Issue 27(1)
Collaboration Between
Student Affairs and Institutional Researchers to Improve Institutional
Effectiveness. (2001).
J. Worth Pickering and Gary R. Hanson (Eds.). San Francisco
: Jossey-Bass. 111 pp., $29.00. ISBN # 0-7879-5727-5.
Review
by: Lester J. Manzano
Academic
Advisor, Office of Academic Advising and Services
Loyola
University
Chicago
From
state-wide budget cuts to an increased focus on accountability
in higher education, student services administrators have reason
to assess their programs and conduct research on student learning
outcomes related to student affairs services. J. Worth Pickering
and Gary Hanson's edited volume for New Directions for Institutional
Research brings together higher education administrators,
including student affairs researchers and institutional researchers,
to address the need to collaborate in order to create more meaningful
data on the student experience. This volume aims to increase
"understanding and appreciation of research in student affairs,"
all with the hope of "[creating] opportunities in which institutional
researchers can work with . student affairs staff to produce
research for student affairs practitioners" (p. 2).
Using
the American College Personnel Association's (ACPA) "Student
Learning Imperative" as well as ACPA's and the National Association
of Student Personnel Administrators' (NASPA) joint publication,
"Good Practices in Student Affairs," Pickering and Hanson organize
the volume's chapters to provide an overview of the issues and
theoretical perspectives of students affairs, present methods
by which student affairs research is conducted, and describe
ways in which the collaboration between student affairs researchers
and institutional researchers can be improved.
This
volume is useful in that it provides a comprehensive overview
of student affairs research. The contributors within the volume
present not only the content of student affairs research, but
also the methods in which student affairs research is typically
conducted (i.e., through qualitative research methods). Further,
the contributors to the volume are both institutional researchers
(those whose background may not necessarily be related to studying
student development) and student affairs researchers (those
who are interested in studying student experiences and learning
outcomes). It is important to note this because "student affairs
research and institutional research functions often exist in
different worlds. .[B]asic differences in perspective and purpose
present challenges to optimizing their value in improving the
operations and services provided by their institutions" (p.
79).
Well-organized
and concise, the volume serves as a useful reference for student
affairs research: first, by organizing the work of student affairs
research into four areas: "1. Who are today's college students?
2. How do they experience college? 3. What do students learn
in college, and who did they become? 4. How does college affect
what students learn and who they become?" (p. 6); and, second,
by providing a list of the "top 23 research questions" in student
affairs as well as a list of Web-based assessment and research
resources.
This
volume for the New Directions in Institutional Research
series was published in 2000 following the release of
ACPA's "Student Learning Imperative" in 1996 and the joint publication
from ACPA and NASPA, "Good Practices in Student Affairs." A
newer publication from ACPA and NASPA, "Learning Reconsidered",
provides another perspective in understanding the student experience.
The 2004 publication "advocate[s] for transformative education
- a holistic process of learning that places the student at
the center of the learning experience" (ACPA and NASPA, 2004).
This publication, and the subsequent 2006 publication of Learning
Reconsidered 2, may date this text. However the information
regarding student affairs research and collaboration between
student affairs and institutional researchers remains relevant
even though the newer publications call for additional research
questions.
This
volume would prove helpful to institutional researchers who
seek to understand the purpose of student affairs work. In academic
advising, our work to improve retention, provide developmental
academic advising, and enhance the student academic experience
would be measured through qualitative means, and this would
complement the work of institutional researchers who may be
more inclined to utilize quantitative methods to study of retention.
As a professional in student services, I found the volume to
be helpful in understanding the importance of student affairs
research and the ways in which collaboration among researchers
in other institutional units can foster greater and more comprehensive
research on the student experience.
References
American
College
Personnel Association. (1999).
The Student Learning Imperative. Retrieved November
17, 2006 from http://www.myacpa.org/sli/sli.htm.
American
College
Personnel Association, and
National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. (1999).
Principles of Good Practice for Student Affairs. Retrieved
November 17, 2006 from http://myacpa.org/pgp/principle.htm.
American
College Personnel Association, and National Association of Student
Personnel Administrators. (2004). Learning Reconsidered.
Retrieved
November 17, 2006 from http://www.naspa.org/membership/leader_ex_pdf/lr_long.pdf.
American
College
Personnel Association, 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, and National
Intramural-Recreational Sports Association. (2006). Learning
Reconsidered 2: A Practical Guide to Implementing a Campus-Wide
Focus on the Student Experience. Retrieved
November 17, 2006 from [http://www.learningreconsidered.org.