5thFeb2012

DearReader, Last October, I visited Stanford University in an unofficial capacity. While enjoying its glorious weather, I also took the opportunity to tour its campus, chat with Stanford students and talk to the presidentoftheAssociatedStudentsofStanfordUniversity(ASSU).Whatcouldnotescapemyattention was a simple observation: students at Stanford are happy. Most external rankings seem to agree, as Stanford is consistently ranked among the happiest student bodies in the nation. Is it the sprawling verdantcampus,yearroundsun,thewidevarietyofdormitoryfoodacrossmultipledininghalls,orfree laundryandtheendlessarrayofstudentresourcesandperks?Whilethosefeaturescertainlycontribute tostudenthappiness,theyseemfarfromsufficient. One facet of student life at Stanford stood out in particular: ASSU has complete control over theirequivalentofourStudentActivitiesFee,whichtheyallocatetostudentorganizationsindependent of University oversight. At the same time, the University provides institutional support in the form of event advising, legal protection and insurance coverage. Many schools attract talented students, but whatisrareisauniversitysowhollyinvestedinstudentengagementthatitallowsstudentstoconduct their own affairs. With the school administrations support, ASSU fosters a vibrant student life, and raisesmanyquestionsaboutwhatstudentlifecouldandshouldlooklikeateveryinstitutionofhigher learning. While Georgetown faces its own set of constraints, and it would be impossible to transplant anotherschoolssystemintoouruniqueenvironment,wecandefinitelyaspiretodobetter.Tothatend, thisReportprovidesabroadoverviewofstudentengagementoncampusandsuggestsaroadmapfor changeprinciplesandideastofosteratrulyorganicandvibrantstudentlife. TherearetwopeoplewithoutwhomthisReportwouldnotexist:ViceChairRonakParikhand EditorinChiefMattHoyt.Theyarenotonlytwoofmybestfriends(andlongtimeroommates),butalso pickeduptheslackwhenIwasswamped,andmostimportantly,keptmesane.Iwouldalsoliketothank theCommitteesninesectionauthors,allofwhomaretransformativestudentleadersintheirownright. BestwishestomyfellowseniorsastheyleaveGeorgetownandsettheworldonfire,andItrustthatthe nonseniorswillkeepupthegoodworkoncampus. On a personal note, chairing this committee has been highly educational both in terms of learningaboutGeorgetownandaboutmyself.IthasbeenahighlysatisfyingjourneyfortheCommittee andallourallies,andIinviteyoutojoinusasweembarkonthenextphaseofmakingGeorgetowna better place. To those brave enough to take up a similar undertaking in the future, please do not hesitatetocontactmeattanshuoyan@gmail.com. Regards, ShuoYanTan(SFS12) Chair,StudentLifeReport2012Committee

Background TheStudentLifeReportof2012followsinthefootstepsofpreviousmajorstudentdrivenassessments. They include the Student Commission for Unitys report on diversity in 2009, the Report on Student Space in 2010 and most pertinently, the 1999 Report on Student Life. The first Report led to the Administrations commitment to New South as a student center, resulted in the formation of a Club Sports Advisory Board, laid the foundations for recent reforms in the Student Activities Fee & Endowment(SAFE),amongotherthings. TherecentsuccessofSAFEreformswillresultinincreasingamountsofmoneychanneledintostudent activities, which necessitates an immediate evaluation of student life on campus. In that light, the GeorgetownUniversityStudentAssociation(GUSA)establishedtheStudentLifeReport(SLR)Committee inApril2011tochartthewayforward. StatementofPurpose The Student Life Report of 2012 aims to evaluate the current state of student engagement at GeorgetownandproposereformsthatwillenhancetheoncampusexperiencefortheaverageHoya. Scope Our scope includes the five advisory boards Student Activities Commission (SAC), Center for Social Justice(CSJ),ClubSports,thePerformingArtsAdvisoryCouncil(PAAC),MediaBoardtheGeorgetown Program Board, intellectual life outside of the classroom, and general university policies governing studentlife.Thesesectionscomprisethemainbodyofthisreport. From the outset, the SLR Committee chose to exclude a few important, but ultimately peripheral, aspects of student life. Residence Life (ResLife) provides essential programming within residence halls and at free or reduced cost. Nonetheless, the Reslife experience varies dramatically based on accommodation and studentclass year.Studentservices,whichincludehousing, maintenance,dining, andsoforth,alsomakeimportantcontributionstostudentlife.However,theyoccupyaverydifferent sphereofinfluence,typicallyfacilitatingbaselineexpectationsratherthanengagingstudentpotential. Givenourlimitedtimeandresources,wealsodecidedattheoutsettoleavediversityissuesoutofthe picture.Thereareundoubtedlyvariousfactorssocioeconomicclass,race,genderandmanyothers thatcananddolimitparticipationinvariousfacetsofstudentlife.Thatbeingsaid,thisReportisabout thelimitlessupsideofstudenthappiness;whatcanbedonetoenableandequiptheaverageHoyato fully actualize their dreams? To answer that question, we talked to hundreds of stakeholders on campus, conducted nine official comparative trips and analyzed thousands of survey responses. The resultingreportpresentsthestudentviewsaboutthepast,present,andfutureofstudentengagement atGeorgetown.

Methodology 1)AssessingCurrentStateofAffairs To create an overview, our section authors conducted numerous stakeholder interviews to paint an integrated perspective from staff, faculty and students. This initial information gathering was complementedbyacademicresearchontheimportanceofeachindividualsectiontotheGeorgetown community. We also paid careful consideration to how each component of the Report stemmed from andcouldfitintoGeorgetownslargerJesuitidentity. Inaddition,weincorporatedsurveydatafromthreerecentmajorsurveys:theCivicEngagementSurvey of 2011, the Enrolled Student Survey of 2011 and the Senior Survey of 2010. Lastly, we ran a consultationexercisebothpublicallyandprivately,theformerthroughacallforcommentsviaaschool wideblastemail,andthelatterbymeetingwithnumerousadministratorsandadministrativebodies. 2)ComparativeDimension Beyond Georgetown, we arranged official comparative trips to nine peer institutions: American University,BostonCollege,CornellUniversity,DukeUniversity,FordhamUniversity,UniversityofNorth Carolina, University of Pennsylvania, University of WisconsinMadison, William & Mary. These schools wereselectedforavarietyofreasonsandsimilaritiestoGeorgetown,includinglocationinWashington D.C.,Jesuitidentity,sharedfeatures,andsharedgoals. Furthermore, Georgetown belongs to a larger consortium of universities that administers both the EnrolledStudentSurveyandSeniorSurvey(SeeAppendixforcompletelist).Whileconfidentialityissues preventedusfromobtainingprecisestatisticsforindividualuniversities,thecompositedatastillallowed ustoestablishwhereGeorgetownstandsinrelationtootherinstitutionsofhighereducation. 3)EstablishingBestPractices ThetwopreviousapproachesenabledustoidentifygapsinthecurrentGeorgetownenvironment,and at the same time ascertain how other universities have managed to address these seemingly irreconcilable dichotomies. In turn, we were able to ascertain which best practices would work in the Georgetowncontext,andrecommendideasandprinciplesforimplementation. DataAnalysis There is a trove of survey data that can be used to establish the relationship between student satisfaction and level of engagement. On even years (2010, 2008, etc.), Georgetown sends out the SeniorSurveytoallmembersoftheseniorclass.Onoddyears(2011,2009,etc.),theEnrolledStudent Survey goes out to 100% of the senior class and 50% of the junior, sophomore and freshman classes. More recently, the Civic Engagement Survey of 2011 focused on the level of student involvement in volunteerism and advocacy activities. Many preliminary statistics from the three abovementioned surveysappearinlatersectionsofthisReport. We initially hypothesized that student engagement is key to student happiness. While this may seem intuitive,muchoftheconversationoncampusrevolvesaroundtheneedformorespaceorfunding,but lesssoontheinstitutionalclimatesthatencourageshigherstudentinvolvement.Basedonrudimentary empirical modeling, there is a positive and highly statistically significant relationship between student

satisfaction and various measures of engagement number and range of activities that a student is involvedin,theadministrationsresponsiveness,facultyadvisingoutsidetheclassroom,etc. Unfortunately, there is a lot more work to be done on this front. Using the wealth of data available, Georgetown statisticians should construct a model that tests for the key contributors to student satisfaction, weighing student engagement against social life, working for money, and a plethora of othervariables.Atthesametime,therearegapsintheexistingdata,astheUniversityssurveysdonot includesatisfactionlevelsonmanyimportantfacetsoftheoverallstudentexperienceatGeorgetown. Tonameseveral,theyincludeavailabilityofclasses,classrooms,computerservices,feelingofsecurity, food services, library facilities and housing facilities all factors that contribute to levels of student satisfaction. NoncomprehensiveempiricalmodelingisalwayssubjecttoTypeIerrors,andhavingadditionalcontrols wouldallowforarobustandconclusivestudyontheroleofstudentengagement.Thatbeingsaid,the existingdataanalysispointsinonedirection:thatstudentengagementmattersatGeorgetown.Giving students the appropriate level of support, resources and space to pursue their interests will result in happystudents. WhyStudentEngagementMatters Formation.ItsawordfundamentaltotheJesuiteducation,andonethatdistinguishestheGeorgetown experiencefromitssecularpeers.Georgetownseeksnotonlytoeducatethemindsofitsstudents,but alsotoformtheircharacter.Thisinstitutionaimstodevelopitsstudentsintheirmind,body,andspirit curaspersonalis.ThroughtheStudentLifeReport2012Committeesresearchandbroaderinvestigation, we determined that one major venue for formative experience at Georgetown is engagement with studentlifeontheHilltop. In this Report, we examined student engagement through the lens of broad institutional issues, the advisory boards, and the state of intellectual life outside the classroom. We found areas in which Georgetown excelled, such as the work done by the Center for Social Justice and the lowcost programmingofferedbytheGeorgetownProgrammingBoard.Atthesametime,currentsystemsoften constrain and limit interactions among students and between students and faculty/staff, placing an unneededceilingontheboundlesspotentialofstudentengagement. Father Kevin OBrien, Vice President for Mission and Ministry, frequently talks about how a Jesuit university blends character building with creating knowledge and molding professionals. He explained that each person has a uniquely created gift, and it is the job of the educator to harness that. In that light,cocurricularactivitiesareimportantbecausetheyengagethewholeperson,especiallywhenthe student exercises leadership, creativity, or critical thinking. As Father OBrien explains, education improvesthegifts[eachstudenthas]andoffersthemingreaterservicetothecommunitybynotbeing engagedoncampus,youmissthatgreatopportunity. Inthesamelight,FatherRyanMaher,anAssociateDeanandtheDirectorofCatholicStudies,pointsout thatwhenspeakingtoalumni1520yearsout,theymentionawiderangeofactivities,asprinklingof classes and faculty, but really [focus] on the things that speak to the true nature of education the performingarts,sports,andserviceprojects.Bytheirverynature,theseareactivitiesinwhichstudents putforththeirindividualgiftsanddrawbacktheexperienceofsomethingmore.Whentheyworkwell whetheraconcertperformance,aresoundingbasketballvictoryorasuccessfulAlternativeSpringBreak triptheseexperiencescreateasumgreaterthanitsparts.

 While the environment of Washington D.C. provides unrivaled opportunities for personal and professional development, this typically happens off campus and in the absence of Jesuit influence. Facingtheseexternalengagements,itsmoreimportantthaneverforGeorgetowntodevelopaholistic approachtostudentengagementthatencouragesformativeoncampusexperiences.Asmanystudents cometofind,thereismoregrowthandleadershipopportunitiesinbeingEditorinChiefoftheHoyaas comparedtoaneditorialassistantinaD.C.newspaper,orbeinginvolvedinstudentgovernmentonthe HilltopvisvissecretarialworkontheHill. AsthepresidentofHillelproposedlastyear,thereshouldbeamovementtotransformtheperception of'studentlife'fromacollectionofclubsandactivitiestotheprimarycomponentofaninstitutionthat teachesandfosterscivilengagementwhatcanmakeourinstitutionsofhigherlearningtheenvyofthe world in future years are the skills required for civil dialogue, often learned by participating in sports teams,bands,socialorganizations,andvolunteerwork.Asbudgetsgetleaner,therewillbeastronger pushtosidelinetheseextracurricularactivities,butsuchpursuitsarethegreat,uniqueaddedvalueof university life.1Georgetown places great emphasis on teaching and research, and understandably so. Nonetheless, in the spirit of the Jesuit Education, student engagement deserves to be brought forth fromtheperipheryofcampuslifeandbeawardedequalattentionandresources. ExecutiveSummary:BroadAreasforImprovement 1)StudentAutonomy Duetospatial,financialandbureaucraticlimitations,studentsareunabletofullyexploretheircreative potential through oncampus activities. When planning an event, student leaders often spend a significant amount of time and effort filling out forms and working through room reservation procedures. Instead, their energies would be better spent on innovative approaches to programming and events. If empowered with more responsibility and facilitated by centralized administrative processes,Georgetownstudentswillbeabletoexploretheirinterestsingreaterdepthandrealizethe fullpotentialoftheirholisticeducation. 2)CommunicationandTransparency Improving or creating new channels of communications among students, administrators, and faculty wouldreduceinefficiencyandconfusiononcampuscanbeeradicated.Openandclearcommunication allowscorroborationandintegrationofideasandresources,creatinganenvironmentconducivetonew ideasandstudentflourishing. Better communication also provides a sense of transparency with administrative affairs on all sides faculty, staff, and students. Concurrently, this transparency must be extended to decisionmaking processes,whichshouldbefreeofunbalancedincentivesorconflictsofinterest. 3)AssessmentandImprovement By using both qualitative and quantitative data to assess itself, the Georgetown administration can examineiftheyaccomplishdesiredlearningoutcomesfromcocurricularactivities.Drawingfrombest
1

Firestone,Wayne.YearningforCivilDiscourse?ListentoYourStudents.ChronicleofHigherEducation,Oct162011.

practicesbothwithinandoutsidetheUniversity,wehopethatfuturegenerationsofHoyawillthriveon acampusthatoffersanengagingandempoweringundergraduateexperience. UsingThisDocument Because each of the sections covers such different topics and areas, each necessarily branches out in uniqueways.Forthatreason,most,butnotall,sectionswillincludethefollowingsections:Introduction, Background, Best Practices and Recommendations. The current state of affairs should be valid as of December 2011, but given how rapidly student life at Georgetown is changing (and evolving), small components of our assessments may no longer be relevant in one or two years. Likewise, our recommendations are by no means exhaustive, but should give the reader a good idea of the type of concretechangesneeded. These shortcomings aside, this document is intended to be a comprehensive and farreaching call to action. While many of the recommendations we propose are specific to a certain point in time or a certain organization, our overall goal is to enhance student life by increasing student autonomy on campus. We urge all readers to look past individual commentary and ideas to the broader principles behindthisreport;onlythencanweworktogethertofullyembodyGeorgetownsidentityasaJesuit andCatholic,studentcentered,researchuniversity. SpecialThanksandAcknowledgements GUSAPresidentMikeMeaney(SFS12),VicePresidentGregLaverriere(COL12)andTreasurerCharles Jang(MSB12)fortheirinstitutional,financialandadministrativesupport.Inaddition,specialthanksto Greg for drawing upon his prior experience as GUSA Finance and Appropriations Chair to write the HistoryofFundingsection. Erika CohenDerr, Director for the Center for Student Programs and GUSAs Advisor, for being a constantpillarofstrengththroughouttheentireprocess. Mr. Michael McGuire, Georgetowns Executive Director for Institutional Research, OADS, Dr. Rusan Chen,SeniorStatisticianintheCenterforNewDesignsinLearning&ScholarshipandProfessorCharles Udomsaph of the School of Foreign Service for their immeasurable assistance with data analysis and empiricalmodeling. The thought leadership of Professor Kathryn Olesko and Associate Provost Marjory Blumenthal in chairingtheMainCampusExecutiveFaculty(MCEF)IntellectualLifeReport20062007andtheMiddle StatesReaccreditationProcessrespectively. Dr.ToddOlson,VicePresidentforStudentAffairs,theStudentAffairsDirectors,CouncilofAssociate DeansandtheCampusWideAdvisorsfortheirvaluableinput. PhotoshopextraordinaireLeonelDeVelez(SFS15)forourwonderfulcoverpage. Alltheadministrators,faculty,studentsandalumniwhoplayedapartintheReport.Fortossingusan idea,readingthroughsections,supportingusbehindthescenes,orasimplewordofencouragement.To eachandeveryoneofyou,thankyou.