Pedagogical Approach to Developing the Hiring Practices of Higher Education Administrators

Conceptualization: Identify what they learned from the experience Active Experimentation: Based on what they've learned, propose modified process Concrete Experience: Developing and running search process GRADUATES Supervision Course UNDERGRADUATES Foundations Course Reflective Observation: Receive feedback from search committee Abstract Conceptualization: Identify what they learned from the experience Active Experimentation: Based on what they've learned, modify resume and cover letter Concrete Experience: Developing resume and cover letterConceptualization: Identify what they learned from the experience Active Experimentation: Based on what they've learned, modify resume and cover letter Concrete Experience: Developing resume and cover letter 73 Tolman and Calhoun: Pedagogical Approach to Developing the Hiring Practices of Higher Published by Digital Commons@Georgia Southern, 2019 Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs 74 end of the year banquets, etc. The timeline for the mock interview process is mid-February through late April (Table 1) Table 1. Timeline for mock interview process. Graduate Students Undergraduate Students Week 1 Developing the job description Resume and cover letter writing Week 2 Developing recruitment & selection strategy Peer review of resume/cover letter Week 3 Developing rubric for screening resumes Formal application to position Week 4 Resume Screening Week 5 Resume Screening Week 6 Developing Phone Interview Questions Week 7 Phone Interviews Phone Interviews Week 8 Developing on-campus interview questions Week 9 “On-campus Interviews” “On-campus Interviews” Week 10 Call each candidate to offer feedback Receive and give feedback Week 11 Feedback and discussion on process Management and Supervision course (graduate students) This experience afforded graduate students the opportunity to chair a search committee from start to finish. This began in the recruitment stage and concluded by offering the position to a candidate. This professional development provided intentional training to imminent student affairs professionals in an area that is often overlooked and assumed that professionals have competency in (despite not receiving formal training). Developing job description. The graduate students are tasked with developing a job description for a fictitious entry level student affairs position. Prior to doing this, they examine existing job postings on higheredjobs.com. This leads to the conversation of best practices of what should be included and excluded in job descriptions and job postings. The class collectively develops the job description to be used/advertised to the undergraduate students. Creating marketing/recruitment strategy. Students are challenged to develop a 74 Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs, Vol. 35 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5 https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/gcpa/vol35/iss1/5 DOI: 10.20429/gcpa.2019.350105 Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs 75 marketing and recruitment strategy, which includes where the position will be posted, how they will ensure to recruit diverse and well qualified candidates, and the timeline for the search process. Resume Screening. Students discuss the best practices for screening resumes and develop a rubric for screening. Students then collect the resumes, screen them, and note feedback on each resume to share with candidates. Interviews. The graduate students schedule and conduct phone interviews and in-person interviews with all of the undergraduate students. Additionally, graduate students develop an interview itinerary for the “on-campus interview.” Throughout this process, the graduate students note feedback on how well the candidates interviewed, which is shared with the undergraduate students at the end of the process (for their professional development). Candidate Follow-up. At the conclusion of interviewing (phone and in-person) the undergraduate students, the graduate students speak with each candidate to update them on the search process, share the decision (negotiating a job offer to one candidate, while letting others know they had not been selected), and provide feedback on their resume, phone interview, and in-person interview. Feedback. The graduate students are provided direct feedback (anonymous evaluation forms) from the undergraduate students who shared their experiences/perceptions of being interviewed. This feedback includes how comfortable the candidate was made to feel, their opportunity to express their ability to do the job based on questions asked, attentiveness of the interviewers, etc. Additionally, the course instructor observes the in-person interviews and provides additional feedback. Foundation of Higher Education Leadership course (undergraduate students) The timing of this project for the undergraduate students was ideal, as the majority of them in the class were preparing to submit their applications and interview for both admission into graduate school and graduate/professional positions in student affairs. Resume and Cover Letter. Students explore the best practices of developing their resume/cover letter and learn how to tailor it to applying for positions in student affairs. As they develop their materials, they are strongly encouraged to utilize the Office of Career Services and seek advice from current student affairs professionals. In-class activity includes peer review of resumes and cover letters. Students use their finalized documents to apply for the mock position. Class discussion includes comparing their 75 Tolman and Calhoun: Pedagogical Approach to Developing the Hiring Practices of Higher Published by Digital Commons@Georgia Southern, 2019 Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs 76 current resume to job positions/descriptions of the positions they would like to hold once they graduate from their Master’s program. This facilitates the conversation of creating a professional development plan for each student to intentionally gain the experiences during their graduate program that will lead to them successfully positioning themselves for the role they would like to hold after graduate school. Phone and in-person interviews. Students are phone interviewed and “brought to campus” for an in-person interview by graduate students in the Management and Supervision course. These interviews are formal and parallel the experience they will have when applying for positions in the future. This includes professional dress for the on-campus interview and follow-up communication with the search committee. Feedback for Search Committee. The undergraduate students are asked to complete an evaluation to give the graduate students feedback about how it felt to be a candidate in their search process. This is done for both the phone and on-campus interview. Outcome of Course Integration and Lessons Learned True to the theory of experiential learning (Kolb, 1984), this hands-on approach enabled both the undergraduate and graduate students to learn through experiencing the hiring process. The undergraduate students were able to gain practical experience and confidence in their ability to interview for student affairs positions. The graduate students gained not only the experience of chairing a search committee from start to finish, but had the opportunity to learn best practices of how to effectively hire staff. This was a meaningful process that extended beyond the typical medium of a textbook and lecture. Students were able to experience firsthand the hiring process, which will realistically parallel their imminent experiences as they apply for positions (undergraduates) and are tasked with serving on search committees (graduate students). Like most processes, this course integration was one of trial and error. To further strengthen this course integration and hiring process activity, there is room for improvement. If possible, it would be greatly beneficial for the graduate students to be involved with an actual search process in addition to the mock process. Due to the size of the class (typically 20+), it is not realistic for them to be intimately involved with the search process and serve on the committee. Alternatively, it would be beneficial for them to attend the presentation of the candidates to the campus (if there is one) and meeting with the chair of the search committee. In meeting with the chair of the search committee, the 76 Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs, Vol. 35 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5 https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/gcpa/vol35/iss1/5 DOI: 10.20429/gcpa.2019.350105 Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs 77 graduate students could (independently of the search committee) establish a hiring timeline, develop a rubric and screen candidate resumes (blind review), create interview questions, and determine the on-campus itinerary. This would ideally be done in parallel with an actual search process, which would allow the chair of the search committee to compare and contrast their decisions with how the graduate students would have done it (i.e. compare/contrast who the graduate students would have phone interviewed with who was actually selected by the search committee). It would also be ideal to have more faculty members and seasoned higher education administrators observe this process and provide feedback to the students. This could include review of their developed materials (i.e. rubric, timeline, interview questions, etc.), being on the phone interviews, and attending the in-person interview. In doing so, this will give students even more constructive feedback. Conclusion and Recommendations As faculty develop the next generation of scholar practitioners to take the reins of our profession, it is critical to provide graduate students with the academic and theoretical scaffolding needed to meet the ever-changing needs of the contemporary college student. Supporting this belief, Davenport (2016) stresses that higher education administrators ha