EXTERNAL REVIEW TEAM
REPORT
University of Louisville ~ Office of Student Activities
January 2012
Respectfully submitted by:
Mr. Don Stansberry & Dr. Regina Young Hyatt
OVERVIEW
A review of the Office of Student Activities & Student Activities Center (SASAC) at the
University of Louisville was requested by Mr. Tim Moore, Director of Student Activities
as part of the office’s ongoing efforts related to strategic planning and assessment.
Through meetings with students and staff as well as a thorough review of materials
provided to the team, the report that follows is a comprehensive review of the Student
Activities/SAC operation. This review is grounded in the standards and principles from
Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS). Specific CAS
functional areas considered in this review included the Campus Activities Program
(CAP), Fraternity & Sorority Life, College Union, and Commuter & Off-Campus Living.
The charges given to this team were as follows:
 Determine the effectiveness and efficiency of resource management including
facilities and use of space
 Evaluate the organizational functions to maximize the impact on the campus
community
 Determine the Office of Student Activities support of the Division of Student
Affairs mission and values
 Evaluate SASAC’s role in student learning and development
 Recommend areas of improvement and future growth.
The review team found all members of the staff and student body with whom we
interacted to be extraordinarily helpful and willing to participate in this process. Each
person exhibited a genuine interest in providing information that might be helpful in
making the Office of Student Activities more effective in its role on campus. The
SASAC staff was very interested in how this process might help them to become better.
We very much appreciated the candor and thoughtfulness by all participants exhibited.
The materials provided to the team were thorough as well and provided a great deal of
insight into the process.
The report found below will include for each component within CAS the following: (1) a
summary of the feedback and comments received on that particular guideline/standard;
(2) a statement of the guideline/standard and best practices associated with it; (3) the
1
external review team’s recommendations related to that standard. It should be noted
that the best practices cited are those with which the team is most familiar and for some
of the University of Louisville’s peer institutions. Clearly, there is not a “one size fits all”
notion to the best practices. What works at one campus works there because of the
campus culture, history, philosophy, and mission.
MISSION
Observations:
The Office of Student Activities has a mission statement but it was not well
articulated by any of the participants. The mission statement in and of itself is fairly
comprehensive but does not seem to be integrated into the overall actions of the office
and does not appear to be utilized as a context that informs the actions of the office.
We did not see much evidence of the mission statement being used on print materials
or in the office itself.
Best Practices/Standards:
The Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS) offers
extensive information for the establishment and practice of mission statements stating,
“The CAP must complement the institution’s academic programs…enhance the overall
educational experiences…in social cultural, multicultural, intellectual, recreational,
community service, and campus governance programs.” Additionally, these “should be
planned and implemented collaboratively by students, professional staff, and faculty”
and they should “reinforce accurate images of the institution.” Finally, “the CAP must
incorporate student learning and student development in its mission” and “must provide
opportunities for students to participate in co-curricular activities, participate in student
governance, advocate for their organizations and interests, develop leadership abilities,
develop healthy interpersonal relationships, use leisure time purposefully, develop
ethical decision-making skills, and advocate for student organizations and interests”
(Campus Activities Programs Standards and Guidelines, 12/11/2006, Council for the
Advancement of Standards in Higher Education).
The work of departmental mission statement generation is usually done in
conjunction with the overall strategic planning of the Division of Student Affairs. As the
Division continues to develop its 2020 plan, the SASAC staff should engage in a
mission review. This process should include staff and students. Processes for mission
statement review and revision could be facilitated in part by processes articulated in
Peter Senge’s “The Fifth Discipline Field book”. This provides a framework for how to
develop a shared vision and mission. Best practices would indicate a regular review of
the departmental mission statement and should be part of an annual assessment review
done by the area.
Recommendations:
a. The Office of Student Activities should work to incorporate and build upon the
University’s mission and the Division of Student Affairs mission and plan. This
2
b.
c.
d.
e.
might begin with focus groups of Louisville administrators, faculty, staff, and
students to read current interpretations of the university’s and division’s mission.
The CAS Self-Assessment Guide should be used to measure the current mission
statement as well to determine how successful the office is with its work and,
given the measures within the guide, make any changes to the mission
statement based on the University’s, Division’s, and Dean of Students’ mission
statements.
In order to incorporate the mission of the office fully into its work and into the
lives of the students it serves, the Office of Student Activities should distill its
mission statement to its broadest functions/purposes.
The office should also examine mission statements from its peer institutions to
determine how those offices employ and incorporate their values and functions
into the statement.
As the staff establishes its goals and objectives for fulfilling its mission annually, it
should be incorporating a timetable for measurements of the progress for
meeting those goals and objectives.
PROGRAM
Observations:
The Office of Student Activities is committed to “making the out-of-class
experience a total part of the educational process… and its programs promote a sense
of community and loyalty to the university while serving as a place for social, intellectual
and developmental growth for students”. This program goal is articulated as part of the
SASAC mission statement but it does not appear to be always well executed in part
because of the challenges related to the mission of the office and lack of context to the
overall institution and to the dearth of assessment conducted and utilized. Additionally,
there seems to be a reliance on the “tried and true.” Attendance and anecdotes are
used to measure success. There does not seem to be a commitment to re-think
approaches to problems as indicated by a somewhat defeatist attitude in regard to the
film program and associated costs, the inability to reach further across the campus
population including outside the SAC and Red Barn, and both long-range and shortterm planning. Exacerbating the situation is the lack of learning outcomes that can be
associated through and achieved by structured programs and services. This was also
manifested in that students are disconnected from the process of program planning;
students did not indicate a strong ownership of creating, planning, implementing, and
evaluating programs and activities. Students also expressed an unawareness of their
“power” to change the programs/processes related to their events.
There does not appear to be any intentional curriculum or program directing the
Office of Student Activities programs (registered student organizations, SAB, SAC
Student Staff, and Fraternity/Sorority Life). In the absence of an intentional curriculum,
there are limits to the student learning and the assessment of student learning that can
occur within these units.
Best Practices/Standards:
In this area, CAS states that, “the formal education of students consists of the
curriculum and the co-curriculum, and must promote student learning and development
3
that is purposeful and holistic. The Campus Activity Program (CAP) must identify
relevant and desirable student learning and development outcomes and provide
programs and services that encourage the achievement of these outcomes.” CAS
further outlines a variety of outcomes ranging from intellectual growth and clarified
values to spiritual awareness and the achievement of personal and educational goals.
The Self-Assessment Guide from CAS allows CAPs to evaluate their work. CAS
establishes the following learning outcomes for the Campus Activity Program:
leadership development, meaningful interpersonal relationships, collaboration, social
responsibility, effective communication, enhanced self-esteem, realistic self-appraisal,
clarified values, satisfying and production lifestyles, appreciating diversity,
independence, intellectual growth, personal and educational goals, career choices,
healthy behavior, and spiritual awareness (Campus Activities Programs Standards and
Guidelines, 12/11/2006, Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher
Education).
Program development speaks directly to the department’s support of student
learning and this is manifested through student learning outcomes. Many resources are
available now to assist departments in developing student learning outcomes. NASPA
and ACPA offer specific programs for staff members doing this work. Additionally, CAS
offers a partner resource to the self-assessment guide specifically geared to the
development of learning outcomes. The “Framework for Assessing Learning and
Development Outcomes” comes in book and CD form. This step by step guide can be
extraordinarily helpful.
One interesting permutation on structuring an activities board comes from the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The Carolina Union Activities Board is a
student-led organization that uses a portion of the Student Activities Fee
($19.00/student/semester), constitutionally funded (at 33% of the fee) through the
Student Code, to create a diverse range of entertaining, cultural and educational
programming for the student body. The organization, comprised of several committees
of student volunteers, seeks input from peers via verbal and written feedback which is
then used to plan programs to meet the needs of the student body. Each year, the
Union President assesses campus interests and needs then forms committees with
volunteers who can be responsive to those interests and needs through programming.
There are no established or “fixed” committees required in their mission. The focus of
the committees varies based on the needs of the community, leadership of the
volunteers, and the overall interests of the committee. The Board and the committees
strive each year to collaborate with other organizations and departments across campus
to fulfill the mission of the Board and to successfully meet the needs of the student
body. In every instance, programs are discussed, reviewed, improved and approved by
the committee and the Board. Program evaluation includes attendance, collaborative
opportunities, faculty participation, diversity, and overall value of social, educational and
cultural experience. This is just one of many models that could be considered.
Recommendations:
a. The Office of Student Activities/SAC needs to step back and take a fresh look at
its programs. Building on the recommendations in the Mission section (above),
utilizing a more direct and institutionally-based mission statement and
appropriate student development and learning outcomes will permit the office to
4
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
assess how well its programs are meeting the mission and the needs of its
student population.
SASAC should profile other campus and community agencies that offer
programs and services to determine allies (Housing and the Residence Hall
Association) as well as competition (downtown venues including the arena), and
then seek out definitive action plans to work with or around those agencies as
appropriate.
SASAC should conduct a deliberate evaluation (utilizing a professional
assessment team) to reach far and wide across the campus (beyond what they
termed, “the usual suspects”).
SASAC should ask itself, on a program-by-program basis, what is the value of
each program? For example, does the current film series work? Who is
attending these events? What kinds of movies do students want to see? Films
could be a great, fairly low-cost weekend and evening program but the staff
member who is involved has created an environment where there can be no
change in the series. Our recommendation is either to stop doing films or
reconsider the current position about using a first-run film company.
SASAC must work to ensure that there are viable learning opportunities for
students, both those actively involved in the creation, planning, implementation,
and evaluation of such programs – whether in SGA, Fraternity & Sorority Life,
SAB, or student organizations – and those on the receiving end of the programs
as members of those organizations or the broader Louisville student community.
With each program and service idea, the Office of Student Activities must look to
its student colleagues and ask, “What is gained for our campus with this program
(service)?”, “In what ways are you going to be able to further your understanding
of
through your work on this program (service)?”, and “What can you gain by
your presentation of this program and/or developing this service?”
Every program and service should be thoroughly evaluated: participants should
be asked to rate their experience, the sponsoring agency should be asked to rate
their experience and any other agencies that worked with the sponsoring agency
(Campus Safety, for example) should be asked to rate their experience.
All SASAC programs (RSO’s, SAB, Fraternities/Sororities) should develop a
curriculum, just like a class, of what is to be achieved and learned over the
course of 6 months to 1 year’s time. Focus and resources then need to be
directed towards these initiatives that fall into this designed and purposeful
curriculum. This could include certain educational programming for all members,
certain training components for specialized groups like officers, new members, or
certain gender/cultural groups, healthy social opportunities designed to enhance
positive interactions among members in the community, a staff sponsored yearly
community service initiative, skills set development options, rewards and
recognition events, and more. These things should not be left up to the student
organizations themselves or the councils to solely be responsible for the creation
of them. The office needs to take a more proactive planning and educational
role.
LEADERSHIP
5
Observations:
The review team noted the presence of many staff members with a great deal of
seniority on campus. Their historical perspective can provide a great deal of value for
the team moving forward however, it was also observed that some of the staff who have
a great deal of longevity express unwillingness to consider new or alternative
approaches.
Graduate assistants provide a great deal of individual leadership for advising
roles with students as well as program planning and implementation.
Best Practices/Standards:
For leadership, CAS states that “CAP leaders at various levels must be selected
on the basis of formal education and training, relevant work experience, personal skills
and competencies, relevant professional credentials, as well as potential for promoting
learning and development in students, applying effective practices to educational
processes, and enhancing institutional effectiveness.” Additionally, CAP leaders should
actively seek the ways and means to manage their department, model appropriate
behavior, address issues and concerns, offer a broad range of experiential
opportunities, and be both proactive and responsive.
Recommendations:
a. Every opportunity for engagement in professional associations and conferences
should be seized for each of the full-time staff members of the Office of Student
Activities/SAC. Professional development plans should be developed for each
staff member and staff should be expected to share information about what they
have learned through their professional development opportunities with others.
b. Additional site visits to benchmark institutions should be utilized and, when such
visits are not feasible due to costs and time, staff members should research their
counterparts in terms of staff and websites.
c. As part of the institution’s performance expectations, review, and work plans for
these employees (employee evaluations, annually or bi-annually), consideration
should be given to the development of a resource library and recommended
readings for the employees.
d. Based upon the review of the current level of staffing within the SASAC, the
reviewers suggest the adding of additional staff because current levels are not at
an appropriate level for the number of students at the institution nor scope of
programs. The Division of Student Affairs should review of peer institutions,
determine the appropriate size of the staff, the functions of the staff, the
qualifications necessary for the staff, and the appropriate salaries for this staff.
e. As vacancies occur in this office, the Division of Student Affairs/Dean of Students
office must commit to hiring professional staff members with appropriate
academic credentials and experience levels as indicated in job descriptions.
f. Training program should be developed for graduate assistants that clearly outline
tasks and duties. Grads should be brought in during the summer to provide time
for training and planning. Moving GA positions to 12 months would not greatly
increase the financial burden on the department but would greatly increase the
6
opportunity for training and development of this important part of the staff.
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Observations:
A great deal of positive energy has built up due to the leadership provided by the
Director of Student Activities. There was general consensus that his presence had
ushered in a positive time of change and that he was largely viewed as being someone
who could help move the organization forward. The Director has good rapport with staff
and students alike. There does exist some confusion about where the office is moving
and how the personnel will be managed in any new organizational structure. Relating
back to the previous section, the presence of seasoned staff creates both a challenge
and opportunity. There is some reluctance in their part to embrace the vision that the
Director has set forward and it appears that no new resources have been identified to
help that vision move forward (either fiscal or human) so the staff is left to figure out how
to change without adding people or money to the mix.
Best Practices/Standards:
From CAS, we know that “CAPs must be structured purposefully and managed
effectively to achieve stated goals. Evidence of appropriate structure must include
current and accessible policies and procedures, written performance expectations for all
employees, functional workflow graphics or organizational charts, and clearly stated
delivery expectations.”
It is interesting to note that CAS also states that the CAP may be organized as
an autonomous unit or may be organized in the same unit as the campus union or other
programming units. In addition to its standards and guidelines for Campus Activities
Programs, CAS has established standards and guidelines for the College Union (CU)
which, among other practices, states that “the primary goals of the CU must be to
maintain facilities, provide services, and promote programs that are responsive to
student developmental needs and to the physical, social, recreational, and continuing
education needs of the campus community.” This demonstrates the strong connection
of the building (student center) and the programs (student activities) in a holistic
approach to student development and student learning as well as fulfillment of mission,
accomplishment of vision, and establishment of values. The team fully appreciates and
understands that the Union model does not necessarily work on every campus and that
the Union model has many different permutations.
Recommendations:
a. Consideration should be given to changing the name of the Office of Student
Activities. The office has a far greater purpose/purview than activities and the
name should reflect that. Other options could include: Cardinal Union, Student
Involvement, Student Engagement and Leadership, Student Development (feel
free to insert Office of, Center for, or any other title). Then a new marketing
scheme could be developed to launch the new office name and hopefully
expanded purpose.
b. The Leadership & Service functional area which currently reports to the Dean of
Students appears to have a great deal of opportunity for connection with the
7
SASAC. The SASAC team needs to collaborate and partner with the Leadership
& Service functional area to enhance program offerings to the student
community.
HUMAN RESOURCES
Observations:
The Student Activities staff is likeable, friendly, and demonstrates a desire to
work well with one another. Many members of the team have worked with one another
for a long time and there appears to be a genuine amount of care and concern for one
another. The staff is visibly not diverse.
Multiple references to staffing deficiencies complement another oft mentioned
concern of staff longevity. There were frequent references to need for more staffing and
the review team agrees that additional professional or graduate staff would help to
achieve some of the longer reaching goals of the unit.
The Fraternity & Sorority Life students only see Joni as one person so they think
F/S Life only has one person advising/assisting them. No Greek Life community on any
campus could survive, let alone thrive, with only one person assisting them, but that is
not to be confused with one full-time paid staff person. Greek Life requires an army of
volunteers including in the ranks university colleagues, alumni volunteers, community
members, student leaders, and even parents. The male fraternity students repeatedly
indicated they did not believe they were getting the attention they needed or deserved
from the full time staff member.
There is a sense of team and camaraderie among the professional full time staff.
There is a sense of team and camaraderie among the Graduate Assistants. There is a
reason why these two groups appear separately in two sentences in this report; the
observation of our team is of a large chasm between these two groups which urgently
needs to be bridged. The GA’s likely have the skills required to accomplish many of the
desired outcomes of this program should they be utilized, trained, and supervised
appropriately. The Graduate Assistants are clearly the most under-utilized resource in
this entire department. Additional adjectives could include underutilized, under-trained,
under appreciated, and under-welcomed. None of the GA’s interviewed could provide
any proof of any formal training or preparation for their job responsibilities. There is a
significant disconnect between GA’s and professional staff in several cases. This
disconnects lies primarily in the perceived lack of professional development and
mentoring that comes from the current supervisors of the grads (generally across
areas).
There is a fundamental conflict at play in the Office of Student Activities. The
staff views themselves as providers of service to students versus empowering students
to plan, develop and govern themselves. There is very little training that happens for
student leaders to understand their role as partners in the student life arena. The staff
generates and manages almost all of the programs. Where do students fit into that
picture? Are they simply the customers? Students should be developed in such as
way so that they have ownership over these programs and services. This issue cannot
be overemphasized because this is a philosophical shift that will be a challenge for
some members of the SASAC team to make. The reviewers are advocating for a model
8
where the professional staff see themselves as “advisors” and “teachers” and that their
styles adjust based upon the needs of the students and/or groups they are working with.
The one exception to this happens in Fraternity & Sorority Life where the students are
the only ones planning and implementing programs and activities. The office has very
little role there currently which is an area of opportunity.
Best Practices/Standards:
Through CAS, the CAP’s human resources “must be staff adequately by
individuals qualified to accomplish its missions and goals. Within established guidelines
of the institution, the CAP must establish procedures for staff selection, training, and
evaluation; set expectations for supervision; and provide appropriate professional
development opportunities. The program must strive to improve the professional
competence and skills of all personnel it employs.
Joint ventures in staff development should be encouraged by colleagues in allied
programs such as recreational sports, residence hall programming, programming for
students of traditionally under-represented groups and international students,
regardless of whether they are administratively connected with campus activity
programs. Students should be trained in leadership concepts and skills, organizational
development, ethical behavior, and other skill training particular to distinctive
programming requirements, such as contracting for entertainment. Training should
emphasize mutual sensitivity, recognizing diverse and special student or community
population needs. Each of these areas of emphasis could be the foundation of a
curriculum that is used across programs for RSO’s, SAB, SGA, Fraternities/Sororities,
etc. This curriculum should be developed in a way that addresses the wide range of
student leadership abilities and potential, from those students who are just beginning in
their leadership journey and those students who are more experienced. The key to
success in this curriculum is the intentionality involved, that these are not a disparate
set of programs and activities for students but rather a set of building blocks that are
intentional and build upon the experiences and education of those involved.
Recommendations:
a. The Office of Student Activities needs to “employ” more staff vs. pay/hire more
staff. This means they need to more strongly identify partners who can take
actions for them. This also includes the incorporation of Leadership/Organization
ambassadors who could earn valuable experience while also providing much
needed “labor” for the office. One example can be likened to Best Buy’s “Geek
Squad” referencing the decision to outsource some of their operation in order to
serve customers/students/student organizations better. Important to remember
in this approach will be training and recognition for all volunteers.
b. The SASAC staff should be tasked with finding new and creative ways to obtain
resources (both financial and human). This task is not only the job of the
Director, but rather the whole team. Are there ways to leverage existing
programs for efficiency? Is there something or someone that can be pulled from
one program/activity to service another? Are there students who have been well
trained who could take responsibility for some of the workload?
c. The SASAC staff as a whole should be considered a set of “moving parts” so to
speak. Staff should be easily able to pick up new pieces or give away pieces of
9
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
their roles to other staff or students. This requires a new way of thinking about
programs and activities so that the staff can be more adaptable to the changing
needs of the student body and in keeping with the mission and vision of the
department.
The Fraternity & Sorority Life operation will require a significant presence of
support in order to find any success. The students and alumni need to see that
all eyes are on their community both as a watch dog and as a care taker. It is the
role of the office and the staff to be more intrusive and educational with the
community.
As will be said in other sections of this report, the “human resource” component
of this department must include a paradigm shift in how work gets done in this
area. The staff needs to adopt a stronger “train the trainer” mentality to get the
students to embrace a greater load. This will provide a greater reward for the
students and the staff and will help shift the thinking about who does what.
The Graduate Assistants can and should be utilized more effectively. Part of
their effectiveness relates directly to having access to good training and
appropriate supervision.
The Director must ensure that each staff member be properly trained,
supervised, and evaluated with the goal of ensuring that the programs mission
and outcomes are achieved.
Utilize evaluation methods for staff which focus on professional growth and
development. The National Association for Campus Activities has created a tool
called the “Steps to Individual Excellence as a Campus Activities Professional”
and a companion evaluation which could be considered.
Budgeting should be re-ordered based upon programs and services with each
starting at 0 and submitting budget plans about how these programs and
services will be supported.
Each staff member should be involved and current with professional best
practices. Staff needs to be viewed as friendly, cutting edge and energetic.
Each staff member additionally must be able to have the ability and initiative to
make modifications in their work plans based upon the current needs of the
department and the staff should not rely on the Director to come up with the plan
for making it work. Each staff member should exhibit a level of leadership that
would demonstrate his or her ability to make decisions for and about those
programs and services within his/her scope of influence.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
Observations:
Identified as one of the key barriers to success by the Student Activities staff,
financial resources are of utmost importance. Funding for SASAC is generated almost
exclusively from the University’s general fund an allocated by the VPSA to the
department. Some funding for specific programs (SAB) are funded through SGA and
student fees. Funding for student organizations comes through this same channel. The
10
department does generate some income through facility use fees but those fees are
largely places back into maintenance and upkeep of the building.
Additional funding from the University general fund seems unlikely so the
department must focus on other means to generate revenue. The Division of Student
Affairs has hired a development officer and SASAC has some programs that are under
consideration. The VPSA has expressed a desire for SASAC to take on more
responsibility related to conferences which has the potential for additional revenue
generation.
Best Practices/Standards:
The CAS standards indicate adequate funding should be provided for Student
Activities so that it can fulfill its stated mission in support of the University’s goals and
objectives. Additionally, authority over funding as it relates to student activity fee dollars
should largely include students. Students and staff should work together to set priorities
for how these funds are administered and expended. Lastly all monies should be
managed with an eye toward appropriate financial stewardship and staff should
exercise the highest level of a care as it relates to all financial matters.
Funding for non-alcoholic social programming must be a budgeting priority. This
best practice is currently being met, with over 95% of all programming on campus being
non-alcoholic.
Recommendations
a. Additional funding sources must be developed if Student Activities is to expand
(and even maintain) its operations. The current student activity fees seem
minimal by reviewer’s standards. As part of the benchmarking process, data
should be gathered on what peer institutions charge students in activity fees.
More funding from student activity fees for the work of the department could be
considered for things like leadership training for student organizations, late night
& weekend programming, and equipment updates for the SAC. Outside revenue
is possible through co-sponsored events or sponsorship of current programs.
This takes human resources however and would need to be balanced with other
needs of the department.
b. Staff should have greater understanding of the department and units financial
operations. This could be accomplished through more regular interaction
between the Unit Business Manager and staff.
c. Partnering with the Divisional advancement staff member to prioritize
departmental needs is critical.
FACILITIES, TECHNOLOGY, AND EQUIPMENT
Observations:
The Office of Student Activities resides in the Student Activities Center (SAC).
The office space for the staff appears to be adequate given the size of the current staff
but would not be able to accommodate additional people. There was little to no space
for registered student organizations aside from open tables inside the office. There
were no individual offices for student organizations except for SGA and SAB. While the
11
building is called the Student Activities Center, students expressed little “ownership” of
the building in that it was seen as a service center not a place to hang out, relax, etc.
Based on institution size, it appears that the current Student Activities Center space
lacks programming space that is sufficient given the size of the student population and
number of student organizations. Other campus spaces available for use are available
at costs which are largely prohibitive to student organizations and the department.
With the construction of the new Recreation Center, the SASAC staff hopes to retain
the vacated space that could be redeployed as meeting and conference space along
with a large programming space and a resource space for student organizations.
The Graduate Assistants and the Director have a good grip on the need for SASAC
presence in social media. There was evidence of this through promotional material in
and around the office. The remaining staff seem hesitant and have not demonstrated
application of learning new ways of communicating with students through social media
or other such technology.
Best Practices/Standards:
From CAS, the standards state that “the Campus Activity Program must have
adequate, suitably located facilities, adequate technology, and equipment to support its
mission and goals efficiently and effectively. Facilities, technology, and equipment must
be evaluated regularly and be in compliance with relevant federal, state/provincial, and
local requirements to provide for access, health, safety, and security.
Best practices in this area are difficult to assess due to the unique situation and
culture of each campus and its community.
Recommendations:
a. SASAC staff needs to gain a strong understanding of what technology students
are using or are likely to use/view and then use those methods to reach students
(e.g., Facebook, Twitter, electronic sign board in dining areas or residence halls).
Knowledge of other emerging technologies should be gained by staff and utilized
in a competent manner to actively and effectively engage students.
b. There are a multitude of resources available via professional association
websites like the Association of College Unions International (ACUI), the National
Association of Campus Activities (NACA), and the Association of Fraternity
Advisors (AFA).
c. Conduct assessments of student center facility and program users/customers
d. Use program evaluations to determine the effectiveness of space/facilities used
as program venues as well as provide evaluation/feedback to staff.
e. The vacated Recreation space should be reallocated to the SAC for use by
students. Students should be actively involved in developing the space so that
they feel more ownership for the building.
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Observations:
The Office of Student Activities has a responsibility to manage its operations in a
way that reduces its legal liability and responsibility. The staff seems to generally be
12
aware of that responsibility although little evidence was presented that pointed to
appropriate practices in this area.
Several areas require attention related to the SASAC’s legal responsibility
including the following: risk management for fraternities and sororities, risk
management for general student organizations, risk management for the departmentally
sponsored activities and programs, personal liability for persons working at events (both
staff and students), hazing education/management, and insurance issues.
Best Practices/Standards:
The CAS standards indicate staff members must not only be knowledgeable
about applicable laws and regulations but must also take the necessary steps to be
certain that those involved with programs and activities are also informed of these
requirements. Staff members additionally must work to limit the exposure to liability
claims in all ways possible. Lastly, resources should be made available to the staff to
educate themselves on these issues including access to legal staff when needed.
The Fraternity & Sorority Life operation needs to work closely with U of L offices
that have direct contact with students related to those issues listed on this web page for
the Association of Fraternity Advisors at the AFA website on risk management. Risk
management education should not be left up solely to individual chapters and/or
councils, the office should be involved and offer risk management education and
training as well. There must be a zero tolerance policy for hazing, so clear that the
University will not hesitate to remove a chapter from campus if they are found
responsible for a violation of this policy.
Developing a strong working relationship with the appropriate offices (University
Counsel, Health and Safety) is a critically important practice to institute.
Recommendations
a. Written policies should be developed that articulate clear expectations regarding
risk management at student events and programs. There may be formalized
processes in place that the review team is unaware of. Minimally travel and
participation waivers should be developed and made available to student
organizations for use.
b. Staff should receive training on reducing their personal liability for programs and
services. This could be facilitated by Louisville legal staff or the Risk
Management office.
c. Staff could explore insurance options which allow the purchase of additional
insurance for student organizations or student activities with high levels of risk.
Additionally, if large scale outdoor programs are held, staff could purchase
weather insurance to cover the costs of events in case of inclement weather
which causes cancellation.
d. Workshops for student organizations around risk management and liability
should be offered on a semester basis. Organizations engaging in high risk
activities should be required to attend while general organizations can be invited
to attend.
e. There were no policies related to alcohol and drug use or risk management
available on any SASAC website aside from in the RSO handbook. These
13
policies should be made available on the department’s website and accessible to
students.
f. Risk management policies for the Fraternity & Sorority community must be
reviewed yearly at minimum. This review and education must be done regularly
to the extent that anyone in a leadership role within this community knows when
and how this education happens by memory.
EQUITY AND ACCESS
Observations:
The review team received supportive feedback generally for the access provided
by the Office of Student Activities staff. Both staff and students felt like the office was
largely welcoming to students. The office was identified through signage as being
“Veteran Friendly”.
Best Practices/Standards:
The CAS standards indicate that staff must provide services and programs in an
equitable fashion and in a way that is accessible to the campus community. Staff must
be educated and aware of diversity and be certain departmental programs and services
are not discriminatory. Additionally, staff has a responsibility to work to create balance
in student participation in programs. Lastly, because of the advances in technology,
campus activities must display sensitivity and programming for students whose main
interface with the institution is through distance learning.
Recommendations:
a. Develop visible programs that help students recognize the Office of Student
Activities as a welcoming place and environment for all students. This might
include the facilitation of a Safe Zone or Safe Space program for GLBTQ allies or
becoming a campus affiliate of the National Coalition Building Institute (NCBI).
b. SAB should engage in assessment practices that reach out to students who do
not traditionally attend its programs and activities so a better understanding of
general student interests could be understood.
c. Consider developing an alternate office hour schedule which permits staff to
have “open” access hours for students so students can drop in and receive
assistance from staff without an appointment.
d. The office is open late two or three days per week, and these additional hours
should be more effectively advertised to the campus community. Staff needs to
create a marketing campaign to educate the campus on the variety of services
and resources that are available.
e. Offer programs and activities at a variety of times and dates so that commuting
and non-traditional students might have opportunities to access the services
provided by the office.
f. Research ways in which distance learning students might benefit from
participation in student activities. Consider offering leadership workshops online
for distance learning students that will allow them to learn about leadership skills
without having to be physically present in the office.
14
CAMPUS AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS
Observations:
The program has established relations with multiple and relevant campus
individuals and agencies. Meetings with campus stakeholders were largely positive and
most viewed the office as having been good partners with their areas in the past. One
area noticeably absent from our meetings was Housing & Residence Life. We view this
relationship as critical and would expect that there are some very specific opportunities
that exist for developing partnerships and collaborative programs with this unit.
Additionally, we did not interact with any faculty during our visit. This is a noticeable
area of growth in terms of developing additional partnership with the campus
community. We also had positive interactions with the advisors to fraternities and
sororities. All seemed generally positive about their experiences with the office and
they all expressed an interest in having more opportunities to come together as a group
to discuss concerns/issues.
Kudos go out to the SAC building staff for their very strong relationships with
campus partners. There was a great deal of praise for the facilities team overall and the
campus partners we met with felt very strongly that the team, while clearly understaffed,
worked very hard to “make things happen”.
An interesting observation that came through in a couple of our campus partner
meetings was the idea that “we always have to go to them” versus the SASAC team
proactively seeking partnerships. Everyone we met with agreed that when asked, the
SASAC team would be happy to assist or be in partnership but the asking part was
always on the part of the stakeholder.
Best Practices/Standards:
Campus activities programs should encourage faculty and staff members
throughout the campus community to be involved in campus activities. Faculty
members should serve as valuable resources related to their academic disciplines,
especially as lecturers, performers, artists, and workshop facilitators. Faculty and staff
members who serve as administrative advisors may work directly with organizations in
program and leadership development and should be supported by the activities staff.
Faculty members, staff, and administrators external to the program or institution may be
important resources for activities programs. Faculty and staff members, administrators,
and students may serve together on advisory boards to provide leadership for important
initiatives.
Campus activities programs are highly visible to persons on and off campus and
may be influential in forming public opinion about the institution and creating a positive
environment for both communities. Cooperation between governmental and social
organizations and campus activities programs on matters of mutual community concern
strengthens the institution's role in the community, expands the resources available to
both communities, and provides valuable developmental opportunities for students.
Recommendations:
a. Student activities programs should encourage faculty and staff members
throughout the campus community to be involved in campus activities.
15
b. The Director and staff should invest time and energy into developing some key
faculty relationships within academic units where there could be opportunities for
partnering (i.e. theater, business (for marketing assistance), music, as
examples).
c. SASAC needs to develop and maintain effective relationships with other
departments within student affairs such as Leadership Development/Community
Service and Housing & Residence Life.
d. The Fraternity & Sorority Life program keeps a master list of all campus and
external partners including the key contacts and contact information for each
partnering group. These partnerships must be cultivated regularly and
letters/cards of gratitude and appreciation must be sent yearly to reinforce the
importance of that relationship. This information should be distributed on a
regular basis.
e. The Office of Student Activities staff must all have a “go to” list of 5-10 significant
national colleagues at U of L peer and aspirant peer institutions who serve as
resource consultants when needed. This serves as an alternative to e-mailing an
entire list-serve of professionals within an association seeking ideas and support.
f. Athletics seems to be largely overlooked as a potential partner. What
opportunities exist for co-promoting athletic events with a student activities
event? While past history partnering with athletics has been ineffective, this
relationship should continue to be worked on.
DIVERSITY
Observations:
The primary observed diversity within the SASAC staff and student team was
related to race/ethnicity. The scope of how diversity is understood and supported by the
SASAC team also seemed to be limited to be around race/ethnicity. One noticeable
exception to this is the presence of “Veteran Friendly” signage around the building and
in the SASAC office. It was unclear that SASAC saw any role for themselves around
diversity/multicultural programming and activities.
Best Practices/Standards:
CAS states that “the CAP must nurture environments where commonalities and
differences among people are recognized and honored” through education,
assessment, strategic planning, and reflection” and “Activities programs must
emphasize self-assessment and personal responsibility for improving intercultural
relations.”
There are a number of programs that address ways and means of being more
culturally aware and educated. The Safe Zone program trains allies in sexual
orientation specifically while the National Coalition Building Institute program works
across more broad-based identities. The university’s human resources department is
likely to offer sensitivity programs and activities. There are likely to be communitybased agencies that can be brought to campus to lead appropriate workshops.
Best practices include the promotion of cross organizational interactions among
student organizations and other organizations on campus. Additionally, inter-chapter
16
interactions among the fraternity and sorority chapters in the Greek Community appear
to be happening minimally.
Recommendations:
a. The staff of the Office of Student Activities should be supported to participate in
any and all programs and services that provide diversity, sensitivity, and/or other
awareness skills training.
b. Credentials indicating that SASAC staff members have successfully completed
diversity, sensitivity, and/or other awareness training programs should be
displayed.
c. Art work in the office should reflect the student body so that a student walking
into the office can recognize him/herself and made to feel welcome and familiar.
d. If they are not currently available, web sites and publications need to be made
available in formats accessible to the visually impaired.
e. The Fraternity & Sorority community should begin exploring the role of
multicultural fraternity & sororities for the campus.
f. Additional partnerships with the Diversity & Inclusion office are needed and in
particular as it relates to the advisement of multicultural student organizations.
The role of the two areas is unclear to students and the requirements (according
the student perceptions) are unclear as well.
g. Specific programming for students related to diversity education should be
offered frequently. Additional training should be implemented for the formal
student groups the office supports related to diversity and multiculturalism.
ETHICS
Observations:
The Office of Student Activities does not have a written statement of ethical
practice that was presented in the written materials or on site. We can assume that the
graduate assistants are being prepared understanding their ethical obligations related to
working with students in their coursework but this should be examined by the Director.
If this preparation is not taking place, it should be included in the recommended formal
training of all GA’s in the office.
The Fraternity & Sorority Life program seems to be the place where the presence
of ethical standards would be most visible. There does not appear to be any community
wide standards (ethical or otherwise) that have been developed or are being used in the
F/S community at U of L. There are many examples of F/S standards available through
national resources. Additionally this may serve as an outstanding community building
process for the whole F/S community which currently seems fractured by council.
There was no evidence to suggest the department was operating outside of
generally accepted ethical standards.
Best Practices/Standards:
All persons involved in the delivery of the Campus Activity Program (CAP) must
adhere to the highest principles of ethical behavior. The program must develop or adopt
and implement appropriate statements of ethical practice. The program must publish
these statements and ensure their periodic review by relevant constituencies.
17
Staff members must strive to ensure the fair, objective, and impartial treatment of
all persons with whom they deal. Staff members must not participate in nor condone
any form of harassment that demeans persons or creates an intimidating, hostile, or
offensive campus environment.
When handling institutional funds, all staff members must ensure that such funds
are managed in accordance with established and responsible accounting procedures
and the fiscal policies or processes of the institution.
Recommendations:
a. The SASAC needs to continue to create and adopt standards for ethical practice
and incorporate them into its daily work.
b. Training of new staff and continuing education of current staff must include
education and understanding of ethical conduct related appropriate relationships.
c. Training of new staff and continuing education of current staff must include
education and understanding of appropriate and acceptable use of technology.
d. Training of new staff and continuing education of current staff must include
education and understanding of fair, objective, and impartial treatment of all
persons with whom they deal and do not condone or participate in behavior that
demeans persons or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive campus
environment.
e. Consult higher education associations connected to the program’s work (ACUI,
AFA, and NACA) for examples of ethical standards and practices.
ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION
Observations:
Assessment and evaluation are clear deficiencies within the Office of Student
Activities. The Director recognizes the importance of assessment but has not made
substantive gains in formalizing an assessment program within the department. The
Director recognizes the importance of benchmarking with like institutions and has begun
to do some work in this regard. The development of an inspirational peer group would
be important for future use.
There is a lack of quantitative data related to program satisfaction. Quantitative
data can help SASAC inform its future work. Existing assessment tools (event/exit
surveys, focus groups) can be used to understand student satisfaction.
Additionally there does not appear to be any current practice of
decompression/follow up/evaluation meetings following large scale events with
operations staff or other stakeholders. Develop standardized model for evaluation of
events to be used by students and staff after the event. Use this data to inform
departmental practices the next time a similar event is to take place.
Most significantly, no assessment or evaluation practices are in place to
understand how student learning takes place within the department. Additionally
training may be required for the staff to understand how to appropriately measure
student learning in the context of both programs and activities that are taking place and
with the student staff.
18
Best Practices/Standards:
The CAS Standards indicate that regular assessment and evaluation must be
completed using both qualitative and quantitative measures. Additionally, the Division
of Student Affairs and departmental mission must be central to development of student
learning outcomes. Lastly, evaluation and assessment should be used to make
substantive changes when warranted. Data cannot simply be collected without an
appropriate use of the results.
Recommendations
a. Utilize daily building manager reports to follow up with student organizations and
student groups regarding their use of space. Support policies that hold student
organizations accountable for their use or non-use of space.
b. Consider the use of focus groups for qualitative data. An example might be to
host monthly meetings in the commuter lounge to talk with commuting students
about their experiences on campus. Small incentives could be provided for
student participation in general focus groups (lunch, $10 per student, drawings
for larger prizes).
c. Utilize national assessment instruments to supplement assessment efforts.
Student Voice and EBI both have surveys that are for fraternity/sorority life,
college unions, and campus activities. While these instruments have associated
costs, the data collected will be more credible. Additionally, they offer
benchmarking opportunities with like institutions.
d. When assessments are developed for use by departments, utilize the institutional
resources available for assessment. Is there someone in Student Affairs tasked
with assessment who could provide some training for the staff?
e. Each program area should develop intentional learning outcomes. Program
training should then be modified to support those outcomes. For example, SAB
may choose as a learning outcome “Students will be able to effectively promote
campus events through a variety of mechanisms.” Then offer specific training for
the program board at the beginning of their term in office on promotional avenues
and campus standards. Throughout the year offer feedback to the students on
their progress in this learning area.
f. The Fraternity & Sorority Life program is measuring: long term membership
numbers and trends, scholastic achievement, retention (joining to graduation),
retention (joining to initiation), chapter-sponsored programming hours
(community service, educational programming, non-alcohol social activity,
philanthropic donations). There have been some efforts to share this information
across the community. These data could be collected for other RSO’s as well
and communicated to the broader campus audience as well. As information is
gathered it should be shared with interested parties.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The review team recommends the following major points be addressed by the Office of
Student Activities in cooperation with the Dean of Students Office & Division of Student
Affairs:
19

Explore raising the student fee to create more revenue to support student
organizations and to begin to replace and update building equipment.

Policies and procedures for RSOs need to be reviewed and developed as these
groups continue to grow. Additional funding should be identified and allocated to
support RSOs.

Consistent policies and procedures should be developed for all groups
regardless of where they are advised (Cultural Center versus SASAC). There
appears to be duplication and confusion for leaders. Groups are required to
attend training sessions as part of the RSO process and as part of the Cultural
Center requirements. This duplication could be a perceived duplication but it
would be worth the effort to have SASAC staff visit with the Cultural Center staff
to find if there are ways to share information between the groups.

The growth in Fraternity/Sorority Life is positive; however, for those students not
interested in Greek Life, it can appear that the emphasis is very heavy on
fraternities and sororities and not on other leaders.

A comprehensive leadership development plan should be developed that starts
at the first year and grows each year with the leader.

As the campus changes from commuter to residential, the off campus students
need to also feel valued and recognize how they fit into the residential model.
The majority of students will still live off campus.

Assessments need to be done a regular basis to determine the needs and
program desires of students. Additionally, assessments need to be developed
with learning outcomes for programs. Attendance is only one indicator of
effectiveness.

A review of all programs and actives should be done and evaluated to determine
if they are cost effective and are still necessary. This will allow staff to let go of
some programs that are no longer meeting the goals of the Division.

While there is an online calendar available, our sense is that it is being
underutilized by students and staff. It may be helpful to do an inventory of what
has been submitted across several months to determine if there are gaps in the
current offerings that appear on the calendar.

The theater and film program is underutilized. SAB should consider showing
current films at various times including the weekends. This provides
programming at night and the weekends. The staff is reluctant to work with
Swank, however, the students are interested in showing current movies. A review
20
of the benefit of charging versus making the movies free should be discussed.
Does the cost hinder or help the program?

Partnerships need to be developed with the Housing & Residence Life staff.
There was very little evidence of partnerships and collaboration. Housing &
Residence Life could provide funding to support programming-if residents are
attending. With the emphasis on becoming residential, everyone will need to
work together.

Fraternity & Sorority Life is growing. However, there are concerns about the
staffing level and the ability to work effectively with IFC specifically. Educating
and informing students of University standards as well as awareness of national
organization standards should be a priority.

Spaces throughout campus need to be identified for programming. Students
believe they are not allowed use outside space for events. Again, this could be a
perception that is easily changed by communicating with students about outdoor
space availability.

A task force should be developed to determine how late night programming and
weekend programming can be enhanced on campus. This should also include
partnering with the Louisville area. Funding for these initiatives will be required.

Commuter programming is unclear. The space that is used by students does not
have data to support who uses it and why. Although it was crowded at times,
there is no data to indicate who is there. Perhaps this space should be located in
the SAC.

Student Awards program should get greater emphasis and is an opportunity to
partner with other units across campus to recognize student leadership.

Senior week should include sponsors from alumni and career center, also
bookstore for cap & gowns, etc. Again, while this is an existing program, more
emphasis could be placed on it to create visibility.

Training should be developed for RSO advisors.

Meeting space needs to be increased and technology available for students to
use. The SAC needs to be more than programming. It should also have space
available for studying and to handle business.

Once the Rec Center leaves, additional services need to be identified to drive
traffic to the SAC.

Students need to be involved in the decision making for programs and events.
Many decisions are staff driven. By utilizing a curricular approach to student
21
training and development, some of this perception could be alleviated. The more
students are trained on doing to work, the less need there will be for staff to be
making the decisions.

Staff need to focus on continual personal growth and development. One’s
longevity does not exclude someone from needing to keep up with current
practices and demonstrating flexibility and creativity in one’s work.
REVIEW TEAM
Mr. Don Stansberry:
Don serves as Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs at Old Dominion
University. He previously served as Dean of Students and Director of Student Activities
& Leadership at Old Dominion. Prior to joining the ODU staff, Don worked at Towson
University as Associate Director of Student Activities, Western Illinois University as
Assistant Director of Student Activities, and The Defiance College as a Resident
Director/Director of Student Activities. Don holds a Master’s Degree from Ohio
University, Education Specialist in Education Leadership degree in Higher Education
from ODU, and is currently completing his PhD. coursework
Dr. Regina Young Hyatt:
Regina serves as Dean of Students and Associate Vice President for Student
Affairs at the University of Alabama, Huntsville. She previously served as the Associate
Dean of Students at the University of South Florida and the Director of Student Life at
the University of South Florida St. Petersburg. She additionally worked at the University
of North Carolina at Charlotte, Palmer College, and Western Illinois University. Regina
holds a Doctor of Philosophy degree in Higher Education Administration from the
University of South Florida. Regina is a past chair of the Board of Directors and past
National Convention Chair for the National Association for Campus Activities (NACA).
She is currently serving on the Board of Directors of Alabama-NASPA. She has served
as a lead facilitator for LeaderShape Inc. and a campus-based trainer for the National
Coalition Building Institute.
Participants
Name
Tim Moore
Robin Sutherland
David Shaw
Joni Burke
Julie Onnembo
Albert Burton
Kenny Quisenberry
Stuart Neff
Title
Director
Business Manager
Assistant Director for Facilities
Assistant Director of Greek Life
Assistant Director for Involvement
Coordinator for Facilities and Operations
Outreach and Building Coordinator
Coordinator for Programming
Office
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
22
Kellynn Wilson
Teresa Smith
Victoria Spencer
Matthew Vogelpohl
Daphne Arnold
Holly Bradford
Joshua Hardman
Lyston Skerritt
Melissa Gross
Brian Buford
Michael Anthony
Barbara Jones
Sarah Nehring
Erika Knop
Cleminth Thomas
Kaysara Mandry
Ben Donlon
Margie Artis
Joe Scheper
Stave Standiford
Craig Harrington
Yolanda Demaree
Sean Pleasant
Cathy Phillips
Janin Tup
Christy Metzger
Alyssa Murphy
Suzanne Galbreath
NPHC Advisors
Reservations and Administrative Support
Administrative Assistant
Graduate Assistant for Student Activities Board
Graduate Assistant for Programming
Graduate Assistant for Greek Life
Graduate Assistant for RSO
Graduate Assistant for Involvement
Graduate Teaching Assistant
Director
Director
International Student and Scholar Coordinator
Student representative
Student representative
Student representative
Student representative
Student representative
Zeta Phi Beta Advisor
Pi Kappa Alpha Advisor
Sigma Pi Advisor
TKE Advisor
Delta Sigma Theta Advisor
Kappa Alpha Psi Advisor
Chi Omega Advisor
Delta Zeta
Director
Associate Director
Unit Business Manager
Glenn Gittings
Director for Special Programs
Frank Mianzo
Director of Student Affairs Technology
John Smith
Michelle Clemons
Gerome Stephens
Assistant Director, Memberships, Marketing,
Promotions, Technology, Safety
Assistant Dean of Student
Coordinator of Student Leadership
Keith Prager
Branesha Hill
Ashlea Boyer
Bradley Shacklette
Emily McGlawn
Coburne Spencer
Robert Fiske
Skylar Graudick
Elijah Wood
Student Staff
Student Staff
Student Staff
Student Staff
Student Staff
Student Staff
Student Representative
Student Representative
Outreach Chair
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
Student Activities Staff
PEACC
LGBT Services
Cultural Center
International Student Office
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Like
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Life
Greek Like
Greek Life
FYE Office
Admissions and Orientation
Vice-President for Student Affairs
Office
Vice-President for Student Affairs
Office
Vice-President for Student Affairs
Office
Intramural Office
Dean of Students Office
Civic Engagement, Leadership
and Service
Student Activities
Student Activities
Student Activities
Student Activities
Student Activities
Student Activities
Off-Campus Student Association
Off-Campus Student Association
Student Activities Board (SAB)
23
Derek Carpenter
Chris Bretzlauf
Lauren Nehus
Clarissa Mobley
Franklin Neff
Tony Ausick
Director of Programming
Director of Finance
Engaging Issues-Vice Chairs
Spirit and Traditions- Vice Chair
Film Committee-Chair
Campus Life-Chair
Student Activities Board (SAB)
Student Activities Board (SAB)
Student Activities Board (SAB)
Student Activities Board (SAB)
Student Activities Board (SAB)
24