In his February 2010 TED talk, CEO and author Chip Conley tells a fascinating story about the nation of Bhutan and their transformation from an isolated, undeveloped nation to a modern, technologically rich nation that still manages to maintain the essence of their original culture and traditions. Bhutan’s story is one of striking the balance between progress and innovation, while stilll maintaining core elements of an identity (a rare feat for any country, organization, or school in today’s rapid-paced world). One of the most interesting parts of Conlee’s telling of the story is his reason for Bhutan’s ability to transorm in these ways. Quite simply, he believes that it is because Bhutan has learned to “count” the right thing, gross national happiness. Forty years ago, Bhutan’s King coined the term rather off-handedly to describe his commitment to building an economy that would allow for growth, while staying true to Bhutan’s Buddhist roots. Bhutanese officials ran with the concept, developed sophisticated instruments to measure the concept, and used it as a model for the development plan that brought Bhutan into the 21st century. This all stands in stark contrast to most nations’ preoccupation with Gross Domestic Product and their belief that it stands as the supreme indicator of a nation’s well-being.
paradoxes
2
Jul 10
Measuring what matters: How much should we really care about retention?
There seems to be a lesson for higher education in all of this, particularly the first-year experience movement. Like anyone else, we count what is easily countable. So, in many ways “retention” has become our GDP. We work hard to measure it, argue over how it should be measured, showcase (or hide) it in reports to our administrations, and tout it at conferences. This isn’t to say that we shouldn’t care about retention–the reality is that enrolled students bring money to the institution and that money keeps us running. But, there seems to be some danger in retention becoming what Conlee describes as a “misplaced metric,” an easy to count measure that gives little indication as to the real health of an institution.
So, what should we be counting? In many ways this question hinges on how we define success in the FYE movement and the factors that we believe contributes to a vibrant campus community. What does a “successful” student look like at the end of their first year? What skills, habits, and attitudes would they possess? While the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) has contributed greatly to institutions’ ability to measure certain behaviors and attitudes of students, we don’t seem to do much on our individual campuses to measure the equivalent of the “gross national happiness” for our campuses.
What would these “intangibles” on our campuses be? While they will vary slightly across institutions, some possibilities might include
A personal reason for being at a particular institution. Do students know why they decided to come to your school? Their purpose and commitment to the educational ideals and objectives at your institution will make a huge difference in their engagement and persistence. If they don’t have a set of fairly good reasons for choosing a particular campus, there is likely to be trouble down the road.
Understanding of and investment in an institutional mission. This seems strongly correlated with the idea above, but it seems important for institutions to not only orient students to their physical surroundings, but to help them understand the culture and ideals of the institution they have enrolled in so they might become a part of the community and fulfill their role in it. So, if you are a faith-based institution that espouses character development, do students believe in that mission and pursue that growth? For liberal arts institutions, do your students value a well-rounded education and recognize the importance of breadth in their learning?
Passion for learning. What students believe and feel about learning are important. We want life-long learners that continue to grow and make contributions to society after they leave our institutions. Can the first-year experience nurture this passion? How would it be measured?
This is obviously not an all inclusive list. But, these would seem to be key indicators of the success of a FYE program. There are others including deep learning behaviors, formation of supportive mentoring relationships, and the development of grit and persistence. We probably can’t measure them all, but what for you are the key indicators on your campus? What could we start measuring on our campuses that would be meaningful and give us real insight into the success of our FYE programs?
Universities need leaders who know what to count.
19
Mar 10
Managing Transitions: What FYE can learn from the corporate world
Recently I have been reading a book from business literature called Managing Transitions. In it the author (William Bridges) describes a philosophy and accompanying set of strategies that organizations can employ to successfully navigate difficult transitions (e.g. a merger, downsizing, closing, etc.). The premise of the book is that transitions, while filled with anxiety and the sometimes debilitating potential for failure, present tremendous opportunities for growth and innovation.
This has been interesting reading for me because my area on campus is in the midst of a fairly dramatic transition. But, as I read another chapter this afternoon it occurred to me that some of Bridges ideas could be applied to my work in first-year experience. New freshmen on college campuses look, in some ways, a lot like a mid-level manager trying to grapple with changes in her organization. Both are anxious and somewhat frightened of the uncertainty that lies ahead, both are probably questioning their ability to succeed in their new environment, and both are likely to brush up against experiences that expose weaknesses and deficiencies.
So, what can those of us in FYE learn from corporate America about managing transitions?
Bridges’ identifies three fluid stages–(1)Letting Go, (2) the Neutral Zone, and (3) The New Beginning (see image below).
It’s important to note that these are not three static phases that are moved through in sequential order (like walking through three separate doors). Rather, we find ourselves in all three phases at any given point within a transition. The concept of a new beginning was not new to me–it is where we focus most of our efforts as we design orientations, first-year programs, etc. However, my sense in talking with colleagues on other campuses is that most of us haven’t spent much time thinking about the letting go and neutral zone elements of students’ transitions onto our campuses. That’s where I’ll focus the rest of this post.
Letting Go. Among other things, Bridges recommends that those assisting individuals in transition pay attention to what is being lost by those experiencing the change. What are they giving up? What are they likely to long for in the new situation? etc. The first implication here is that we both expect and accept the fact that most if not all new students will experience some sort of “grieving” during their first year on campus. For some it will come in the first few weeks and in other cases it could come much later (e.g. after Thanksgiving or Christmas vacations). But, we shouldn’t be surprised or discouraged when we see students struggling with the “I wish I was at home” sorts of feelings. In fact, recognizing and addressing those feelings is necessary for students to eventually become integrated into our campuses. At times, those of us who interact with new students (faculty, advisors, residence hall staff, etc.) might be guilty of trying to skip to the “new beginning” without ever allowing students to let go. One way that this might happen would be to mark the ending in a very public or visible way. Could something happen during new student Convocation or another part of orientation that ritualizes the ending (this could also more effectively signal the new beginning we hope students engage in)? Also, could students be invited to discuss with one another or with a peer mentor/advisor the sorts of things they are giving up as they transition into college (e.g. old study habits, friendships, their own room, etc.)? This could help lead to a conversation about the many things that we provide on our campuses to compensate for these losses–student organizations, academic help centers, residence hall advisors, and more.
The Neutral Zone. The neutral zone is that place between the ending and the beginning where we are trying to find our place, reframe our identity, and figure out how to make it in our new situation. It’s in the neutral zone where we see students anxious, stressed, ambiguous, and questioning their ability to make it. And, in some ways, our programs are intended to move students through this uncomfortable place as quickly as possible. The interesting idea presented in Managing Transitions is that the neutral zone isn’t necessarily something that we should try to rush people through because of the opportunities for growth and innovation that it presents. A quote from the book (p. 52) captures this idea very well:
“The key to succeeding in these efforts [the efforts to help individuals navigate the neutral zone] is to look at the neutral zone as a chance to do something new and interesting–and to pursue that goal with energy and courage.”
I like that thought because it shifts the responsibility for success on to the individual and essentially asks “what can you do during this time of transition to grow, change, be creative, etc” That seems like a liberating thought and one that should be shared with students. In addition, Bridges recommends that the neutral zone be “normalized” such that it becomes clearly understood by students and others on campus that the transition to college won’t happen overnight and won’t happen without some growing pains. Carol Dweck’s ideas in Mindset seem like they would have particular application here; in a nutshell she discusses the idea of a “growth mindset” wherein individuals view intelligence and success as malleable and responsive to hard work and practice. This sort of attitude can help students reframe the way they view failures and help them use the neutral zone and its “failures” as learning experiences that lead to eventual growth and success.
So, the take home for me was that for FYE professionals to really help students “begin” their college experience, we need to pay a bit more attention to the other two elements involved in the transition to college. Thoughts? How are you helping students let go or navigate the neutral zone?
