Running Head: STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

Learning Outcome Narrative Strengths

Bruce B. Mann

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

Strengths (Learning Outcomes 2, 4, 7, & 8; Artifacts C, D, E, G, J, & K)

For the integrative theme, I chose to conceptualize my development and strengths in the
Student Development Administration (SDA) program by focusing on critical inquiry and
consciousness, which is the act of applying data, research, and social justice knowledge to better
understand and critique systems in order to improve them. This framework is derived from and is
informed by Critical Race Theory (Ladson-Billings, 1998, Delgado et al., 2001) and cutting edge
best practices in assessment and evaluation as demonstrated by the Student Affairs Assessment
Leaders group of which I am a member. In reflecting on how I have grown and improved as a
professional, patterns emerged around utilizing data, assessment, research, and narratives in
service of improving the educational experiences of underrepresented students. I am someone
who looks to understand the world around him as a learner and am constantly seeking to discover
innovative solutions for complex problems. My approach is guided by the work of Freire (1970),
hooks (1994), Critical Race Theory (Ladson-Billings, 1998, Delgado et al., 2001), and Upcraft
and Schuh (1996). Through my experiences in SDA program, I have developed a deeper critical
consciousness around social justice and educational equity issues while further improving my
knowledge and skills in utilizing critical inquiry to improve practice.
Learning Outcomes 2 & 4; Artifacts C2, E, & J
Education in general, and higher education specifically, can either be used to socialize to
the historically oppressive status quo or can become a practice of freedom and liberation (Freire,
1970). Prior to the SDA program, I worked in student affairs for five years in two positions at the
University of Idaho, yet never critically considered the deeper purpose of student affairs and
higher education. Through engaging in the texts and conversations in Foundations of Student

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

Affairs (SDAD 5770) and in my work at the University of Puget Sound in Intercultural
Engagement, I have developed a deeper understanding of the needs of students, specifically
those with marginalized identities, as well as the importance of improving systems to foster
diversity and justice on our campuses and in society at large.
It is through my continued focus on and growth in LO2, understanding students and
student issues that I am developing into a more just, empathetic, and effective student affairs
professional. The key dimensions of this outcome are developing processes to learn more about
students on an individual level, staying up to date with current trends and contemporary
research on specific student populations, and integrating knowledge and needs assessments to
more effectively serve students. In various SDA courses and readings as well as in my
assistantship and internships, I have learned more about foundational student development
theory, emerging research, and contemporary issues facing students. This is best demonstrated by
Artifact J: Distinctive Contribution, which is a white paper on retention of low-income, first
generation students of color created during my internship for College Access Now. This paper
shows an increased understanding and knowledge of diverse student populations (first
generation, low-income, students of color, immigrant students) and their unique strengths, needs,
and challenges in transitioning to college.
Artifact G: Research/Programming Development, the summer institute program
design for Puget Sound, is a prime example of using knowledge of student issues to develop a
targeted program aimed at improving educational outcomes for underserved populations. Simply
understanding students and student issues is not adequate in order to affect lasting change. We
must understand the why of education in order to utilize our knowledge and understanding of
students turning theory into effective practice.

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

For me, the why of education is in liberation and social justice, which can be seen clearly
in LO4, understanding and fostering diversity, justice and a sustainable world formed by a
global perspective and Jesuit Catholic tradition with dimensions that include developing
cultural competency, deepening exploration of personal identity, knowledge and commitment
to social justice, and awareness of global issues and perspectives. Prior to the SDA program, I
believed I had a good working knowledge of justice, inclusion, and diversity, but my experiences
in the program have increased my understanding of the complex systems affecting all of our
students, our institutions, and ourselves. My growth in this learning outcome is evidenced in
Artifact G and Artifact C2: Best Written Work, which was the development of a personal
social justice philosophy and plan of action.
Artifact G is evidence of a more complex understanding of systems of power and
inequity, with a demonstrated commitment to developing programs grounded in theory and
research that lead to improved climate, educational outcomes, and justice for marginalized
students. Moving from theory to action, Artifact C2 shows my increased ability to explore,
understand, and utilize my personal identity as a White, heterosexual, cis male in combination
with relevant social justice and cultural competency theories to work for change in all aspects of
my personal and professional lives. Both of these artifacts, as well as my daily work at Puget
Sound, show not only a deeper understanding of the makeup and effects of power and privilege,
but also represent my increased understanding and commitment to naming my salient identities
and using that growth to advocate and work for change for all students on our campuses.
This learning outcome is not just about the cognitive dimension of justice, diversity, and
inclusion but also must include personal identity work, cultural humility and responsiveness
(Fadiman, 1997), and intentional reflection. As someone who identifies as a White, heterosexual,

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

cis male, this is the cornerstone of my work moving forward as a student affairs professional.
Coming from places of privilege, too often we focus on the theory or systems view of social
justice, without a strong commitment to personal identity development which is a necessity in
order to improve ourselves and work through our implicit biases before we can truly be effective
as agents of change. The Jesuit context of the program has given me an additional perspective
from which to approach justice work in education. This past summer I was extremely fortunate
to be selected as a faculty member and core group facilitator for the Social Justice Training
Institute Student Experience (Artifact E: Beyond Campus: Jesuit Context and Commitment)
where I applied much of what I had learned in Theory and Foundations into practice which
allowed me to better foster diversity and justice in educating undergraduate students from around
the country. Working from a framework informed by Nash & Murray (2010) and Adams, Bell, &
Griffin (1997) I used personal reflection, group reflection, and identity development to assist
students in their development. Through this process I was able to see my growth as a facilitator
and educator in modeling the way for participants by showing vulnerability in personal narrative,
naming my dominant identities and their effects, and creating a space for dialogue that respected
and honored all voices, especially those that are typically marginalized and silenced.
This year has been marked by tremendous personal and professional improvement around
my understanding, knowledge, and skills in multicultural competency, which involves
developing the sensitivity and awareness to refine skills in order to offer meaningful experiences
and outcomes for all students (Pope, Reynolds, & Mueller, 2004). With this development, I have
been able to improve as a facilitator for diversity and as an advocate for marginalized
populations. I have improved my skills in active listening, empathy and compassion, and have
developed a more critical perspective in order to reach students.

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

Learning Outcome 7; Artifacts G & C

I entered the SDA program with a sold base of knowledge and the foundational skills
needed to engage in assessment and evaluation in student affairs. While at Idaho, much of my
job duties and committee work was focused on learning outcome assessment and using data to
evaluative program effectiveness. While my base was strong a year and a half ago, I have
demonstrated tremendous improvement and growth in LO7, utilizing assessment, evaluation,
technology, and research to improve practice with the dimensions of developing and utilizing a
comprehensive and inclusive assessment plan, using research and data to inform program
development and improvement, integrating assessment and evaluation into daily practice, and
staying current with emerging trends in evaluation and research. Through the Student
Development Theory course, internships, my assistantship, and multiple trainings I recognized
how much more I had to learn in this area.
Often in student affairs we conceptualize assessment as learning outcome measurement
through indirect Likert scale self-reporting and prior to the SDA program I was guilty of this as
well. LO7 is much more than just knowing how to write effective learning outcomes. It starts
with using existing theory and research to inform program creation and then consists of the
myriad of tools and approaches for measuring learning, and must always be positioned toward
improving practice through application of lessons learned through data analysis, research, and
reporting. I have gaining more knowledge and improved skills in this outcome through
participation in the Student Affairs Assessment Leaders list serve, multiple trainings and
workshops, and rereading publications by leading researchers like Upcraft and Schuh (1996),
Fink (2013), and Henning (2014).

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

The best demonstration of this learning outcome came through my assistantship when
asked to develop as research report and program proposal looking at barriers to persistence and
success for African-American students at Puget Sound. I utilized research skills developed in
Student Development Theory to author a white paper focusing on retention and persistence
research and best practices. From the research paper I developed a detailed program proposal for
a summer cohort based transition program for underserved incoming students (Artifact G:
Programming/Research Development). I improved how I approached, evaluated, and used
theory to inform practice. The program and learning outcomes are heavily influenced by
integration theory (Tinto, 1993), validation theory (Rendn, 1994), community cultural wealth
(Yosso, 2005), and promising practices from non-profits and other higher education institutions.
This proposal is being used as the basis for a pilot program next summer and represents my
growth in this learning outcome.
I had multiple other opportunities to further develop and demonstrate my learning in LO7
through my internship at CAN. At CAN, I created a distinct research paper (Artifact J) for the
college persistence program around retention of first generation and low-income students which I
used to inform programming in the summer support series as well as in the creation of new
assessment instruments for the upcoming year. I plan on furthering my skills in this learning
outcome in the future through taking additional research classes and seeking out opportunities to
engage in different forms of assessment and evaluation. My work on the Puget Sound Divisional
Assessment Work Group this year will provide ample opportunities to further develop in the
short term.
Learning Outcome 8; Artifact C, D & K

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

While I have written reports, developed summaries, and presented on a variety of topics
in past professional positions, I believe I have further refined and improved in LO8,
communicating effectively in speech and writing. For me, this learning outcome is about
adapting your communication style to your audience, conveying information in a clear,
concise manner, and presenting information in a visually and verbally engaging style.
In Student Development Theory, Adult Learning, and Best Practices in Student Services I
was able to work collaboratively to develop presentations that moved beyond the typical to
engage the audience in a more participatory way. I developed new skills as a leader by including
more perspectives in program design, learning how to best measure needs, and improving my
active listening skills. At Puget Sound, I have created assessment reports, executive summaries,
and presented to the division around intercultural engagement and assessment. I have become
more comfortable in delivering different types of oral and written reports in order to convey
learning and opportunities for improvement.
I believe all of the artifacts in my portfolio demonstrate my growth in communicating
effectively through academic and reflective writing especially seen in Artifact C and Artifact
K. The most obvious example of my growth and strength in this learning outcome is my final
project for EDUC 513, Adult Learning, which was a professional development program proposal
for adult learners (Artifact D: Best Presentation). This presentation on engaging male identified
professionals in conversations around how we show up as men in our work, of which I am
extremely proud, shows my ability to present a dense topic effectively through arresting visuals
and appropriate complimenting speech based on Finks (2013) work on significant learning
experiences and effective presentation design (Duarte, 2010). While this is area is a strength of
mine, I recognize that I have much room for future growth. As someone who identified as White

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

and male, I recognized that I can take up more space than others in meetings and discussions,
and am working on listening more intently and actively in order to hold space for all voices. I
also tend to be long winded, so I am working on being more concise without losing any impact. I
also recognize that this area is best improved through hands on practice so I plan to seek out
additional opportunities to present and write while seeking constant feedback from colleagues
and mentors

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

10
References

Adams, M., Bell, L. A., & Griffin, P. (1997). Teaching for diversity and social justice, New
York, NY: Routledge.
Duarte, N. (2010). Resonate: Present Visual Stories that Transform Audiences. New York, NY:
John Wiley and Sons.
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to
Designing College Courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum International
Publishing Group.
Henning, G. (2014). Considering assessment as investment. Student Affairs Feature. Retrived
from: http://studentaffairsfeature.com/considering-assessment-as-investment/.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress. New York, NY: Routledge.
Nash, R. J., & Murray, M. C. (2010). Helping college students find purpose: The campus guide
to meaning-making. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Pope, R. L., Reyolds, A. L., & Mueller, J. A. (2004). Multicultural Competence in Student
Affairs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Rendn, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and
student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33-51
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition (2nd
Edition). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE

11

Upcraft, M. L. & Schuh, J. H. (1996). Assessment in Student Affairs: A Guide for Practitioners.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 6991.