Beyond Double Secret Probation: Christians in College Student Development
by Michael Hammond
The earliest models for colleges in the United States were
not too far removed from the monastic tradition in Europe. Students lived among
their faculty members, who were viewed not only as academic scholars but as role
models for their young students. By the early twentieth century, faculty
members specialized on academic research, and colleges needed additional help
fulfilling the expectations of In Loco
Parentis, the understood role of parenting young students away from home. The
specialized field of student development—or student affairs—emerged to fill
this need, typically with house parents, or deans to tend to specific issues
for students. National student affairs associations, including the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators
(NASPA) and the American College Personnel Association (ACPA) formed out of deans of men and deans of women
associations in the early decades of the 1900s. This was during the time when
most Christian colleges were still focusing on training for ministry. Today,
these organizations, as well as ACSD, adopt a “whole person” approach to the
student experience, seeking to partner classroom curriculum with other
experiences in what has been termed the Student Learning Imperative.
Scholars of religion in the United States often tend toward
studying Christianity, especially the evangelical type that has typically been
at the center of political and cultural turning points throughout American
history. Very fine studies of political groups, religious leaders, commercial
ventures, and parachurch organizations help to interpret the ongoing story of
Christianity in America. Christian colleges have produced many of the leaders
of these organizations, and much has been written on the growth and development
of those schools.
Yet one of the most influential groups in this story,
Christian college student affairs professionals, has been largely overlooked. Last
week, on the campus of Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota, college staff
from around the country met for the annual meeting of the Association for Christians in Student Development
(ACSD). The organization’s mission is
to “to equip and challenge members to infuse their Christian faith into student
development practice and scholarship.” Workshops at the conference included:
·
“Reducing Marginalization of Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual and Same Sex Attracted Students at Christian Colleges and Universities”
·
“Is It Manly to Say You’re in Love with Jesus? A
Study of Masculinity and Spirituality”
·
“Ernest Boyer’s Legacy and Implications for the
Future of Student Development”
·
“Surviving Tragedy as a Resident Director: How
to Heal Personally, Guide Students, and Maintain Professional Focus and
Direction”
ACSD members focus on the holistic development of college
students, pairing their work outside the classroom with the learning outcomes
that are the focus of most faculty members. Most—not all—ACSD members work at
higher education institutions that are affiliated with the Council for
Christian Colleges and Universities. The organization publishes a peer-reviewed
journal, Growth, elects officers and committees, and gives annual awards for outstanding
service.
ACSD officially organized in 1980, but has its roots in
separate organizations of Christian college male and female deans that previously
formed in 1958. The 1950s represented a pivotal decade of organizing for
Neo-evangelicalism in the United States, and these associations reflected a new
focus on young people. As scholars such as Joel Carpenter and Garth Rosell have explained, Youth for Christ and similar groups were
responding to the rise of the American teenager with well-coordinated evangelistic
meetings. Christian colleges, long the home of church doctrine and denominational
politics, slowly expanded their mission to adopt an emphasis on what would become
known as the liberal arts.
After the student protests of the 1960s, colleges around the
United States moved away from the traditional model of In Loco Parentis, and emphasized an empowered student government
and organization structure. Christian colleges adopted a similar approach over
the years, and by the end of the 1970s the time had come to unify their efforts
in a national advocacy organization, ACSD. From roles as “dorm moms,” on-campus
concert promoters, events planners, and rule-enforcers, the profession
developed as a distinct academic and professional discipline. A good resource on
Christians in the profession is Student Affairs Reconsidered, edited by David S. Guthrie.
Why does ACSD matter in the story of American evangelicalism?
ACSD personnel are often most directly connected with students in residence
halls, leadership groups, and outreach work. The emphasis on scholarship in
classroom is vital for student learning. But as scholars such as James K. A. Smith and Todd Brenneman have emphasized, the intellectual aspects of faith are not always
as strong as the holistic approach on what people love and emphasize emotionally.
When campuses are faced with issues like school shootings, such as the one that
took place at CCCU member institution Seattle Pacific University, it is typically the student development personnel that take
the lead in addressing the emotional needs of students.
As traditional college age students face crisis points such
as suicidal thoughts, shifting stances on matters of politics, belief, or sexuality,
it is often the student development staffer who enters into the conversation. When
a traditionally fundamentalist or evangelical college develops its stance on dancing,
alcohol
use, issues of sexuality,
or even human origins, it may be the board of trustees, administrators, or a faculty
committee who develop the policy, but it is the student development staff who work
closest with students as they live under it.
Student development organizations provide governance
opportunities for staff and students who may not have a voice in the university
otherwise. The study of secularization and integration of faith and learning
has typically focused on scholars and leaders of institutions that have shaped
the narrative by massive policy shifts or scholarly works. Looking into student
affairs gets closer to a social history that measures change by the student experience.
Most student affairs professionals are experts on student culture and interpret
student behavior as a matter of professional responsibility. And the whole
person approach, at its best, builds a love for learning that extends beyond
the walls of the classroom. Students who foster curiosity beyond the need to
fulfill graduation requirements will be better prepared to shape their culture.
Scholars investigating the political shifts of the
evangelical movement can benefit from exploring the ways that these cultural
and political issues have been shaped by young evangelical leaders on college
campuses. ACSD brings a focus on the whole person that complements what
scholar-teachers attempt to accomplish in the classroom. As Christian colleges
adopted the liberal arts in the twentieth century, ACSD members helped shape
the thinking of students who paired scholarship with faith and emerged as leaders
of American Christianity.
Comments
"Broadening our understanding of what constitutes intellectual influence on student’s lives to include extra-curricular activities such as religious activism, Bible study, campus group membership, and student leadership opportunities raises important questions about the legitimacy of viewing the work of faculty in teaching and research as the exclusively essential intellectual work of a university. In the contemporary American environment that is again asking fundamental questions about the role of higher education in the development of democratic citizens, this distinction must be clarified. If indeed the central intellectual work of universities is carried on only in traditional venues supervised by faculty, the university must explain scholarship that suggests that student affairs staff and other non-faculty personnel participate in the overall formation of students, intellectually, spiritually, and emotionally by weaving together a “seamless coat of learning.”
See Ernest Boyer, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. (Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990); Robert G. Bringle, Richard Games, & Edward A. Malloy, Colleges and Universities as Citizens. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1999); Association of American Colleges and Universities, Greater Expectations: A New Vision for Learning as a Nation Goes to College (Washington DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2002); and Campus Compact, President’s Declaration on the Civic Responsibility of Higher Education. (Providence, RI: Campus Compact, 2000).