Engaging the amygdala...

In a June 20th Chronicle of Higher Education article, Eric Hoover discusses the college admissions process in light of the fact that traditional age college applicants do not yet have fully matured pre-frontal cortex and do have highly active amygdala.

The amygdala is central to memory and processing emotional reactions; hence why emotional moments and subjects tend to be remembered more easily. It my also help explain why we have a hard time objectively considering ideas that elicit an emotional response from us or why adolescents are difficult to argue with. With a highly active amygdala, adolescents are likely to process information through their emotions, or at least attend to the emotional aspects of that information, more so than the details. Due to it's role in memory, it may make it harder for adults to transfer (encode) information that is processed as emotionally incongruous into Long Term Memory. There is also the fact that emotional responses tend to inhibit reasoning, planning, and logic, all functions of the pre-frontal cortex. In this way, the pre-frontal cortex provides mechanisms to manage emotions and impulses, although this a fairly large oversimplification.

The pre-frontal cortex is the "control and command" center of the brain, and without it at full capacity, traditional age college students experience greater difficulty with higher order functions, particularly those that require extensive and intensive concentration, metacogition, etc. when there is little emotional interest in the subject. This is where we gain our objectivity and a greater ability to process separately emotions and information.

Hoover talks about how the admissions process is overwhelming to many traditional age college students because of the higher order functions required of the many different forms, deadlines, essays, etc. in light of the emotions experienced in terms of "getting accepted" and "getting accepted to _________", etc. In essence he encourages adults and admissions counselors to help traditional age applicants chill out, reduce their emotional intensity, and develop scaffolding systems to help cope with the higher function demands, such as creating realistic plans to complete applications on time.

This is more important than that, though. The fact that traditional age college students are still developing their pre-frontal cortex has great implications for all areas of the college. Traditional aged students, in this context, have difficulty with complex systems, procedures, etc. Desk workers often seem to get confused about forms that make complete sense to us. The Resident Assistants can have greater difficulty enforcing policies that have emotional meaning to them, i.e. alcohol, drugs, visitation, etc. Faculty members may give assignments that involve content that is rather esoteric and emotionally irrelevant to students and feel disappointed at the lack of enthusiasm or effort given to the assignment. Students may not be self-aware enough or able to reason effectively enough amidst all the emotions to consider seeing a counselor or an adult for help.

In terms of behavior, student's risk taking and their desire for emotionally intense experiences often trumps their reasoning and impulse control. This impacts areas of Student Conduct, Residential Life, and faculty, who often deal with the indirect consequences of this area of student behavior. Increasingly, though, faculty are directly dealing with inappropriate student behavior in the classrooms. The science tells us our approaches should first engage the amygdala, and work with them on the emotional level. We should simultaneously provide mechanisms or experiences that support, but not exclusively rely on, the development and exercise of the pre-frontal cortex. We have become so accustomed to our own ability to reason and manage emotions, that we take it for granted. We frequently talk about students just not "getting it" referring to that cognitive gap that we sense when students reject or simply don't understand the salience of the reasoning behind our rules, expectations, decisions, etc.

Given the science, we may be the ones not getting it. If we take for granted that traditional age college students will relate to information and experiences in ways similar that we do, then that gap may be more about us not understanding them.

Reflective Engagement Model

-->

For a while now a growing number of folks have held that traditional RA programming was missing the boat in terms of facilitating actual learning. Even the best of programs often more about providing information and exposure than processing, developing meaning, and integrating new knowledge with their established knowledge, etc.

A few years ago the Res Life staff at U. Delaware began an ambitious program where they mandated residents attend both 1 on 1 interviews with resident assistants and large scale programs that were directly rooted in value-laden learning outcomes, related to privilege, oppression, critical thinking, advocacy and more. Professional staff developed highly sophisticated Learning outcomes, learning goals and pedagogical strategies for each hall and developed delivery materials, all approved by faculty, which the RA staff were required to both implement exactly as structured and score their residents according to a specific rubric evaluating residents’ developmental level.

They ran into difficulty, mainly because they adopted a highly prescriptive, highly academic, and value-based expectation upon students in a social setting where it was not expected or accepted. They broke the rules. Residence halls exist within a social framework that permits such things in classrooms, but not in residential areas.

While their approach may have been too prescriptive on a number of levels, they did make sound arguments around 5 fallacies of traditional RA programming:

· Fallacy #1: Programming is educational. We use educational very loosely and can rarely answer clearly about the specific knowledge, skills, understandings, etc. that we want students to learn from any given program.

· Fallacy #2: Residential education is best designed by Resident Assistants. Based on Astin, but misinterpreted…peers have greatest influence, but doesn’t mean they are always the most qualified to exert that influence. Hence why we spend such great effort and value on role modeling.

· Fallacy #3: Programming should be based on the students’ interests. Do students know what they do not know? If yes, would you allow students to choose what courses need to be taught for their degree?

· Fallacy #4: Programming is the most effective means of delivering education in the residence halls. When you assess programming based on content learned and not attendance statistics, fallacy #4 is apparent; when you consider all the factors inherent in learning like motivation, attention, prior knowledge, dual-coding, seductive details, social context, emotion, metacognition, memory processes, etc. it is obvious that typical RA programming remarkably ineffective and ill designed.)

· Fallacy #5: High program frequency and high program attendance equals success. (small percentage, same over again)

This leaves us with the question, how can we better facilitate learning with each resident?

There are many theories involved in learning, but the most central of all is how students construct knowledge, or what meaning they construct as they integrate their knowledge, experiences, values, beliefs, etc. This involves questioning, reflection, perspective taking and acting, and is a significant factor in identity development (something rarely addressed in our Identity Development models). What we need a cutting edge, learning centered approach that engages every resident at multiple points in their residential experience in activities that facilitate their ability to develop and integrate meaningful concepts regarding the multiple relationships, roles, and responsibilities in their life.

The goal of the Reflective Engagement Model of programming is to do just this by re-applying the value of Astin’s finding that peers exert the greatest influence on peers but within a context that is both more congruent with how learning occurs (i.e. Schema theory, Zone of Proximal Development, etc.) and with what is socially acceptable (i.e. living and learning vs. teaching and lecture) in the residence halls. It is also based on the perception that students today are arguably more expecting of and responsive to individualized attention.

The Reflective Engagement Model is tailored to specific department and institutional learning outcomes. In this case it is designed in terms of the UNLV Housing and Residential Life mission of developing self-directed individuals and learning outcomes of the UNLV Co-curricular Agenda and the General Education Outcomes of UNLV.

The following learning outcomes are designed facilitate the achievement of the “self-directed individual”, which is the developmental essence of the UNLV Housing and Residential Life mission statement. These outcomes are grounded in the theory and models surrounding schema, zone of proximal development, self-authorship (as well as others) and adapted from the Co-curricular Agenda and UNLV’s Student Expectations (general education outcomes).

· Problem Solving - Every student will identify, reflect on and analyze a problem/source of conflict from different perspectives, question their role in it, develop possible solutions and take action to resolve it.

· Self Reflection and Cognitive Integration - Every student will reflect on and integrate their experiences, values, beliefs, strengths, weaknesses, and their personal perspectives and style, and articulate themselves in terms of a unique, evolving and self directed cultural being.

· Goal Setting - Every student will identify and commit to personal goals in the areas of (a) academics, emphasizing academic skills and career exploration and development, (b) Community Involvement and Leadership, (c) Personal Wellness, and (d) Time Management

· Interpersonal Relationships - Every student will reflect on their successful and unsuccessful personal relationships with Friends Faculty and Staff, and Parents and Family, and identify aspects that make those relationships meaningful, including what they learn from and appreciate in others and what they themselves bring to their relationships.

· Multicultural Perspective Taking - Every resident will explore different perspectives on local, national, and global issues and reflect on their interrelatedness and explore issues of leadership, civic engagement, as well as environmental and social justice ethics, etc. related to them.

They are worded in terms of behaviors because it is easier to measure and we presently have no mechanisms to measure individual resident’s actual learning. But these behaviors could be triangulated with other assessments to give a very useful picture. It can even be used to implement an early warning/intervention system.

Based on these outcomes, instead of current programming requirements, RA’s conduct reflective interviews, designed and scripted by professional staff to address specific learning outcomes, with each of their residents once per month. These interviews are designed lead students to (a) reflect on concrete experiences and current student knowledge, (b) engage students in higher cognitive analysis of the experience, (c) integrate those experiences with their sense of self, (d) connect with departmental and campus resources and personnel, (e) set goals for future experiences, and (f) establish stronger more intimate relationships with student staff and other residents. These interviews are structured around a timeline that corresponds with typical student experiences throughout the year, such as academic and personal goal setting at the beginning of the semester, and problem solving during their second month, etc.

· Aug-Sept. - Self appraisal and goal setting

· Oct. - Problem solving – approach and step by step model

· Nov. - Meaningful relationships

· Dec. - Goal review and evaluation

· Jan-Feb – Self appraisal and Goal setting

· March - Current issue – multicultural perspectives

· April-May – Goal review and evaluation (a bit more in depth – end of year)

So far we have seen exceptional results, including:

· Greatly enhanced relationships with RA’s and residents – supported by EBIs, Floor Surveys, retention, etc.

· Greatly enhanced value for RA’s due to deeper intimacy and connection with residents (and in my perspective, a noticable increase in developmental growth of RA’s compared to traditional model)

· Increased student involvement – not in the sense of leadership positions per se. but involvement in more interactions with others

· Decreased behavioral issues

· Rising GPA, rate of increase seems to be outpacing rise in Overall housing and other theme floors.

· No meaningful decrease in perception of the number of programs and activities available to them

It surprises me, though, how steadfastly staff and faculty within our field cling to the traditional models of RA programming despite the current research on learning and cognition and even the research on residential programming that shows it is ineffective. Despite proclamations otherwise, too many professionals and faculty in student affairs are not experts in student learning, and until we are, we will never be able to fully realize our potential and our responsibility to truly facilitate student learning.

Irony of Ridicule

-->

Today in The Chronicle, there is a short memo from a department dean that is intended to serve as a humorous update, but actually serves another purpose.

The article subtly laments a student’s faux pas where a student includes a reminder/request for a study guide for the final exam within a condolence email following his or her professor’s unexpected surgery.

The dean included the student’s email in the memo and then informs the faculty of the department that fruit was sent to the recovering professor and adds in comedic fashion that there was no mention of a study guide.

While this does assuredly have some value as a lighthearted memo in the midst of what might not be a lighthearted time, the dean was either shortsighted or successfully illustrated the condescension many students feel in their academic relationships.

The student’s response was certainly not well written either, but of course, the dean is the authority and role model here, and thus has the greater responsibility to communicate thoughtfully between the two of them.

While there are numerous outstanding faculty, students often complain about not-so-outstanding faculty going through the motions of teaching, or skipping classes, lecturing rather than teaching, and so on and so on. They have high expectations for faculty, and many of those expectations are valid.

Students pay for a particular course, and the syllabus and verbal intentions made by the professor in the course may constitute a legal contract. At the very least, the syllabus and verbal intentions made by the professor are understood by students as promises and they plan their lives accordingly and expect a degree of professional follow-through.

When a professor is absent from a class for whatever reason and aspects of the syllabus go unfulfilled, the students are often upset and surprisingly judgmental. This is particularly so when students are expected to fulfill the expectations of the syllabus (project due dates, content, final exams, etc.) without the professor doing so. The inequity here is clear I think.

There is another aspect as well, that I believe faculty – particularly this dean – are often ignorant of. That is the fact that some students are not necessarily upset at the faculty being absent or less than engaged but rather the fact that they are not getting the quality of instruction and opportunity to learn that they are paying for.

Now there may have been more appropriate communication sent to students informing them of the situation and what impact it has on the course. There may even have been measures in place where someone was promptly able to take over the course and continue to provide at least somewhat equitable instruction and materials to the students. The dean, though, made no comment of such, and instead of acknowledging the student’s investment in performing well in the course, or the department’s responsibility to provide for the students, he or she instead attempts to ridicule the student. The dean has rather now ridiculed his or her self and the department she or he leads for showing such a degree of arrogance and condescension when it comes to the students they are there to teach.

"Wikid, dude!"

For once it feels good to be Wikid...

I remember in circa 2000 when I was living in the Middle East and I had been paying attention to my students (female, arab national University) and their online connections...email, IM, etc. I was fascinated how fast they would scan shared network drives (it was a completely networked and mobile campus). My colleague who had taken photos of my wedding had copied them to a shared drive so I could save them on my laptop (his office was across campus), and within the 4 minutes that it took me to download them, the photos had already been copied by students and shared with other students on campus! I got an IM from a student before the download was complete complimenting me on the photos! I didn't realize it then, but I was watching Web 2.0 take hold.

As I was interviewing to return to Student Affairs in the states, I began to intertwine the traditional value for community in residence halls with the online behavior of my students in the Middle East, and I began fermenting an idea of an online community for a residence hall.

I got here and everyone was talking about Facebook and MySpace... "Doh!" My inspiration and aspiration had been deflated instantly. I wonder now if these sites were blocked where I was or if I was really that oblivious... (I'd hate to say how I usually answer that...)

Now, though my inspiration has been renewed with WikiSpaces. http://www.wikispaces.com

WikiSpaces (akin to Wikipedia) allows individuals, teachers, classes, schools, clubs, study groups, etc., etc., create their own Web 2.0 environments, with multiple pages and the flexibility to customize the degree of access, from totally public (true Web 2.0) to more controlled and even private access. The more basic levels are offered for free, while the more sophisticated and option-rich levels are available for somewhat reasonable prices.

This presents the opportunity for individuals to create intensely rich interactive efforts around a shared cause. On his own WikiSpace, Will Richardson presents this WikiSpace as a prime example of the potential of online collaboration between motivated individuals. Memory Alpha

Memory Alpha was created and is constantly enhanced through the combined contributions of hundreds of Star Trek enthusiasts, resulting in a "sum greater than its parts" online phenomenon.

(Will's own Wiki, hosts many educational and technology resources and links, in addition to Wikispaces. )

I want to help create that for my students in the residence hall. With Facebook and MySpace, the center of the network is the individual...all others link to the individual and through the individual to all the other individuals linked to him/her. Even with "groups" and what not, it is more a chaos structured network. With Wikis, though, the designation of pages within a Wiki-space allows for a structure to be placed around the online environment. Instead of individuals interacting around other's individual spaces, in a Wiki, individuals interact around a single space.




This provides unique opportunities in terms of creating a shared communal space in which all of those involved can contribute to, set standards for, and interact. In terms of education and community building within Residence Halls, it allows for the creation of individual pages for individual floors and the building as a whole, in which individuals from those areas can post and create content. The possibilities of content are endless, but could include favorite quotes, upcoming events, latest personal news, floor programs, trivia, etc. It also allows for the creation of special pages for study groups and online learning, i.e WebQuests, Podcasts, etc., which few residence hall environments have taken advantage of to date. Residence hall staff can have their own private spaces as well where staff meetings could be podcasted for those who miss it, special instructions for nightly duty rounds could be maintained, etc. There is a great amount of potential for residence hall staff to utilize WikiSpaces and bring Web 2.0 to Residence Halls 1.o.