view (American Council on Education Studies. Vol. XIII. Series VI. Student Personnel Work No
13). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from the website of the Bowling Green State University
Student Affairs History Project at http://
www.bgsu.edu/colleges/library/cac/sahp/pages/1949SPPVrev.pdf
American College Personnel Association. (1996). The student learning imperative:
Implications for student affairs. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.myacpa.org/sli_delete/sli.htm
American College Personnel Association. (1997, March). Principles of good practice for
student affairs. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.myacpa.org/pgp/principle.htm
American Association for Higher Education/American College Personnel
Association/National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. (1998). Powerful
21

partnerships: A shared responsibility for learning. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from the
website of the Bowling Green State University Student Affairs History Project at
http://www.bgsu.edu/colleges/library/cac/sahp/pdfs/PowerfulPartnerships.pdf
Brown, R. D. (1972). Student development in tomorrow’s higher education—a return
to the academy. Alexandria, VA: American College Personnel Association.
Goldstein, P. J. (2006). The Future of Higher Education: A View from CHEMA.
Washington, DC: Council of Higher Education Management Associations.
Association of American Colleges and University (2002). A new version for learning as a
nation goes to college. Washington, DC: Author.
Association of American Colleges and University (2007). Liberal education and
America’s promise. Washington, DC: Author.
Hulme, E. (2011). The leader as an agent of hope. In G. J. Dungy & S. E. Ellis (Eds.),
Exceptional senior student affairs administrator’s leadership (pp 253-266). Washington,
DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators
Iwata, J. M. (2011). The new nexus of transformational leadership in various collegiate
settings. In G. J. Dungy & S. E. Ellis (Eds.), Exceptional senior student affairs administrator’s
leadership (pp 81-92). Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel
Administrators.
Keeling, R. P. (Ed.). (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus‐wide focus on the student
experience. Washington, DC: American College Personnel Association & National Association of
Student Personnel Administrators.
Keeling, R. P. (Ed.). (2006). Learning reconsidered 2: Implementing a campus‐wide
focus on the student experience. Washington, DC: American College Personnel Association,
22

Association of College and University Housing Officers–International, Association of College
Unions International, National Academic Advising Association, National Association for
Campus Activities, National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, & National
Intramural‐Recreational Sports Association.
Miller, T. K., & Prince, J. S. (1977). The future of student affairs: A guide to student
development for tomorrow’s higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Moneta, L, & Jackson, M. L. (2011). The new world of student affairs. In G. J. Dungy &
S. E. Ellis (Eds.), Exceptional senior student affairs administrator’s leadership (pp 1-14).
Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.
Newman, E., Olson, T., Laws, J., & Whitney, K. (2010). Leadership reconsidered:
SSAOs as entrepreneurial leaders of future. Leadership Exchange, 8(3), 16-23.
Porterfield, K. T., Roper, L., & Whitt, E. J. (2001, December). Redefining our mission:
What does higher education need from student affairs? Journal of College & Character, 12(4),
1-8. doi:10.2202/1940-1639.1853
Sandeen, A. (2011, December). Does student affairs have an enduring mission? Journal
of College & Character, 12(4), 1-8. doi:10.2202/1940-1639.1852
Student Affairs History Project website (Bowling Green State University,
http://www.bgsu.edu/colleges/library/cac/sahp/).
The National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement. (2012). A
Crucible Moment: College Learning and Democracy’s Future. Washington, DC: Association of
American Colleges and Universities.
Van Der Werf, M., & Sabatier, G. (2009). The college of 2020: Students. Washington,
DC: Chronicle Research Services
23

United States. Dept. of Educ. A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher
Education. Commissioned by Margaret Spellings. Sept. 2006. 28 Mar. 2007
http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/pre-pub-report.pdf
24