Running head: STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 1

Personal Strengths Developed by SDA

Mitchell Catalano

Seattle University
STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 2

Learning Outcome Narrative Strengths (Learning Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10; Artifacts

A, B, C1, C2, D, E)

Integrative Theme: Naming Privilege

For those of us with privilege, our commitment must be to use that privilege to help those

with different or lesser privilege to succeed at an equitable level. This is a summary of a lecture

I received as a young student affairs professional and it has guided my development in this field.

I chose the Student Development Administration (SDA) program because I felt confident that my

learning experience would guide me to an understanding of how to achieve that goal. While not

every decision I have made throughout this program has been driven by that mission, I can state

with confidence that professional development steeped in my coursework, graduate assistantship,

and internships has built a personal framework to strive for that goal. That scaffolding constructs

the greater narrative theme of my SDA experience, specifically, being able to name privilege.

I have had the great pleasure to engage in classroom learning that challenges our

perceptions of how privilege appears in our educational system as well as the society

surrounding us. I have engaged directly with student leaders and student programming and seen

how privileges both personally and systemically allow them to engage in critical and meaningful

work for their communities (Learning Outcome 2, Artifact A). I experienced diverse arrays of

student demographics be it in education level, race, ethnicity, economic status, or ability,

allowing me to identify the greater pool of privileges and how to address them. All these

experiences have helped me identify that there is a process and importance to naming privilege

as a student affairs professional. Engaging in this process is reflected in three sub areas

describing key strengths gained in my SDA experience, namely: acknowledging professional and
STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 3

personal identities, learning to understand and support diverse student communities, and

commitment to institutional knowledge and changes.

Acknowledging Professional and Personal Identities (Learning Outcomes 3, 4, 10;

Artifacts B, D, E)

Defining Dimensions: multicultural competency, identity development, theory to practice

Popes (2004) model of multicultural competency teaches professionals that we must

center our work in awareness, knowledge and skills when working with diverse student

populations. Much of that work begins with a knowledge of ourselves in comparison to the

many students with whom we will work. Before the SDA program, I was relatively unaware of

how my identity as a white, straight, cis-gender, able bodied man compared with colleagues and

students of different identities. Thanks to this program, I have gained knowledge of student

development theories helping me to build skills in advising diverse student populations. For

example, I provided support to international students, students of color, LGBTQ students, and

students of different abilities through my graduate assistantship responsibilities with the Student

Government of Seattle University. I eventually identified how each unique student leader was

formed by their identities and how their development coincided with their leadership role.

Simultaneously, I worked through my identity as a white privileged male as recognized in

Cabreras (2012) research in critical white studies. As his theory suggests, I identified areas of

agency to struggle against my own privilege while working positively with my students. This

internal work has continued to drive me through the program, reflective of Learning Outcome

10 and demonstrated in my professional and personal mission (Artifact B).

In those experiences and with those guiding statements, I feel confident that I exhibited

Learning Outcome 3, commitment to ethical practice and leadership as a professional. With

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 4

ever increasing diversity in our student populations, it is crucial that a white male student affairs

professional like myself continue to engage in multicultural competency while having the

integrity to complete self-reflection about my own privileged identities. Having had the

opportunity to engage in those conversations both in and out of the classroom with my SDA

classmates has been an optimal way in which to accomplish that work. In addition to those

interactions, I have also had multiple opportunities to discuss ethical and integrity driven work

with supervisors from my professional positions. Specifically, Artifact D demonstrates how

other professionals in the field readily recognize my dedication to ethical practice in my work

and demonstrates their confidence in what I have learned in this program.

Finally, self-analysis completed in community with peers and other professionals has

become a main avenue for me in enhancing and establishing a professional identity as a

competent and socially just professional. Artifact E demonstrates that I am most competent in

personal and ethical foundations, social justice and inclusion, and advising and supporting

students. Again, Artifact D corroborates those competencies and helps me state my professional

identity with confidence. Taken together with the acknowledgment of my personal privileges as

identified in my work, it becomes clear that SDA has allowed me to fully acknowledge my

professional and personal identities espoused in Learning Outcome 4.

Learning Understand Diverse Student Leaders (Learning Outcomes 2, 4, 5;

Artifacts A, C2, E)

Defining Dimensions: multicultural competency, student development research, theory to

practice

My ability to adapt student services to a wide range of student populations has been a

constant in my professional experience (Learning Outcome 5, Artifact A). Previous to SDA I

STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 5

guided American students in adapting to a new cultural context by studying abroad. This was

one small lens which I recognized needed further development with more experience and a

deeper breadth of academic knowledge. In my time with SDA, I have developed the knowledge

and discovered the experience to understand the different needs of diverse student populations

and how to adapt environments of student affairs to those needs. Specifically, I have been able to

accomplish this through theory to practice situations with student leaders

Applying theory to practice begins with the knowledge I have gained in coursework.

Artifact C2 demonstrates a collective paper from SDAD 5400 demonstrating our abilities to

understand students and students issues (Learning Outcome 2). In conducting this research

about the continued development of the Seattle University Youth Initiative (SUYI), my peers and

I were able to identify how student development theory could apply to populations of young

adults exploring a pre-college program during middle school. This required us to apply a scope

of multicultural competency in understanding the diverse needs of these students. We also had to

identify how their transitions between middle school, high school, and hopefully college

experience may connect fluidly. Utilizing best practices in this area along with maintaining a

lens of Yossos (2005) community cultural wealth model as well as Schlossbergs (1984)

transition theories, we were able to name key recommendations of how to best support a middle

school college pipeline program supported through SUYI.

This academic experience supplied me with the framework of how to accomplish similar

analyses in my professional practice. For example, through my work with the Center for Student

Involvement, I have engaged with a diverse group of student leaders, applying knowledge and

skills in diverse student experiences. Understanding that my student leaders hold myriad forms

of capital (Yosso, 2005), I have learned how to identify the ways in which their unique capital
STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 6

connects with their ability to understand themselves, their situation, their support, and strategies,

and strategies to be successful throughout transitions in their leadership role and overall

experience much like Schlossbergs (1984) transition model (Evans et al., 2010). This is a

complex theory to practice approach, but centralizing my professional work within that strategy

has produced many fruitful advising relationships with student leaders.

Applying that sort of practice is something I have been able to do with various student

leader populations (Artifact A). This wide ranging application has provided me with an ability

to engage in critical reflection identifying my own prejudices and biases in this process (Artifact

E). Remaining ever reflective with my students in this framework, I have developed a capacity

to understand their needs, help them adapt to their particular environments, and maintain a lens

of diversity, reflection in action, and social justice (Learning Outcome 4). This capacity

demonstrates how I have applied learning outcomes two, four, and five into a practical and useful

professional exercise thanks to my knowledge and experience gained through the SDA program.

Commitment to Institutional Knowledge (Learning Outcomes 5, 6, 9; Artifacts A,

C1)

Defining Dimensions: research, professional practice

The final component in learning about working with privilege in higher education

involves identifying privilege at the institutional level. In my time in SDA, I have learned that as

professionals we equally serve students as well as our institutions. In a similar way to

multicultural competence, I have learned that institutional competence requires a similar method

of investment. As professionals, we must commit ourselves to accessing knowledge and

awareness about our institutional structures to inspire change. In my time in SDA, I have found

effective means for accomplishing this by engaging in research about law and policy in the
STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 7

classroom, engaging in servant leadership, and gaining access to different institutional types

(Learning Outcome 9, Artifact A&C1,).

Knowledge of law and policy across higher education was provided to me in Leadership

and Governance in Post-Secondary Education. In this course, I engaged in a group research

project focused on how current governance issues affect the landscape of higher education

(Artifact C1). The resulting research report demonstrated our abilities to analyze issues within

complex institutional governance structures and identify recommendations of how to create

policy or action. This exercise and the analytical frames it provided helped to continually guide

me in my work with student government at Seattle University. Furthermore, that knowledge

provided me with a critical lens of leadership with which to view governance and policy

generally within our field (Learning Outcome 6).

This knowledge is translated into skills in my experiences at unique institutional types. I

have had the pleasure to serve in professional positions at a private and four-year public

university during my SDA experience (Artifact A). That artifact also includes my previous

professional position at a private institutions unique Italy campus that served as its own

microcosm of the larger institution. In these positions, I successfully adapted my leadership

styles between servant and strategic leadership depending on the institutional and units

governance structure. In this work, I developed and adapted my leadership identity while

collaborating with colleagues across institutional types (Learning Outcomes 5&6), proving my

commitment to these institutions, their missions and values, and their students.

Conclusion
STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 8

My learning experiences in SDA have inspired me to become a professional with the

knowledge and skills to name privilege in myself, for my students, and in our institutional

systems. I truly believe that my accomplishment of the learning outcomes included in this

narrative have built a foundation for me to accomplish critically important work in striving for

equity in higher education. Accomplishing this task requires an ability to identify my own

privilege in the systemic interactions I experience with my students, colleagues, and institutional

administrators. I am energized to continue my professional practice in this way and will utilize

the SDA community in my continued learning through this process.

References
STRENGTHS NARRATIVE 9

Cabrera, N. L. (2012). Working through Whiteness: White, Male College Students Challenging

Racism. Review Of Higher Education, 35(3), 375-401.

Evans, N.J., Forney, D.S., & Guido F. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research,

and practice 2nd Edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Pope R.L., Reynolds, A.L., & Mueller, J.A. (2004). Multicultural competence in student affairs.

San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass

Yosso, T.J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race discussion of community cultural

wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-82