Strengths Narrative

(Learning Outcomes #2, 5, 7, 8; Artifacts A, B1, B2, C2, C3, D, E, F2, G, J, K)

The integrative theme that best represents my strengths as developed over the course of
the SDA program is Meaning-Making. The SDA program has provided me with the knowledge
and resources to find purpose in the lessons and experiences I have had throughout my lifetime
and while growing as a professional. Meaning-making has changed the way I see myself and the
world around me. It has made my personal life richer, and has made me a self-assured
professional. Three ways I demonstrate meaning-making is through reflective practices, fostering
relationships and advancing practice.
Reflective Practices (Learning Outcome #8; Artifacts C2, E, K)
Reflection was never a major aspect of my life. Before entering the SDA program my
reflective practices mostly included evaluating what I did right, what I did wrong and what I
could have done better. This was not an effective way of reflecting. It was a harsh binary of right
versus wrong and thus made work more challenging and unfulfilling. I was not reflecting on the
why or how. I have come to revere the practice of reflection as essential and impactful to my
personal life and professional practice within student affairs, because of the SDA program.
Reflection was a major aspect of the SDA program from the very beginning, and was
crucial in the development of communicating effectively in speech and writing (LO #8). The
majority of my classes involved reflecting on existing literature, me and the field of student
affairs as a whole. The theoretical frameworks surrounding identity, ethical and cognitive
development provided the foundation from which important conversations with students and
other higher education professionals stem from. Self-authorship (Baxter-Magolda, 2001) became
a cornerstone in my reflective practice. During American Community Colleges (SDAD 559),

reflection aided in deepening my understanding of my identity and what privilege I have as a

Caucasian woman from a high socioeconomic stature (Artifact C2). I had options as a high
school senior, and such considerations as tuition were not major factors in my college decision
process. Although I am extremely grateful for this privilege, I am still highly aware that
countless students in this country do not have that freedom in choosing if or where they attend
college.
In my graduate assistantship at Seattle University, I practiced having personable and
professional communication with my coworkers, students and office partners. Special attention
was given to the skill of being engaging and personable when giving important information
through written communication (LO #8). I facilitated workshops that used reflection to foster
meaning-making and build confidence in myself and in my students (LO #8). During my
summer internship at the University of California in Berkeley in Student Conduct, I incorporated
the practice of reflection in the sanctions I created or modified (Artifact E). This was an
intriguing undertaking considering the student dynamics and campus climate of Cal. I was told
that Cal students have strong reactions to words like values, so I strived to find a balance and
adapt reflection to meet the attitudes of Cal students. Watching the conduct specialists at Cal
have critical conversations with students during conduct meetings was also impactful to how I
communicate with students and colleagues. I was able to supplement these observational lessons
with the skills that I developed in Foundations of Counseling (COUN 5100) and in Leading with
Emotional Intelligence (MGMT 5335) (LO #8). And reflection was a natural component in
absorbing these skillsets. In addition to helping me make meaning of the experiences and lessons
from my time in the SDA program, reflection also aided in making-meaning of processes and
long-term projects during this culminating portfolio project (Artifact K).

Reflection is now a staple in my professional practice. As trending issues and priorities

change, I will be more competently prepared to adapt student services as needed and where
resources are available due to the benefits of reflective practice. I must be diligent about setting
aside time to intentionally reflect in productive ways, and will encourage my colleagues to share
in this experience with me.
Advancing Practice (Learning Outcomes #5, 7; Artifacts A, B1, B2, G)
I have always wanted to be someone who made a difference. In my previous jobs as an
Administrative Assistant and Project Coordinator, although I was not extremely passionate about
these positions, I worked towards making processes better. Now that I have found my passion in
student affairs and get to work in positions I genuinely enjoy, I have found that advancing
practice based off of best practice, experimentation, reflection, research and theory is truly my
forte and is connected to my professional mission of challenging and empowering students
(Artifact B2).
The development of my resume (Artifact A) shows how this has become a major
strength over the last couple of years and how I have integrated this talent in every position I
have held. This theme also exemplifies how I have utilized assessment, evaluation, technology
and research to improve practice (LO #7). My graduate assistantship at Seattle University
working with the Student Alumni Ambassadors (SAA) was a tremendous opportunity to grow in
this area and in adapting student services to specific environments and cultures (LO #5).
Because of how independently I worked, I quickly utilized assessment and research to maximize
results. And in the process, I discovered that I am a formative evaluator. I reached out to advisors
of similar organizations at institutions across the country for best practices, read about
organizational development and other research on student organizations and working with

student leaders. After collecting as much information as I could find, I adapted my findings to
what would work for our student population and campus climate (LO #5). I completely
restructured how the organization was operated, worked diligently to shape the perception of the
organization as an organization full of student leaders rather than business majors and created
learning outcomes that linked Chickerings (1969) Theory of Identity Development, BaxterMagoldas (2001) Self-Authorship and Astin and Astins (2000) Social Change Model of
Leadership. When trying to create an action plan with goals that aligned with the goals and
vision of the Alumni Association, I strived to stay student-oriented in my strategic planning.
During my Independent Study (SDAD 5960) at Cascadia College, I worked to improve
the experience of students on academic warning or probation and advance the practice of the
academic advisors who interact with these and other at-risk students in their daily practice
(Artifact G). My main priority was finding an academic intervention methodology that would
allow academic advisors to individualize the intervention process for each student based on their
obstacles and needs (LO #5). I utilized the research (LO #7) on a comprehensive list of topics
relating to academic interventions, such as factors in working with at-risk students, intrusive
academic advising and strategies for academic success. At Cascadia College, I also realized how
important of a role technology can play in impacting our daily practice (LO #7). With innovative
and worthwhile technologies, like early academic alert systems, student affairs professionals are
more able to proactively help students find success in the college experience.
I gain energy from developing programs that enhance the student experience and seeing
the results of my hard work and passion. Even when progress is slow, I still notice change and
highlight these accomplishments to students and the team, because without either progress is not
possible. Change means that I am making a difference, which is a key point in my personal

mission statement (Artifact B1). In the future, I want maximizing the development of students,
programs and initiatives to be my specialty. This is a transferable skill that will benefit any
functional area. I will continue to use best practices, evaluation, technology and other research to
improve my practice while also striving to understand the institutional climate and student
population I am serving in order to best adapt student services for effective practice.
Theory to Practice (Learning Outcome #2; Artifacts C3, D, E, F2, G)
Before entering the SDA program, theory was important to researchers. And researchers
were those individuals dedicated to doing new trials with a quantitative eye and qualitative drive.
I enjoyed the process of trial and error, and did not repel at the thought of doing a research paper
like it did for some. But I was not a researcher, and therefore figured that I would be more
practitioner than scholar when I walked into Student Development Theory (SDAD 578) that first
quarter of graduate school. Little did I know I was both.
Theory became an inherent part of my student affairs practice, and truly empowered me
to understand students and student issues (LO #2). Whether it was student development theory
or leadership theory, it became effortless to integrate this into my daily practice. In classes, such
as Adult Learning (EDUC 513), I was quickly able to apply theory to presentations and projects.
Even in Higher Education Law (SDAD 580), I considered how theory could help the institution
and the individuals involved in the cases. Soon I was able to differentiate between what a student
needed versus what a student wanted, and how to respond in a way that was developmental and
educational (LO #2). In my graduate assistantship working with SAA, I used theory to
substantiate my decisions and processes with the Alumni Relations staff. In this circumstance,
being able to communicate theoretical concepts to non-student affairs professionals was
profoundly critical (LO #2). I actually really enjoyed educating others though about leadership

and student development theories, especially foundational theories like Chickerings (1969)
Theory of Identity Development and Schlossbergs (1984) Transition Theory.
Additionally, when I was in a position with other student affairs professionals, I was
energized by the opportunity to openly discuss theory on a deeper level (as evidenced in Artifact
F2). At UC-Berkeley, my competence in recognizing where a student was at developmentally
and knowing how to meet them where they are at significantly improved by watching conduct
specialists have critical, developmental conversations with students during student meetings (LO
#2). The extent to which I incorporate student development and leadership theory into my
research and practice can be seen in Artifacts C3, D and G. And although it is not cited,
Kohlbergs (1981) Theory on Moral Development, Schlossbergs (1984) Transition Theory and
Chickerings (1969) Theory of Identity Development can intrinsically be found in the sanctions
of Artifact E.
Although I do not see myself as the next Schlossberg or Kohlberg, I will continue to
inquire and support those developing new theoretical frameworks that benefit our professional
practice. I will continue to employ best practice research and seek out collegial conversations
with other student affairs professionals in an effort to better serve our students and the field of
higher education.

References
Astin, A. W., & Astin, H. S. (2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher education in
social change.
Baxter-Magolda, M. (2001). Baxter Magoldas theory of self-authorship. In N. Evans, D.
Forney, F. Guido, L. Patton & K. Renn (Eds.), Student development in college:
Theory, research,and practice (pp. 183-193). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, A. (1969). Chickerings theory of identity development. In N. Evans, D.
Forney, F. Guido, L. Patton & K. Renn (Eds.), Student development in college:
Theory, research,and practice (pp. 64-81). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kohlberg, L. (1981). Kohlbergs theory of moral development. In N. Evans, D. Forney, F. Guido,
L. Patton & K. Renn (Eds.), Student development in college: Theory, research,

and practice

(pp. 99-118). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schlossberg, N. (1984). Schlossbergs Transition Theory. In N. Evans, D. Forney, F. Guido,
L. Patton & K. Renn (Eds.), Student development in college: Theory, research, and
practice (pp. 212-226). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.