Student Engagement: A New Paradigm for Student Affairs

Today more than ever, student affairs must respond to wide range of demands for accountability and respond to requests to assist faculty in designing the best environment for students. Student engagement is term used to explain set of beliefs that can guide student affairs as field in planning and accomplishing this mission. This manuscript discusses how the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) has propagated the concept of student engagement, traces the genesis of student engagement through earlier student affairs paradigms, and outlines methodology to implement student engagement paradigm particularly relevant for student affairs practitioners working to create an engaging environment for students. For decades, higher education has been inundated with demands for better accountability. National reports, such as for Better Results - A National Imperative for Higher (National Commission on Accountability in Higher Education, 2005), published by the State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO), created culture of crisis around the undergraduate experience and lamented the failure of current accountability measures to improve that experience. The SHEEO report identified number of crises: (a) the nation's higher education system has lost stature among developed countries, (b) 40% of enrolled students fail to graduate within six years, and (c) current accountability systems are not useful, well designed, or effective. While SHEEO and other similar agencies continue criticizing the quality of undergraduate education, regional accrediting agencies, such as the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), have modified their reaccrediting process to include greater emphasis on institutional effectiveness. For example, the SACS' Commission on Colleges has made major changes to its reaffirmation procedures by supplementing the task of verifying compliance with core requirements, comprehensive standards, and federal requirements with focus on future improvement. The reaffirmation process now incorporates an enhanced emphasis on institutional effectiveness demonstrated by the institutional development of Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) describing a course of action for institutional improvement that addresses an issue or issues critical to enhancing educational quality and directly related to student learning (Southern Association of Colleges & Schools, 2005, p. 5). The purpose of the Quality Enhancement Plan is to direct efforts toward improvement rather than merely documenting past performance. The net result of such changes in reaffirmation procedures by regional accrediting agencies is that institutions must demonstrate, in tangible ways, progress in improving the quality of the educational experience, especially at the undergraduate level. Another complicating factor in the crisis environment of undergraduate education is the numerous publications that rank colleges and universities. One of the most popular is U.S. News and World Reports annual ranking of the best colleges and universities. At its inception in 1983 standings were determined by reputation alone. In 1988, statistical data were added as source of information (Morse & Flanigan, 2004). These data are primarily provided by the institution on the quality of the entering class; for example, weights are given to such numerical criteria as SAT/ACT 25th-75th percentile scores, class rank, acceptance rates, average freshman retention rate, and projected and actual graduation rates (U.S. News and World Report, n.d.). Student affairs plays major role in responding to these external demands and in helping design the best environment for students. To participate fully in this endeavor, student affairs needs paradigm that helps craft environment that, while aligned with the academic mission, recognizes the unique contributions that student affairs professionals make to student experiences. …