The Student

Affairs
Graduate
Assistantship:
A Story of
Assessment

Matt Skoy and Zack

Ford
Iowa State University

March 31, 2009

ACPA National
Conference
 Prologue

• Introductions:
Once upon a time, there were two
gentlemen in graduate school…
 Meet the Characters

Z a ck Fo rd Matt Skoy
Iowa State University Iowa State University
2007-2009 Master’s Cohort 2007-2009 Master’s Cohort

Assistantship Assistantship
Multicultural Academic Athletic Academic Services
Advising
 Prologue

• Introductions
• Our Study
• The Narrative Workshop
– Assessment
– Graduate Assistantships
• The Feedback Loop
 By the end of this workshop, we hope you
will learn to...…

• Understand the complex dynamics of

the graduate assistantship
experience.
• Consider factors for designing an
assessment.
• Navigate a political climate to effect
change.
• Advance through the “assessment
spiral” to increase student learning
opportunities.

 Quick Survey of the Room

• How many are hoping to learn more

about the assessment process?
• How many are hoping to learn more
about student affairs graduate
assistantships?
• How many are currently GAs?
• How many are currently GA
supervisors?
• How many are Higher Education
graduate faculty?
 Chapter 1: Develop Goals

• Identified inconsistencies regarding

quality of our peers’ assistantship
experiences.
• Recognized that all Master’s students
are required to have an assistantship
to complete their degree.
• Realized there was no accountability for
learning outcomes of assistantship
experience.
• Realized there was no method to collect
feedback about students’
 Let's Do This

• Began discussing ideas in Fall ‘07.

• Spring ‘08: Program Evaluation and
Assessment Course
• Resources – CHECK.
• Motivation – CHECK.
• We might just be grad students, but
we can do this!
• We can proceed to the next step.
 Chapter 1 Discussion

• How do you decide to do an

assessment?
• What motivates you to move forward
on that assessment?
• What concerns are there regarding
time and resources?
 Chapter 2:
Determine Outcomes

• What information are we going to

collect?
• How do we construct our instrument?
• Now what? What will we do with this
data?
• Set Objectives
GAS = Student Affairs Graduate Assistant Surv
 The SAGAS Purpose

This assessment is designed to collect



information about the general

experience of student affairs graduate
assistants at Iowa State University. The
researchers hope to capture a snapshot
of the quality of these assistants' work
environments and whether their
learning outcomes are being met within
their assistantships. This information
will provide insight into the learning and
professional development experiences
for graduate assistants.
 The SAGAS Objectives

1.To understand the experience of current

student affairs graduate assistants in
their work environments.

2.To reveal strengths and weaknesses within

the current assistantship program in
terms of the expectations set forth in the
Supervisor’s Manual.

3.To make recommendations to the

Department of Educational Leadership
and Policy Studies of how to improve the
assistantship experience in terms of its
 The SAGAS Objectives

4.To make recommendations to the Division of

Student Affairs regarding ways
supervisors of graduate assistants can
improve the learning and professional
experience of graduate assistants with
whom they work.

5.To make recommendations to campus

professional staffs regarding how they
can improve work relations with graduate
assistants.
 Nuts and Bolts:
Small Group Case Study
 Based on what we’ve shared so far:
• What challenges would you face
conducting this survey?
• Could such a survey be done on your
campus?
• What would you ask? How do you
measure the “experience of current
student affairs graduate assistants
in their work environments?”
• How would you construct this study?
 What? vs. Why?

• Select outcomes that will drive the

process
• Set yourself up to be able to use the
information from your assessment
in an effective way
• Consideration for stakeholders
(department, supervisors, other
professionals, students)
 Chapter 3: Moving Ahead
(Challenge and Support)

• Challenges
– Time commitment
– IRB approval
– Response rate
– Politics
• Resources
– Support of our own assistantship
supervisors
– Support of our course instructor
– Support from cohort members
– Support from graduate department
– Intrinsic and cooperative motivation
 Our Plan

• Set flexible timeline

• SurveyMonkey
• Focus groups
• Utilize supervisor’s manual
• Informal feedback from colleagues
 Our Actual Survey

• Assistantship preparation/orientation
• Workload flexibility
• Feedback and learning opportunities
• Assistantship learning outcomes
• Workspace and resources
• Relationship with supervisor
• Work environment and colleague
interactions
• Contact with students
• Overall experience
• Likert-scale items and open responses in
each category
 Discussion Questions

• What differences were there between

your group’s ideas and our study?
• How did the roles of your group
members affect what kinds of
questions you came up with?
Assistantship Relationship with supervisor
preparation/orientation Work environment and colleague
Workload flexibility interactions
Feedback and learning Contact with students
opportunities Overall experience
Assistantship learning outcomes
Workspace and resources
 Collecting the Data

• Determine sample (for us:

everybody)
• Set up schedule for focus groups
• Distribute survey, survey reminders
• Waited. Boy, that was tough.
 Focus Groups, or not...

• Only 3 people offered to participate

in focus groups
• Schedules did not allow all 3 to
attend same group
• What do you think happened?
• What do we do now?
 Chapter 4:
Reviewing the Data

• Response rate: 33/61 (54%)

• What did they say?

 A LOT.
 Results: Balance

• 81% (n=26) felt that they maintained

a balance between their
assistantships and their other life
activities.

• 84% of respondents (n=27) do feel

that their supervisors appreciate
the time they dedicate to their
assistantship work.
 Results: Preparation

• 90% (n=29) reported that they did

understand the expectations set forth
in their job description.

• 41% (n=13) disagreed or strongly

disagreed that they received
adequate orientation when they
began their assistantships.

• 47% (n=15) felt they were not prepared

on the first day of work.
 Results:
Supervisor Relations

• 94% (n=29) agreed that their

supervisors respect them as “both
a person and a professional in
training.”

• 87% (n=27) agreed that their

supervisors respect them as “both
a student and a colleague.”
 Results:
Supervisor Relations
73% (n=24): “I feel comfortable talking to my


supervisor about concerns I have regarding the

workplace environment, or other professional
concerns.”

• My supervisor appreciates the time I dedicate to

my assistantship.
• My supervisor respects me both as a person
and as a professional in training.
• My supervisor encourages me to express my
opinions.
• The other professional staff members create a
working environment in which I can
comfortably and productively work (n=23).
• My supervisor has supported my job search
 Results: Feedback
• 56% (n=18) of respondents said they did
not regularly receive critical feedback
from their supervisors.
 Results:
Other Items of Interest

• 84% (n=26) reported that the

amount of student interaction they
have meets the expectations they
had when entering the
assistantship.
• 29% of respondents (n=9) felt they
were not prepared to assist
students who were dealing with
crisis situations.
• Concern about personal time.
 Results:
Overall Experience
 Discussion Questions

• What do you do with your results?

• How do you determine which results
to respond to?
• How do you hold the assessment
accountable? (How do you prevent
shelving?)
 Writing (and Rewriting)
The Report

• Format
• Language Concerns
– “only”
– “surprisingly,” “generally”
– “of concern”
– “critical”
• Recommendations…
 Recommendations ‐ Before
(We know what’'s best!)

1.Develop orientation for assistantship

supervisors.
2.Call for supervisor’s written evaluations
every two months instead of every
semester.
3.Create module for regular feedback on
assistants’ experiences.
4.Provide consistent professional
development workshops for all
student affairs graduate assistants.
5.Establish consistent policy for sick
leave, vacation time, and comp time.
 Recommendations ‐ After
(Here are some ideas...)
1. Investigate efficient and consistent methods for the
ELPS Department to communicate with
assistantship supervisors.
2. Consider what expectations the ELPS Department has
of assistantship supervisors and how the
supervisors are prepared to meet them.
3. Establish a consistent process for regularly collecting
supervisor’s written evaluations of their assistants.
4. *Create module for graduate assistants to regularly
assess their experiences in their assistantships.
5. Consider how the ELPS Department can organize
consistent professional development workshops for
all student affairs graduate assistants.
6. *Establish consistent policy for sick leave, vacation
time, and comp time.
 Chapter 5: Taking Action

• Presented results to classmates

• Prepared report for department
• Shared report with all participants
• Personal time policy committee
– Conversations about student vs.
employee
– Considerations for illness, deaths in
family, attending conferences, etc.
 What's Happening Now

• Department is using our study

– Our results discussed at departmental
meetings
– Assistantship self-assessment already
taking place
– Other changes being discussed
• We’re leaving
• Future uncertain
• Personal time (sick/vacation leave)
policy
 Open Discussion:
Thoughts or Questions?

• Assessment
• Student Affairs Graduate
Assistantships
• Our Study
• Political Challenges on Campuses
 THANK YOU!

• Please sign up if you’d like to be

emailed our powerpoint and report
of our study.
• Please feel free to contact us with
any follow-up thoughts or
questions!


Matt Skoy – mskoy@iastate.edu

Zack Ford – zacharyford@gmail.com