Running head: COURSE SYNTHESIS 1

Higher Education Administration Course Synthesis

Nicholas J. Aniol

Louisiana State University

COURSE SYNTHESIS 2

Higher Education Administration Course Synthesis

As I conclude graduate coursework within Louisiana State University’s Higher Education

Administration program, I recognize my development as a scholar and an administrator. The

curriculum, my assistantship, and other developmental opportunities I have been afforded at LSU

have shaped my understanding of colleges and universities, the students that enroll, and the ways

in which I can facilitate developmental opportunities. Specifically, the program has provided

capacity to examine historical and contemporary issues in higher education, advanced my

understanding of the characteristics and development of students, and established competency of

many foundational aspects of research and inquiry.

Reflecting on my enrollment in the Higher Education Administration program, the

various assignments, and my practical experience at the University, there is a recognizable

connection to my current role and future professional career. In the first semester of the

program, courses allowed me to consider the foundations of higher education, trends in student

affairs, and research methods. The subsequent semester established an understanding of student

development theory and basic counseling skills. Building on this first year in the program, the

third semester introduced the concepts of law and finance, while reiterating trends affecting

students. In my final semester, the core coursework has focused on strategic planning and

assessing programs, initiatives, and university efforts. Within these courses, readings and

assignments provided insight to various themes, including: a shift from access to retention, the

current era of accountability and legal issues, and theoretical support of a holistic and

transformational approach to education. These themes are relevant in the current research and

professional practice.
COURSE SYNTHESIS 3

Access, Retention, and Student Success

Historically, institutions of higher education served the elite – specifically, wealthy,

White men – excluding women, minorities, and the underprivileged. While universities have

worked to address issues of access and community college model has further included

underserved populations, higher education in the United States has a long history of inequity.

With the ruling of landmark case Brown v. Board of Education and the passing of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, higher education began the process of including those formerly denied

enrollment because of their race (Thelin, 2011) In the context of gender, women have faced

adversity in higher education. As Thelin (2011) describes, only in the recent century have

women “gained influence, power, and leadership in all dimensions of campus programs and life”

(p. 371). The emergence and popularity of community colleges in the 1970s proved to be a

foundation for increased access for low-income students (Thelin, 2011). These themes of access

were discussed most in Foundation of Higher Education, Law and Ethics in Higher Education,

College Students in the U.S. Presently, though representation and access issues exist on

campuses, there is arguably a shift of focus on retaining students.

Contemporarily, institutions have taken on additional efforts to ensure student success

and persistence. In a report by the U.S. Department of Education, four-year institutions had a

retention rate of 80.8% and a graduation rate of 59.8% among first-time undergraduate students

(McFarland, et al., 2018). These numbers support the need for institutional action that supports

persistence through graduation. Throughout several courses, these efforts to retain students were

discussed. Specifically, in College Students in the U.S., various models, including Astin’s I-E-O

model, Tinto’s College Departure model, and Weidman’s Undergraduate Socialization Model,

relate students’ characteristics and their experiences while enrolled when discussing their
COURSE SYNTHESIS 4

educational outcomes. In Tinto’s College Departure Model, students’ academic and social

integration at an institution affects their persistence (Tinto, 1975). In this course, Tinto’s theory

was used as a foundational basis for my project aimed at understanding the social effects of

residential learning communities.

As institutions adopt this responsibility of ensuring student success, my role will in some

capacity work to ensure that students have resources, feel connected on campus, and assist in

their pursuit of graduation. The context provided in my coursework will prove to be applicable

when understanding the unique needs of historically underserved and under-resourced students

and the execution of initiatives that will support and retain them.

Holistic and Transformational Education

Perhaps uncontested is the reality that students learn from various experiences while

enrolled at a university. These experiences take place in academic spaces and in the residence

halls, through coursework, leadership opportunities, and student conduct. In Student

Development Theory, various model and theories were presented to discuss the ways in which

students develop during their collegiate career. A number of these models and theories provide

insight to “describe the experiences of college students”, “explain the cause of behavior”, and

“predict the development outcomes” for students (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010,

pp 23-34).

Widely used in student affairs, Chickering’s Theory of Identity Development proposes

seven vectors of development that explain the formation of an individual’s identity (Evans, et al.,

2010). Chickering explains development as a non-linear process in which individuals may

sequence through vectors or interact with components of more vectors simultaneously. An

understanding of the vectors gives administrators and scholars a language to define a student’s
COURSE SYNTHESIS 5

progression toward identity development. With this understanding, development of programming

models, facilitation of individual intervention efforts and identification of student learning

outcomes for co-curricular involvement become possible (Evans, et al., 2010).

Noted as two of the seven key influences identified by Chickering are the importance of

peer relationships and the developmental programming and services of a university. In many

capacities, Chickering’s theory can provide guidance in understanding students and providing an

intervention that assists in their development. In Student Development Theory, my group was

tasked with identifying an issue on a university campus and providing an intervention that

addressed this developmental issue. James Zimmerman, Michael Clayton, and I wrote a plan for

addressing issues of student conduct using the lens of moral development theories. Within my

role, the application of student development theories is necessary to provide opportunities for

students to progress both academically and personally.

Accountability and Finance

In higher education, as states divest in higher education, the cost to attend four-year

universities has increased, leaving student debt to reach alarming rates (Archibald & Feldman,

2010). Among other factors, the soaring costs of education, even at public institutions, has lead

students, parents, and the public to call for increased accountability. Concerns of the affordability

of higher education are addressed broadly by faculty and administrators, leaving a need for

assessment that provides evidence of learning and confirms the value of the programs, services,

and initiatives of an institution. Concepts of accountability, finance, and assessment were

discussed in Introduction to Student Affairs, Finance in Higher Education, and Assessment and

Evaluation.
COURSE SYNTHESIS 6

First, the issue of finance involves the ways in which higher education is viewed. As

substantiated in a report by Ma, Pender, and Welsh (2016), enrollment in higher education

proves to be beneficial – both for the individual and on a societal-level. Often, higher education

is considered a private good; though, as the report indicates, the benefits the community.

Enrollment in higher education has an effect on poverty levels, reliance on public assistance,

access to healthcare, and community involvement (Ma et al., 2016; McMahon, 2009). To view

education both a private and a public good substantiates the necessity of investment by

individuals and financial support from federal and state legislatures.

Second, regardless if higher education is a private or public expenditure, the current trend

of accountability is likely to remain. Some criticism of higher education focuses on the luxury of

campus facilities and the programs offered on campus (Banta & Palomba, 2015; Blimling, 2013).

Blimling (2013) calls for assessment to be a regular practice in the work of student affairs

administrators “to answer with empirical data about their stewardship of student money and their

contributions to student life and learning” (p.13). As an administrator, consideration for this

accountability and the financing of higher education will only enhance my desire to design,

facilitate, assess, and revise the programs, initiatives, and services I am responsible for.
COURSE SYNTHESIS 7

References

Archibald, R. B., & Feldman, D. H. (2010). Why does college cost so much? New York, NY:

Oxford Press.

Banta, T. W., & Palomba, C. A. (2015). Assessment essentials: Planning, implementing, and

improving assessment in higher education (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Blimling, G. S. (2013). Challenges of assessment in student affairs. New Directions for Student

Services, 142, 5-14.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010) Student

development in colleges: Theory, research and practice, (2nd ed.) San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Ma, J., Pender, M., & Welch, M. (2016). Education pays 2016: The benefits of higher education

for individuals and society. Washington, DC: College Board.

McFarland, J., Hussar, B., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Wang, K., Rathbun, A., Barmer, A., Forrest

Cataldi, E., and Bullock Mann, F. (2018). The Condition of Education 2018

(NCES 2018-144). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for

Education Statistics.

McMahon, W.W. (2009). Higher learning, greater good: The private and social benefits of

higher education. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Thelin, J. R. (2011). A history of American higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.

Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.

COURSE SYNTHESIS 8