0:01

Welcome to the

0:01

SWACUHO Podcast. I'm your host

0:04

J.C. Stoner. This is our second

0:04

article review where we hope to

0:08

make research more accessible to

0:08

our regional housing staff. Our

0:11

first article review was episode

0:11

three, with Dr. Craig Seager at

0:15

the University of Central

0:15

Arkansas, about RA hiring

0:18

decisions of full time and

0:18

graduate level staff.

0:22

April is World Autism month so

0:22

this month's episode aims to

0:25

support the mission of the

0:25

Autism Speaks Organization and

0:28

sharing the stories and provide

0:28

opportunities to increase

0:32

understanding and acceptance of

0:32

residents with autism. To do so,

0:37

today we are talking with Dr.

0:37

Dustin Grosh, who last year

0:40

co-authored an article in "The

0:40

Journal of College and

0:43

University Student Housing"

0:43

titled "Understanding the

0:46

Expectations of Students With

0:46

Autism to Increase Satisfaction

0:49

With the On-Campus Living

0:49

Experience." The article, of

0:53

course, will be linked in the

0:53

show notes.

0:56

To amplify the voices of

0:56

students in housing with autism,

0:59

after his introduction, Dustin

0:59

and I will jump right into the

1:02

article exploring the lived

1:02

experiences of residents with

1:05

autism. We will then circle back

1:05

around to some of the

1:08

professional development and

1:08

transferable skills associated

1:11

with writing for publication. Dustin is a proud first

1:15

generation college student and

1:17

holds a bachelor's, master's and

1:17

doctorate degree in leadership

1:22

related fields. Originally from

1:22

Warren, Michigan, Dustin enjoys

1:26

boating, hiking, DIY projects

1:26

and writing in his spare time.

1:31

He currently serves students as

1:31

the Director of Academic

1:34

Initiatives at Southern

1:34

Methodist University. As the

1:37

Director, he oversees the

1:37

Faculty In Residence program

1:40

with the 11 Residential Commons

1:40

facilitates, the Peer Leader

1:44

program with over 85 student

1:44

leaders, leads an

1:48

interdisciplinary social science

1:48

research team comprised of

1:51

students, faculty and staff, and

1:51

lastly works with the Engaged

1:56

Dallas Student Directors and

1:56

four other academic and student

2:00

affairs offices to offer Engage

2:00

Dallas, a playspace community

2:04

engagement initiative benefiting

2:04

south and west Dallas.

2:08

Dustin, welcome to the show.

2:10

Thanks, J.C.

2:10

It's so good to be here.

2:13

We're really glad

2:13

to have you. Your article

2:15

explores students with autism

2:15

and their expectations with

2:19

campus housing and the college

2:19

experience. Where did the idea

2:22

for this research come from?

2:23

I was actually

2:23

talking with Hannah Melton and

2:26

Carly Gilson. They're the two co

2:26

authors on that. Dr. Gilson is

2:30

at Texas A&M at the time as well

2:30

and as Assistant Professor of

2:34

Special Education. And Hannah

2:34

Melton was a Graduate Hall

2:37

Director with us at Texas A&M

2:37

when I was there at the time.

2:41

And we had just launched a new

2:41

spectrum LLC. So an autism based

2:45

living learning community that

2:45

got quite a bit of national

2:48

media attention when it first

2:48

launched, which was a

2:52

partnership with our disability

2:52

resource office, as well as our

2:55

special education area in the

2:55

College of Education. And then,

2:59

of course, residence life. And

2:59

so we have that new program

3:03

going and Hannah, our Graduate

3:03

Hall Director, who was unable to

3:07

join us tonight, really had that

3:07

idea of wanting to kind of

3:10

explore and do that as an

3:10

independent study in her

3:13

graduate program. And so with

3:13

her willingness and kind of time

3:17

and energy devotion, we kind of

3:17

came up with this idea of really

3:21

framing it around, what are the

3:21

student experiences and

3:25

expectations of living on

3:25

campus? And so, J.C., I know, we

3:28

talked about a lot in higher ed

3:28

and student affairs about the

3:32

concept of managing students

3:32

expectations, right? Like we're

3:36

better able, if we know their

3:36

expectations, we can manage them

3:39

if they're too high or too low,

3:39

or meet them in the middle. And

3:43

that is essentially what the

3:43

impetus was for this, we wanted

3:47

to understand what expectations

3:47

residents with autism were

3:51

coming in with so we could

3:51

better manage their expectations

3:54

and be realistic about what

3:54

Housing and Residence Life staff

3:58

can provide them when they're on

3:58

campus with us.

4:01

So what

4:01

specifically about it made it

4:03

important to research?

4:05

One of the things when Hannah and I were really digging into the

4:07

literature, one of the things

4:10

you'll find around students on

4:10

the autism spectrum is that the

4:14

sample sizes tend to be pretty

4:14

small, because it's hard to get

4:18

at that demographic of students

4:18

because of different ways in

4:21

which folks on the spectrum

4:21

identify, whether they're

4:24

formally diagnosed with the

4:24

disorder in the DSM, and they

4:27

have that official diagnosis, or

4:27

they might be on the spectrum

4:31

but are choosing not to receive,

4:31

you know, disability

4:33

accommodations. So you see in

4:33

the literature, it's very hard

4:37

to get a hold of that group. And

4:37

then you also find that when

4:41

you're asking traditional, like

4:41

quantitative methodologies or

4:44

questions kind of in a survey

4:44

scale, you don't get at that

4:47

depth of insight that students

4:47

lived experiences really have

4:52

with them that they can unpack

4:52

with you. And so the time

4:56

intensive process of sitting

4:56

down and really getting in and

4:59

digging into what on campus life

4:59

is like, takes a little bit of

5:03

time. And so we really saw a big

5:03

gap there. And realizing too,

5:08

that we had this new living

5:08

learning community that we were

5:10

kicking off, we were trying to

5:10

also better inform maybe how we

5:14

could market the program or get

5:14

more folks interested, both

5:16

families and parents, and then

5:16

also help inform future

5:20

programming of the Living

5:20

Learning Community. So for all

5:23

those reasons, it really led us

5:23

to, to dig into this topic.

5:27

You mentioned the

5:27

gap and not having interviews or

5:30

qualitative data to really

5:30

inform this. So why was

5:33

interviews the way to go, then?

5:36

You know, every

5:36

housing operation is a little

5:38

different. We did see some

5:38

Talking Stick articles that if

5:42

you haven't checked out Talking

5:42

Stick in a while from a cool, I

5:45

highly recommended, they had

5:45

some pieces predating our

5:48

publication on students with

5:48

autism. And what they were

5:51

talking about is different

5:51

architectural design or things

5:54

like that. But a lot of that was

5:54

just based off of

5:57

recommendations from like the

5:57

College Autism Network, or other

6:02

types of like nonprofits, or

6:02

organizations, they have a lot

6:05

of recommendations for students

6:05

and families who are sending

6:09

their resident or student off,

6:09

who identifies on the spectrum

6:12

to college, they have a lot of

6:12

resources there. But you will

6:15

find pretty quickly that it's

6:15

just anecdotal things, there

6:18

really isn't research that can

6:18

be generalized, or that has been

6:22

operationalized to the larger

6:22

housing profession. And so we

6:27

really wanted to give voice to

6:27

that. And in our mind, too, we

6:32

wanted these solid

6:32

recommendations about what were

6:34

expectations, how are they met,

6:34

and how are they not met? And if

6:39

they were not met, let's dig

6:39

into it. And we really needed

6:42

that space through an individual

6:42

interview process. And really, I

6:46

don't know, you know, not to

6:46

stereotype. But in my experience

6:49

working with students on the

6:49

spectrum, they tend to be very

6:52

straightforward, and to the

6:52

point in their answers. So

6:55

sometimes if you have to ask the

6:55

question in different ways to

6:58

really get at the meat of the

6:58

experience, because they're

7:02

really no nonsense and give you

7:02

exactly what you asked for. And

7:05

so sometimes the questions we

7:05

were asking on a survey, or an

7:08

open ended response really

7:08

weren't getting what we had

7:11

intended to, and that was

7:11

probably us asking a bad

7:14

question. But we had to have

7:14

that space to ask those follow

7:18

ups.

7:19

That's so interesting, I'd never I'd never thought about that possibility

7:21

of like, the robustness of the

7:25

examples provided or the

7:25

richness of a very blunt direct

7:30

statement versus someone who

7:30

just likes to talk about it.

7:36

You mentioned that part of the

7:36

the challenge with exploring

7:42

students with autism and their

7:42

experiences is recruiting

7:45

participants in that challenge.

7:45

How did you go about recruiting

7:50

participants such that you were

7:50

able to conduct your research?

7:53

My colleague,

7:53

Dr. Gilson, who I mentioned is

7:56

an Assistant Professor at A&M

7:56

and focuses on special education

8:00

and specifically students on the

8:00

autism spectrum. We really

8:03

leaned on her because Hannah and

8:03

I had never done research

8:07

methods related to this special

8:07

demographic of students before.

8:11

And so we really wanted to lean

8:11

on her expertise. And we went a

8:14

lot of different directions

8:14

there about, you know, asking

8:17

the question about formal

8:17

diagnosis, contacting Disability

8:21

Services and asking them to send

8:21

out invitation for the research

8:24

for folks that are registered

8:24

that have that disorder that's

8:28

on their records. So we went a

8:28

lot of different ways with this.

8:31

And we ended up with, we really

8:31

wanted to open this umbrella up

8:35

to get anyone who identified and

8:35

so what we ended up doing, is

8:39

actually asking an entire

8:39

census, so all students who

8:42

lived on campus at A&M,

8:42

excluding the Corps of Cadets,

8:45

which ended up being around

8:45

like, a little over, like,

8:48

almost 9000, I want to say, if I

8:48

remember correctly, students,

8:52

and we had them answer one

8:52

screener question, do they

8:55

identify as a student on the

8:55

autism spectrum? And we didn't

9:01

ask about the disorder and the

9:01

diagnosis specifically. We had a

9:04

bunch of students reply about a

9:04

14% response rate there and

9:09

about 79 of them had indicated

9:09

that they identify on the

9:12

spectrum. And we ended up

9:12

completing interviews with seven

9:17

of them. There was a lot of

9:17

scheduling things or folks that

9:20

didn't show up or didn't follow

9:20

up with us after we tried to

9:22

reschedule but talk with seven

9:22

and we ended up reaching data

9:26

saturation with that.

9:27

And then what did

9:27

you find any limitations with

9:30

your sample?

9:31

Oh, for sure. I

9:31

think the two that we noted in

9:34

the manuscript were A&M, if

9:34

you're not familiar with the

9:37

institution is prodominately

9:37

White institution. So all of our

9:40

participants were White

9:40

identified. So that was limiting

9:44

in the diversity there with

9:44

racial regard. And then also, we

9:48

noticed that our sample had no

9:48

first generation college

9:51

students in it. And so there's

9:51

some limitations there with just

9:55

kind of those layering and

9:55

intersectional experiences of

9:58

students that we weren't really

9:58

able to get at with our sample

10:01

in particular.

10:03

Looking back, is

10:03

there any way, if someone was to

10:06

conduct this research again

10:06

with, was it a recruiting issue?

10:10

Or was it just a sample issue?

10:12

So if I recall

10:12

correctly, those 79 that

10:16

indicated they were on the

10:16

spectrum, honestly, we, Hannah

10:20

and I could have probably

10:20

followed up a little quicker or

10:23

been more on top of getting

10:23

those things scheduled. A lot of

10:27

it was scheduling, and it was

10:27

near the end of the semester,

10:30

and you know how it gets with

10:30

finals and folks trying to get

10:33

ready for the holidays or

10:33

leaving. And I think we ran up

10:36

against that, and that likely

10:36

impacted recruitment. So my

10:39

recommendation would be try to

10:39

time it in that beautiful period

10:43

right before midterms or right

10:43

after midterms. But you know how

10:47

hard it is to get into those

10:47

beautiful little spaces in this

10:49

semester?

10:50

Well, and when

10:50

those faces do occur, sometimes

10:53

you want to take advantage of

10:53

among other ways.

10:55

Oh, for sure. Like, you know, maybe a little bit of R&R, right?

11:00

Let's jump into

11:00

what you learned. Your article

11:03

says that four main themes came

11:03

out of your interviews. So what

11:07

was first up that you all learned?

11:09

We really kind

11:09

of categorized or themed the

11:13

findings and remember, again,

11:13

what we talked about in the

11:15

beginning, this was about

11:15

managing or understanding

11:18

expectations related to housing.

11:18

So we identified that the

11:22

students we talked to had

11:22

expectations for housing related

11:26

to academics, related to the

11:26

academic support programming and

11:30

services. We also had things

11:30

related to campus housing, and

11:34

just the community they were

11:34

able to create, as well as

11:37

roommates, which was its own

11:37

category related to the overall

11:42

student experience. So to dive a little deeper in

11:43

each of them, the first which

11:48

was related to academics, we

11:48

found that students had

11:51

expectations mainly around

11:51

transitioning to college and

11:55

kind of academic degree programs

11:55

and experiences. So a lot of

11:58

questions from students around

11:58

majors and minors. And assuming

12:03

that both housing staff and

12:03

everybody that they were

12:06

interacting with at the

12:06

university had basic

12:08

understanding of degree

12:08

programs, majors and minors, and

12:13

as we know, as housing staff, we

12:13

don't specialize in that area

12:16

and we didn't quite meet the

12:16

expectations that they had, in

12:20

answering some basic questions

12:20

that, you know, mainly students

12:23

would turn to their Academic

12:23

Advisor for, but as someone like

12:27

myself, who works in academic

12:27

initiatives, or academic support

12:30

programming within Residence

12:30

Life, we also identify that

12:33

students had expectations

12:33

related to residential tutoring,

12:37

and the community computer labs

12:37

on campus and kind of the

12:40

expectations around types of

12:40

software that were available to

12:44

their like that might be

12:44

accommodating to them. Or being

12:49

able to access those kinds of

12:49

spaces that were like lounges,

12:54

or academic study spaces that

12:54

were more individual that could

12:57

block out noise. Because as you

12:57

know, with autism, sometimes

13:01

some students or spokes on the

13:01

autism spectrum, have difficulty

13:05

with noise cancellation, or get

13:05

distracted easily or need some

13:10

space that's really, really

13:10

quiet for them to focus. And we

13:13

found that sometimes our

13:13

academic support environments in

13:17

the residence halls are all

13:17

centered around groups, and

13:20

community. And that might not be

13:20

always the best for students on

13:23

the spectrum. So that's really

13:23

what academics talked about for

13:27

us.

13:28

When you talk about

13:28

the expectations related to

13:32

advising or knowing the things

13:32

that are more academic based, do

13:35

you think it was the there was

13:35

an expectation for housing staff

13:40

to know that or just the point

13:40

of contact they were talking to?

13:45

Yeah, I think it

13:45

was the point of contact. But

13:48

when we were, you know, J.C.,

13:48

that brings up a good point,

13:50

because we were asking them

13:50

about why was it built in to

13:55

housing? And I think what they

13:55

assumed is because we were

13:58

agents of the institution,

13:58

right?, we were part of the

14:03

university that they expected us

14:03

to have more of an understanding

14:06

than we did. And I think that's

14:06

where the disconnect, because if

14:09

you lived off campus, they don't

14:09

expect you to know anything

14:12

about the university because

14:12

they're not affiliated. But I

14:15

think with our affiliation, came

14:15

some sort of expectation there.

14:20

Yeah. And I think that that's one of the challenges of having such like,

14:21

impactful frontline employees

14:26

that have day-to-day,

14:26

night-to-night interactions is

14:30

you know, that point of contact,

14:30

there's a higher expectation I

14:33

would imagine of knowing

14:33

everything. And despite having

14:37

two week long trainings and day

14:37

in and day out that it's

14:41

becoming hard to know everything

14:41

at the universities as they

14:44

continue to grow and offer

14:44

services especially on related

14:47

to students on the spectrum or

14:47

have other needs that in

14:52

generations gone by weren't as

14:52

prevalent or noticed. Or

14:56

acknowledged, I should say.

14:58

Yeah, acknowledged. That's a good good distinction there. And I do

15:00

think with this group too is

15:03

like, you know, I got to

15:03

remember this was at Texas A&M,

15:06

which is really huge, like

15:06

66,000 total students, we're

15:09

talking an on campus population

15:09

of over 11,000, versus where I

15:13

am now at SMU, where we're

15:13

talking about 3600 and we're a

15:17

little bit more of a generalist

15:17

institution. And I think that

15:20

that expectations are a little

15:20

different, because larger

15:23

institutions have to be very

15:23

siloed. But in doing so, who are

15:27

we missing out? Who we're not

15:27

acknowledging, in our process

15:30

because of that? And how do we

15:30

cross train and get back to

15:33

those roots? Where we have in

15:33

student affairs as being a

15:36

generalist?

15:37

I think that's such an interesting point. Because the scale of it because you're

15:39

right, like at a huge

15:43

institution, it really, it has

15:43

to be about volume, it has to be

15:47

about silos. I mean, it I say it

15:47

has to be it shouldn't be, and

15:51

it should be about how do we

15:51

promote and empower each

15:54

individual student, but it's so

15:54

hard to do when there's 9000

15:57

people living on campus versus

15:57

like, my first professional job

16:00

was at a school of 400 on campus

16:00

in our heyday. And it was so

16:05

much easier to know and interact

16:05

and provide for every individual

16:09

student and know the unique

16:09

needs that they all faced. So I

16:13

think that's an interesting

16:13

challenge that I hadn't really

16:15

thought about until you brought that up.

16:16

Yeah.

16:18

So what was the

16:18

next theme that came about?

16:21

So the next one

16:21

was really related to campus

16:23

housing, and, you know, the

16:23

expectations that students

16:27

talked about with that really

16:27

related to what are the

16:29

advantages, and the perceived

16:29

disadvantages that came with

16:33

living on campus. And students,

16:33

you know, these probably will

16:36

sound really familiar to you,

16:36

and probably to the SWACUHO

16:39

nation that's listening in right

16:39

now. Like, they're gonna

16:42

resonate with some of these

16:42

advantages. So like, I can walk

16:44

the class, I don't have to wake

16:44

up really early to get to my

16:47

00am. The students also talked

16:47

about the convenience of work

16:51

orders, and not having to worry

16:51

about that kind of maintenance

16:54

function, or really dealing with

16:54

contractors coming into their

16:57

apartment or dealing with those

16:57

things. They also talked about

17:00

cost and the savings that came

17:00

with living on campus with not

17:04

having to have a car, or things

17:04

like that. So we're all familiar

17:07

with those, I would say

17:07

probably, we've heard maybe

17:09

those things come up with campus housing,

17:11

And in everybody's

17:11

marketing material. Those are

17:13

the things!

17:14

Those are the things! Roll out of bed and go to class. Exactly. So that's

17:15

what we emphasize. But one thing

17:18

that came up as an advantage

17:18

that was unique to the students

17:22

we talked to is goes back to

17:22

that concept of noise again,

17:25

that we talked about earlier.

17:25

And I just want to read an

17:28

excerpt from Chuck, who was one

17:28

of our participants. And Chuck

17:32

was commenting on the advantage

17:32

he perceived by the university

17:37

publishing quiet and courtesy

17:37

ours as a policy.

17:42

So he goes, "because I've known

17:42

some people who are especially

17:46

dealing with sensory overload or

17:46

meltdowns in that situation,

17:50

I've known some people who are

17:50

offput by noise, or more offput

17:54

by certain visual elements that

17:54

stimulate them. For me, it's

17:58

always about always a noise,

17:58

continuously loud is usually

18:02

what drives me off or away." So

18:02

Chuck was really talking about

18:05

how like, you know, we don't, I

18:05

think like RAs going around,

18:10

going on rounds at night that

18:10

enforce quiet hours, or enforce

18:14

courtesy hours, that might not

18:14

be there for other types of, you

18:19

know, off campus properties. And

18:19

I think those enforcement's and

18:23

regular enforcement's and that

18:23

policy really made it attractive

18:26

to Chuck in some of the other

18:26

participants that we talked to.

18:30

So, you know, those were really

18:30

it. And then they also, you

18:34

know, talked about this idea of

18:34

space as being a potential

18:38

benefit or advantage. And they

18:38

talked about the idea of like

18:41

amenities in the room. And they

18:41

also talked about like WiFi and

18:45

having access to technology like

18:45

that, in a consistent way. And

18:49

so those were some of the things

18:49

related to campus housing, more

18:52

generally, the students

18:52

discussed as advantages and kind

18:56

of some of their expectations there.

18:58

And then the next

18:58

theme was community?

19:01

Yes, that one,

19:01

we broke down into some subsets,

19:05

J.C. We talked about campus

19:05

climate, their ability to

19:08

connect with their peers, and

19:08

then we get into RAs in

19:11

particular. And so just to kind

19:11

of boil that down a little bit,

19:15

our students talked about the

19:15

generally like, welcoming

19:19

environment. When they visited

19:19

campus. They felt like the on

19:23

campus living environment was

19:23

very supportive culture, people

19:27

were very gracious and sociable.

19:27

And then also the idea of the

19:31

campus culture, like the

19:31

traditions that were happening

19:34

in each of the residence halls,

19:34

or the unique nature of the

19:37

commons councils or Community

19:37

Councils, excuse me, those

19:40

things were kind of speaking to

19:40

them. And they talked about this

19:44

idea of like peer connections,

19:44

as well. They wanted connecting

19:49

with their peers. They didn't

19:49

want to be just with other

19:52

students on the spectrum. They

19:52

wanted to connect with other

19:55

students that were neurally

19:55

diverse in different ways than

19:58

themselves and make it sure that

19:58

they didn't feel alone, until

20:02

they talked about that need or

20:02

that desire to connect with

20:05

others. And that's why they

20:05

might have looked for a roommate

20:07

to the potluck system, or kind

20:07

of put themselves out there in a

20:11

different way. And then they

20:11

also talked about kind of the

20:15

dimensions that Resident

20:15

Advisors played, having like a

20:17

mentor on the floor, having

20:17

someone that would be like

20:20

convene the group or put on

20:20

events or programs for them to

20:24

socialize. But those things kind

20:24

of came up as, as expectations

20:28

to just have this sense of

20:28

community overall.

20:32

I thought it was interesting that it was I mean, it was almost like halfway

20:33

through the article before

20:36

Resident Advisors or Resident

20:36

Assistants were even mentioned,

20:39

which I think is an important

20:39

point that it really like

20:43

focusing on the the needs and

20:43

the expectations of students

20:47

with autism, it really is a

20:47

system issue. It's not, they

20:51

weren't talking about their RAs

20:51

needing to do more until, you

20:55

know, halfway through. So that

20:55

was, I think that's neat to

20:58

think about, it's like sometimes

20:58

a lot of things get passed on is

21:00

like, our RAs need to be doing

21:00

more, or they need to be more

21:03

educated. It's like, Well, maybe

21:03

if we look inside, at the

21:07

systems in place, and the spaces

21:07

and the facilities first that

21:10

that's a good place to start also.

21:12

Yeah, we I don't

21:12

know about you, JC but I always

21:15

feel like it's a pile on for

21:15

live-in staff, unfortunately,

21:18

like we're always expecting them

21:18

to do more with less or the same

21:21

amount of time. And honestly,

21:21

like when I do this kind of

21:27

analysis and stuff I'm really

21:27

looking for, like, let's think

21:29

about it in a systemic way, like

21:29

in systems thinking, who else

21:34

could we tap to help support and

21:34

meet expectations of students on

21:37

the spectrum, and this was an

21:37

example where facilities can

21:41

play a big part in it at the

21:41

beginning, even how we market

21:44

and some of the policies that

21:44

are not necessarily always in

21:47

the hands of the live-in, staff

21:47

members, but set by

21:50

administrators or leadership of

21:50

a department, for instance.

21:53

Or even just how we

21:53

like retool, like, quote,

21:56

marketing and handbooks about

21:56

spaces. And I mean, I love that

22:00

example about the quiet hours

22:00

and courtesy hours, because it's

22:03

so common in every, every place

22:03

I've ever been in every place

22:07

I've ever heard about has those.

22:07

But if we reframe it in such a

22:11

way that it's like, oh, here's

22:11

an additional value to that,

22:15

other than just its quiet hours

22:15

and courtesy hours as it is

22:19

commonly done. So I love that I

22:19

think like looking, like you,

22:22

the systemic things are the

22:22

usually have the most downstream

22:27

impact, instead of piling on

22:27

like you said to the the live-on

22:31

staff who already have enough to

22:31

do.

22:34

Yep, exactly.

22:37

Chuck talked about roommates or people down the hall, but roommate expectations

22:39

was the theme all on itself. So

22:43

what did you learn about

22:43

students with autism and their

22:45

expectations for the roommates?

22:47

Yeah, like, I

22:47

think it goes back to, you know,

22:51

students on the spectrum just

22:51

want to be like the average

22:53

student, the normal student,

22:53

right. And they're going to have

22:56

those unique challenges of how

22:56

they connect and some of the

23:00

ways in which they communicate

23:00

or interpret nonverbal or verbal

23:03

cues and how they respond to

23:03

noise and visual stimulation

23:07

when they're on the spectrum.

23:07

And so I think we kind of

23:11

recommended a little bit more

23:11

care or time be spent within the

23:16

roommate agreement process,

23:16

where there'll be a little more

23:19

opportunity for sharing and

23:19

being a little more vulnerable.

23:22

Of course, this is based on the

23:22

student on the spectrum, being

23:25

willing to identify in that way,

23:25

or potentially putting

23:27

themselves out there in that

23:27

way, and their vulnerability

23:30

there. But having some prompts

23:30

maybe on the roommate agreement

23:34

that talk about noise, because I

23:34

think often we talk about like

23:38

when guests could visit in the

23:38

room noise might be on that

23:41

little questionnaire we have

23:41

them fill out in the portal when

23:44

they're getting roommates

23:44

selection. But noise doesn't

23:47

really come up, I think, on the

23:47

form, at least on some of the

23:50

ones I've seen more recently. So

23:50

I think we can think about

23:53

space, we can think about noise,

23:53

visual stimulations, like if

23:56

people have lights, you know, or

23:56

things like that. And then ways

24:00

in which noise can be mitigated,

24:00

maybe between you know, the

24:04

types of fabrics that are used,

24:04

or if there's a window, could a

24:08

curtain be hung, that could be

24:08

noise dampening in some way? I

24:11

think we just got to think about

24:11

space and roommates a little bit

24:14

different, but really lean into

24:14

those conversations, and really

24:19

help them develop communication

24:19

strategies. Because if if I was

24:23

a student, and putting myself in

24:23

my 18 year old self again, and

24:27

I'm standing across from my

24:27

potential roommate, and they

24:30

told me that they're on the

24:30

spectrum. At that point in my

24:32

life, I would have not known

24:32

what that meant, or how to

24:35

really respond. And I think in a

24:35

lot of ways, we've got to

24:38

realize that communication is

24:38

going to look different and need

24:41

to be different for the message

24:41

to be clear and get across. And

24:45

so how can we facilitate that

24:45

with our roommate agreements,

24:49

and with our RAs?

24:51

I agree with you

24:51

that I've not seen a lot that

24:53

that overtly talked about noise

24:53

specifically, but usually it's

24:57

like veiled under something else

24:57

of like "How late are people

25:02

allowed to come over?" Or "do

25:02

you like to study with music?"

25:07

Where it's like it's in there

25:07

maybe implied, but it's not

25:13

direct enough to get at the

25:13

heart of what you've been

25:15

talking about.

25:17

J.C. I'm so glad

25:17

you brought that up because you

25:19

use the word like, like overt,

25:19

right? In my experience of

25:24

working with students on the

25:24

spectrum, you have to be a lot

25:27

more overt in your

25:27

communications, rather than

25:30

suggestive or open ended.

25:30

Because you're probably not

25:33

going to get at the real root of

25:33

something or the real issue of a

25:38

conflict unless you're very

25:38

overt. And I think this

25:41

community of students really

25:41

responds well to that direct

25:45

form of communication, which is

25:45

not how we are trained as

25:48

helping professionals. We're

25:48

trained to be softer, we're

25:51

trained to be open ended. But I

25:51

think we got to remember our

25:55

emergency management training,

25:55

our crisis response training,

25:58

very, like direct questions.

25:58

Very, like, yes, and no are

26:02

totally okay with this group.

26:02

You know, and leaning into that

26:06

directness a little bit more.

26:06

And that's that is somewhat

26:09

unnatural sometimes to how we're

26:09

trained as professionals.

26:12

Well, and probably

26:12

I imagine confidence of delivery

26:15

with yes, or nos that sometimes

26:15

just like a hard "Yes" is it

26:20

with confidence is more than

26:20

"Well, ohhhh, I don't know. No,

26:23

that could be this or that or

26:23

the other." And I would imagine

26:27

that, even if it has to be a

26:27

little bit more ambiguous, like

26:30

with a level of confidence

26:30

probably would be beneficial.

26:36

And you talk about the

26:36

overtness, and I think about

26:39

some of the roommate agreements

26:39

I've seen, I've talked about,

26:42

like, "how are we going to

26:42

address each other when there's

26:44

conflict?" Or "when I when you

26:44

do something that upsets me, how

26:48

do we talk about that?", like, I

26:48

can imagine that's probably

26:51

something that should be

26:51

included, to be talked about

26:55

very specifically with students

26:55

with autism, because someone

27:00

who's not on the spectrum might

27:00

not appreciate or get it because

27:06

of the everything you just said,

27:06

of the the softness and the way.

27:10

So I think that that would

27:10

probably be something worth

27:12

exploring.

27:13

Yeah, no. J.C. I

27:13

know our SWACUHO Nation couldn't

27:16

see me. But the whole time you

27:16

were talking, I was nodding my

27:19

head like "Yeah, exactly." And I

27:19

just want to point out, because

27:23

we're talking about this theme

27:23

of communication that kind of

27:26

leads into that last step, which

27:26

was just kind of focusing on

27:29

this concept of the overall

27:29

student experience. Caleb, one

27:33

of another one of our

27:33

participants, talked about this

27:36

concept of like, even students

27:36

on the spectrum come to college,

27:39

because they want personal

27:39

growth and development, just

27:42

like every other student that

27:42

shows up on our college

27:45

campuses. And Caleb talks about

27:45

that the person on an autism

27:49

spectrum should expect to

27:49

improve upon themselves, for

27:52

them to improve with their

27:52

communication skills, is going

27:55

to have to be a must for them to

27:55

grow as a professional. So I

27:58

think maybe some communication

27:58

improvements sort of session

28:02

would be very helpful. He's

28:02

talking about possible ways we

28:05

can do programming, but even in

28:05

our roommate agreements, and the

28:09

conversations we had, we know,

28:09

college students that are not on

28:12

the spectrum, need help with

28:12

communication just as much as

28:16

students on the spectrum. So

28:16

now, why not lean into those

28:19

kind of dialogues and those

28:19

types of communications together?

28:23

Well, if you talk

28:23

about like the programs, and you

28:25

know, we're educators, so

28:25

everything seems to be an

28:29

education problem. Like if

28:29

you're a lawyer, everything's a

28:31

legal problem that I think

28:31

sometimes we in our profession

28:35

and housing and student affairs,

28:35

we often like, "oh, we just need

28:38

to do more programs to educate

28:38

people more," and sometimes

28:41

going back to our whole systems

28:41

processes like, "Well, why don't

28:45

we do a little bit more education within the roommate agreement or be a little bit

28:47

more direct or the quiet hours

28:51

in the handbook?", like, you

28:51

know, we can be a little bit

28:53

more intentional in those areas

28:53

that can demonstrate that

28:57

attention to those educational

28:57

moments, without doing like the

29:02

programs that might foster

29:02

awkward moments or not be done

29:07

well, because we're not experts

29:07

in facilitating on certain

29:11

things.

29:12

Exactly. Pass it

29:12

along because not everything

29:14

needs a screwdriver to fix it.

29:14

Right. We need different tools

29:17

for those things. But I also

29:17

just think it's important to

29:19

recognize that like some of the

29:19

struggles that like all college

29:23

students face is not exclusive

29:23

to non, you know, or

29:27

neurodiversity, as well, like

29:27

students on the spectrum have

29:30

those similar struggles or

29:30

wanting to grow and develop in

29:33

similar ways that other students

29:33

do. And so it's always important

29:36

to have that like asset base

29:36

mindset and not only deficit,

29:39

that this community is coming in

29:39

with unique contributions to the

29:42

community, but also wants to

29:42

grow and develop in similar ways

29:45

as well and has something to

29:45

offer the community too.

29:48

That's great. Are

29:48

there any other things that came

29:52

out within the student experience?

29:54

Yeah, you know,

29:54

I was always so funny because I

29:58

sometimes feel like man, I wrote

29:58

the this a lot better than I'm

30:00

talking about it right now. And

30:00

I'm sure I'm missing a bunch of

30:04

stuff that I'm like, "Oh, I'm

30:04

sure there was a lot more

30:07

because I remember writing all

30:07

this." And it was like, Oh my

30:10

gosh, well...

30:10

it's especially funny because you have to trim it down to 5000 words, or

30:12

whatever the limit is. So like,

30:15

so much gets cut out. And then

30:15

it's like, oh, this is the way

30:17

it is. And now I'm expanding it

30:17

back again.

30:20

Oh, my gosh,

30:20

exactly. I think I always have

30:22

that problem of they always want

30:22

it to be shorter. And I'm like,

30:25

how?! It's all important, you

30:25

know, especially when you're

30:29

like talking about students

30:29

lived experiences, you're like,

30:31

I can't have that, you know?

30:33

There's so many stories and quotes I want to include.

30:36

Exactly. You know, I think we touched on

30:38

it, but probably not as

30:41

explicitly as we could have. But

30:41

under that overall student

30:45

experience, you know, we point

30:45

to some expectations that the

30:50

students had for staff

30:50

education. So just as we might

30:54

have, like SafeSpace programs

30:54

for LGBTQ identified students,

30:58

or students that are

30:58

undocumented, and being allies,

31:03

we might also want to offer

31:03

similar type of ally forming

31:06

programs for students on the

31:06

spectrum. And that could also

31:09

maybe lead to potential like

31:09

round robins, or conference

31:13

program sessions in RA training,

31:13

or professional development

31:17

sessions for full time staffers

31:17

as well. So how do we create

31:21

maybe ally programs for students

31:21

on the autism spectrum, was

31:25

potential there. And we also just talked about

31:26

this desire. And I think

31:29

everyone feels this, I know,

31:29

with my own identities, I feel

31:32

this, it's like you want it to

31:32

be recognized that you're

31:35

different. But you don't want to

31:35

be treated drastically

31:38

different. And I think that

31:38

sentiment comes out in our

31:42

student narratives as well for

31:42

this project in particular, and

31:45

they talk about that with the RA

31:45

interactions and kind of what

31:48

they're looking for. And I'm

31:48

sure, I hope, you know, SWACUHO,

31:53

you go in and dig into this and

31:53

read into it a little bit more,

31:56

because they say it so much

31:56

better than I could ever say it

31:59

as well. And so we have some

31:59

quotes from Rebecca, and others

32:02

who kind of talk about that

32:02

concept of wanting to belong,

32:05

but wanting to be recognized as

32:05

a little different as well.

32:09

I love that. I think I think that's an important point of like, people

32:10

want to be acknowledged for

32:13

their differences, but not

32:13

necessarily treated differently

32:16

for them. So I'm glad that came

32:16

out. And there definitely are

32:21

some great passages from the

32:21

students and in their voices

32:24

itself. So are there any

32:24

powerful stories that weren't

32:29

able to make the cut in the

32:29

final article?

32:32

Oh, yeah, quite

32:32

a bit. As you might imagine,

32:37

when you're trying to keep focus

32:37

on the housing experience, and

32:42

the living on campus experience,

32:42

things like dining came into

32:46

play and the noise that's

32:46

produced in dining facilities.

32:50

And this, one of the

32:50

participants talked about, like,

32:55

strategically waiting until the

32:55

last 10 minutes before a dining

32:59

facility closed, to go eat

32:59

because it was the most quiet,

33:03

but then, you know, dining staff

33:03

would have already thrown out

33:06

the food or would have started

33:06

the closing procedures early,

33:09

and how they missed multiple

33:09

meals for that. So like you have

33:13

some rich stories that go beyond

33:13

just what you know, was the

33:17

scope of this study. But I think

33:17

what was also interesting is

33:20

like all the students in this

33:20

study told us they were either

33:24

satisfied, or very satisfied

33:24

with their on campus housing

33:29

experience at Texas A&M At the

33:29

time, I would love to get some

33:33

students that would be so

33:33

direct, and tell us we're not

33:37

meeting their expectations and

33:37

see what other things we were

33:40

able to, you know, unearth with

33:40

that and what we could be doing

33:43

better as a field as well. But

33:43

yeah, lots of rich stories. But

33:47

that one just sticks out to me

33:47

about the dining halls in

33:50

particular.

33:52

Is there anything

33:52

that you would hypothesize based

33:55

on what the satisfied or highly

33:55

satisfied students said, for

34:01

people that were dissatisfied?

34:03

I think it would

34:03

go around where, you know, where

34:05

are those expectations that we

34:05

talked about today? I think one

34:08

of them is if the roommate

34:08

situation went really bad, I'm

34:11

sure that would have impacted

34:11

them. If noise was really out of

34:15

control in their building, I'm

34:15

sure we would have heard about

34:17

that. If our academic support

34:17

programming and residential

34:21

tutoring and computer labs that

34:21

we have in the residence halls

34:25

don't have the right stuff, I'm sure we would have heard a little bit more about that. So

34:27

just as we talked a lot about

34:30

the advantages kind of in this

34:30

paper or the themes of the

34:33

expectations. Imagine the

34:33

inverse and I think that's where

34:36

we would have really seen that

34:36

dissatisfaction potentially play

34:40

out. But I do think there's ways

34:40

to be improving like we talked

34:44

about setup of spaces a little

34:44

bit different, training for

34:48

sensitivity and inclusion around

34:48

students on the spectrum.

34:52

There's still ways we can we can

34:52

grow and improve I think still.

34:57

The story about the

34:57

student with dining is

35:00

heartbreaking. And it's

35:00

something that, to be completely

35:03

transparent, I never would have

35:03

thought about, like how that

35:07

story ended until you shared it.

35:07

And it's also one that in

35:13

reflection, it's like, it should

35:13

be totally obvious if you think

35:17

about it through the lens of

35:17

like, noise concerns. And like,

35:23

it makes complete sense for

35:23

someone to wait for the end of

35:25

the dining hour. And then now

35:25

think about it one step down,

35:29

it's like, I know, we shut down

35:29

programs when it starts, right,

35:33

like everybody wants to get out

35:33

of there. So now dining staff

35:36

are doing what they normally do

35:36

and getting done early, or

35:40

starting to take meals out,

35:40

because they're not making a

35:42

whole fresh pizza the last five

35:42

minutes, and it seems like it

35:46

should have been obvious to me

35:46

that that was happening, but I

35:48

didn't. And I think that's an

35:48

important takeaway here is if we

35:51

all just think a little bit

35:51

more, from a lens of the things

35:56

that you shared, like I can, I

35:56

can probably now think of a lot

36:00

of things specific to noise. And

36:00

I know there's a whole lot more

36:04

to, like, students with autism

36:04

than just noise, but

36:09

programming, you know?There's so

36:09

many things that are like now

36:12

just popping into my head.

36:13

J.C. when I was

36:13

a student leader, you know,

36:16

back, I've never was an RA, but

36:16

I was an RHA and things like

36:19

that when I was a student, I

36:19

remember my number one

36:22

recruitment tool was blasting

36:22

the music in the lounge and see

36:26

who showed up or, you know, make

36:26

it like a club and put on some

36:30

like lights, you know, and those

36:30

were the ways I attracted

36:33

residents to come out to the

36:33

program, you know, or, you know,

36:36

put amplified sound between the

36:36

two buildings. So when they walk

36:39

out, they would come to the

36:39

program. Some of those

36:41

traditional ways we recruit

36:41

might be actually excluding some

36:45

students that not all of them

36:45

want the lively, loud music

36:49

blaring programming, some of

36:49

them might want the quiet

36:52

discussion, or the the time to

36:52

reflect or, you know, a

36:57

wellness-like activity where you

36:57

can do meditation or yoga, like

37:01

some folks might want that

37:01

quieting space, you know, and

37:05

when we set up, you know, study

37:05

spectaculars, in our residential

37:08

communities at the end of the

37:08

community, often they're all

37:11

done in group settings, again,

37:11

how are we also creating spaces

37:15

when we create those study

37:15

focused programming for

37:18

individual study or study that's

37:18

quiet, you know, in diversifying

37:22

that some people like public

37:22

studying some, like private

37:26

studying some, like semi public,

37:26

you know, studying spaces, and

37:30

it just caused me to recognize

37:30

my privilege, recognize that,

37:33

like, what I would have liked,

37:33

as a student may not be speaking

37:37

or catering to, you know,

37:37

diverse students nowadays, and

37:42

even at the time, the folks that

37:42

I was excluding, inadvertently,

37:46

at the time as when I was a student leader.

37:48

Well, I think that's a perfect example. And not to put you on the spot of

37:50

like, "You're the problem." But

37:53

yeah, that's how systems

37:53

replicate themselves. And you,

37:56

you say now, and I know, we're

37:56

all guilty of it, the type is

37:59

like, You created this

37:59

environment where potentially

38:02

excluded people, and then all

38:02

the people that then got hired

38:05

and recruited is like, this is

38:05

how we do it. And so then they

38:09

recruit that same way. And I

38:09

think, again, that to be like,

38:12

You're the problem, because

38:12

it's, it's a system issue. It's

38:15

the it's systemic. And yeah, you

38:15

know, I think there's a higher

38:19

level of acknowledgement of

38:19

that. And I think your research

38:21

gets really, really into that.

38:21

So I appreciate that.

38:25

Yeah, of course,

38:25

of course. And, you know,

38:27

there's just so much that this

38:27

study, like started for me and

38:30

my own personal work and

38:30

reflection, about like, what I,

38:36

as someone who is not on the

38:36

spectrum, and trying to think

38:40

about like my own college

38:40

experience, and what I thought

38:43

was ideal living on campus, it

38:43

just caused me to rethink some

38:46

of that, because I liked the

38:46

groups, I liked the loud, I

38:50

liked that kind of programming,

38:50

and I'm realizing that no, we we

38:54

need to create space for at all,

38:54

it doesn't all have to look the

38:57

same, it doesn't all have to fit

38:57

the model, because you're going

39:00

to be catering to these different groups.

39:04

That's another thing I appreciate about the article to connect to it. I've

39:05

liked that a lot of the things,

39:10

and you mentioned this directly,

39:10

is like a lot of things are

39:13

things that non autistic

39:13

students would comment about,

39:19

but then it so it made it easier

39:19

to just like take a little bit

39:22

step forward and now add in this

39:22

extra layer of being a student

39:27

on the autistic spectrum. And so

39:27

like I felt I was able to easier

39:31

connect to that, again, as a

39:31

person who doesn't identify as

39:35

being on the spectrum that I

39:35

connected to all these things

39:37

you talked about, and then oh,

39:37

there's this additional layer.

39:40

And I thought your article did a

39:40

nice job of kind of leading into

39:43

that. Let's talk about like small

39:44

scale, localized application.

39:48

We've talked throughout about

39:48

some things that departments

39:51

could be doing or looking at, is

39:51

there anything specifically we

39:54

haven't talked about that you

39:54

think departments could be doing

39:57

to better manage and support the

39:57

expectations of students with

40:01

autism?

40:02

Yeah, we we name

40:02

a few things. So just some of

40:05

those little training things

40:05

like just as we have optional

40:09

developments for ally programs,

40:09

considering one for students

40:12

with autism, we kind of talked

40:12

about that a little bit of

40:15

training for staff would go a

40:15

long way and just kind of

40:18

creating a baseline, modifying

40:18

some forms, to focus on noise

40:23

and kind of the way

40:23

communication flows in those

40:27

settings. We also go into some

40:27

other things like, there's, you

40:31

know, just as there's like, you

40:31

know, the what is it US News and

40:34

World Report rankings, there are

40:34

also groups that do like the top

40:38

25, universities and colleges,

40:38

for students on the spectrum,

40:41

they kind of have like their own

40:41

guide of like, what they look

40:45

for. And some of those could be

40:45

things, those criteria could be

40:48

operationalized by Housing

40:48

Departments. So I would

40:51

potentially take a look at at

40:51

that we reference that in the

40:54

article. There's also a book

40:54

that was published in 2009 by

40:58

Wolf and colleagues that's

40:58

really focused on students with

41:01

Asperger syndrome, which is like

41:01

one component on the larger

41:05

autism spectrum. But they have a

41:05

guidebook for college

41:08

professionals, and we reference

41:08

one of the worksheet activities

41:13

that we felt would be really

41:13

applicable. And so there's lots

41:17

of resources with that one. So

41:17

for instance, that particular

41:21

worksheet helps not only I would

41:21

say, students on the spectrum,

41:24

but any college student

41:24

anticipate negative interactions

41:29

and experiences. So when they're starting off in their experience, what's everything

41:31

that could go wrong with living

41:34

on campus? Let's think about

41:34

disaster planning, what could

41:38

all go wrong? And then talk

41:38

about strategies proactively,

41:41

right? So we talked about

41:41

building resilience with our

41:44

students. And this worksheet

41:44

that Wolf and his colleagues

41:47

proposed, specifically around

41:47

triggers that might relate

41:52

specifically to students on the

41:52

spectrum is super important. So

41:55

there's lots of great, like

41:55

tangible resources you can do.

41:59

And if you're a hall director,

41:59

or live-in staff member, or have

42:03

students who care about our

42:03

mentoring that are on the

42:05

spectrum, great resources within

42:05

that book, and I would recommend

42:08

that.

42:09

your article also

42:09

mentioned the college Autism

42:12

Network, and trainings provided

42:12

there.

42:14

Yeah, lots of

42:14

great resources like like, just

42:16

as we would say, like, what is

42:16

it called canned bulletin boards

42:21

that like RAs can just like

42:21

print and go, there's lots of

42:24

those types of resources on

42:24

their website, in addition to

42:27

like, great videos, first hand

42:27

accounts and experiences, those

42:31

kinds of things. Definitely, I'm

42:31

glad you brought that up as

42:33

well, J.C.

42:34

I love those kinds of things. Because it's like, there's a slew of like emergency

42:36

response trainings through FEMA

42:40

that are free. And I just think

42:40

of those college Autism Network

42:45

and all the things that they

42:45

have there, it's like, on-demand

42:48

training that people can self

42:48

direct, like professionals can

42:51

go at any time in any place. If

42:51

they want to make this a

42:54

priority. Like, it's super

42:54

simple to do to get even just a

42:59

baseline education through these

42:59

like micro trainings or, you

43:03

know, macro trainings, in some cases.

43:05

Yeah. And J.C.,

43:05

I really want to take a moment

43:07

because I know as you mentioned,

43:07

at the beginning, this month is

43:11

Autism Awareness Month. And so I

43:11

do want to challenge SWACUHO

43:14

Nation who's listening today,

43:14

like, what are you committing

43:17

to? What's that one thing,

43:17

you're going to go out and learn

43:20

for yourself, maybe it's maybe

43:20

reading this article even or

43:24

like, go in and finding your own

43:24

kind of resources, or looking

43:27

into some of the things that we

43:27

talked about today. What's your

43:30

one thing you're going to commit

43:30

to this month to make yourself a

43:32

better professional for students

43:32

on the spectrum, or better

43:35

support them, and be able to

43:35

kind of expand your network a

43:39

little bit in that ways if you

43:39

haven't already been connected

43:42

really well to this awesome

43:42

student community on campus.

43:46

I love that. You

43:46

heard it here, the challenge

43:48

from Dustin. We will link to a

43:48

lot of those resources in the

43:52

show notes so we are taking away

43:52

any barriers for you to achieve

43:56

that challenge.

43:58

Love it, love it. Love it.

43:59

And then do you see

43:59

any like metric based, like

44:02

administrative outcomes for

44:02

departments who want to

44:05

integrate some of this into

44:05

maybe their annual assessment or

44:08

reporting, like what can be

44:08

measured from a department level

44:12

to achieve some goals they might

44:12

set up?

44:15

Yeah, so I think

44:15

going back to those courtesy and

44:19

noise hours, like often we give

44:19

verbal reminders or things like

44:23

that. And I also think RA staffs

44:23

and others don't really take

44:27

those as seriously, right. Like,

44:27

they kind of let them slide or

44:30

"Oh, it's not too loud. I don't

44:30

want to knock on that door." But

44:33

like tracking those kind of

44:33

noise violations. You can also

44:36

do what's called environmental

44:36

assessments, which is really

44:40

popular with libraries, right?

44:40

So they use what's called like

44:43

auto ethnography. These are not

44:43

auto ethnographies, but they do

44:46

those like environmental

44:46

assessments, like participant

44:48

observations where they walk

44:48

around the library and track

44:51

student usage in spaces so they

44:51

like tally at 8pm who's using

44:56

what room? I think it's super

44:56

important to look at our spaces.

44:59

Like what are actually being

44:59

used or utilized around the

45:02

clock, and maybe retooling some

45:02

group spaces that might be more

45:07

advantageous to individual

45:07

studies, and set up cubicles or

45:11

set up like, you know, I'm

45:11

thinking about lots of hotels

45:14

now, J.C., you walk into hotels

45:14

and like business centers aren't

45:18

really a thing anymore. There's

45:18

like individual rooms where like

45:21

their own locking door and their

45:21

own individual workstations. I'm

45:25

thinking about spaces like that,

45:25

where it's like you can do

45:28

individual or like, someone else

45:28

can join you in that small room.

45:31

But it's really meant to be more

45:31

individual focus. And I think

45:34

we're such community builders.

45:34

But we realized that like even

45:37

community builders need to

45:37

retreat and recharge the

45:40

batteries individually. And I

45:40

think we need to analyze spaces.

45:44

And those could be some metrics

45:44

that universities could use

45:46

around tracking noise elements,

45:46

looking at kind of those

45:51

environmental assessments. And

45:51

I'm just thinking to is like,

45:54

how do you ask about students on

45:54

the spectrum in your demographic

45:59

questionnaire elements on your

45:59

assessments that you already

46:02

send out? Often we focus on

46:02

race, gender, first gen status,

46:06

those kind of are the main ones

46:06

international students. But are

46:10

you asking the question if they

46:10

identify in the spectrum? And

46:12

how can you just embed that one

46:12

question and look at maybe their

46:16

experience is decidedly

46:16

different? Because you can now

46:18

sort your data based on

46:18

neurodiversity?

46:22

Yeah, anyone doing

46:22

Skyfactor assessments, put that

46:25

in as one of your five bonus

46:25

questions you get to choose.

46:29

Yep, great suggestion.

46:31

And you talk about

46:31

the space. And I think about

46:35

furniture. And I know a lot of

46:35

the furniture that's being

46:38

marketed these days for like

46:38

community spaces is, is highly

46:41

modular, and can be configured

46:41

to be public access space, or

46:46

community space, but also you

46:46

turn it a particular way and now

46:49

it's it more isolated deskspace.

46:49

So some of that could be

46:53

considered for anyone planning

46:53

for future renovations or

46:58

furniture "refreshes."

47:00

Exactly, those are great, great recommendations, too. And

47:02

there's a lot out there like you

47:05

know, and honestly cheaper,

47:05

sometimes those individual

47:07

spaces, so get get creative, and

47:07

make sure you're catering to all

47:11

and you're not just doing the

47:11

same one, you know, same type of

47:15

space in all your buildings.

47:16

Definitely any

47:16

closing thoughts about the

47:19

article itself, before we get

47:19

into some of the skill

47:21

application of writing for

47:21

publication?

47:24

I just want to close with saying, like I mentioned, Hannah and I, it was

47:26

our first time ever working this

47:32

intimately with this demographic

47:32

of students. And I'm so glad I

47:37

did, like for my own

47:37

professional development. It

47:39

really did open up a whole new

47:39

student experience on campus

47:43

that I was so ignorant about.

47:43

But I will say, I'm so glad we

47:47

had Carly able to kind of guide

47:47

us through the process. And so I

47:51

just want to throw out there,

47:51

when you feel the most ill

47:55

informed, or the most lacking of

47:55

confidence or imposter syndrome,

48:00

like that's that I wish I would

48:00

take advantage of those and step

48:03

in there more and get kind of

48:03

this immersive experience like

48:06

this project was able to do for

48:06

me. And so that's just my

48:09

closing comment is like this

48:09

project was something Hannah

48:13

wanted to do for class. And it

48:13

ended up being so

48:16

transformational for my own

48:16

professional development and

48:18

learning. And so just step into

48:18

that unknown, lean into it. And

48:22

even around demographics of

48:22

students who never thought you

48:25

would interact with or don't

48:25

interact with on a regular

48:27

basis. It's just such a great

48:27

way to immerse yourself in the

48:30

community.

48:31

Well, and I think there's a there's an interesting point here about the value of

48:32

you keep going back to like this

48:37

was a project like, I think

48:37

there's a really big value in

48:40

like, doing like, we're all

48:40

doing things like why are we not

48:43

doing more like actual research

48:43

on the things we're already

48:47

doing? Like we all have such

48:47

rich data sets, that there

48:52

should like we should all be

48:52

publishing more about the

48:55

outcomes of these instead of

48:55

like, the anecdotal

48:57

conversations at the hotel bar,

48:57

you know, through an email or

49:01

whatever that, you know, there's

49:01

a very, there's a value to

49:04

getting that out there in a more

49:04

structured and academic sort of

49:07

ways, isn't there?

49:08

Yeah, well, I

49:08

think you name it like when I go

49:11

to the SWACUHO award ceremony,

49:11

sometimes I hear about

49:14

innovations and things that are

49:14

going on or going in on some of

49:17

the presentations at SWACUHO,

49:17

even on a regional level. I'm

49:21

like, "Yes, that's publishable."

49:21

And I just don't think people

49:24

know how innovative or creative

49:24

their work is, and how it's

49:30

easily turned into a

49:30

publication. They just need that

49:33

little bit of nudge or

49:33

mentoring. And I just want to

49:36

say like, if you think you're

49:36

doing something innovative,

49:38

think about publishing about it,

49:38

because it's probably needed in

49:41

our field. And there's so many

49:41

times where I'm like, somebody

49:43

has got to have talked about

49:43

this before the literature and I

49:46

go out there J.C. there's

49:46

nothing out there! And I'm like,

49:49

that is just heartbreaking

49:49

because I'm like, we've been

49:51

doing this for years as a field

49:51

and no one's talked about this

49:55

or published on this, like

49:55

process or simulation that I

49:59

know every campus has done at

49:59

least five times, you know,

50:02

like, I'm just thinking right

50:02

now, J.C. and just to, to

50:06

illustrate, we've done Behind

50:06

Closed Doors forever, right as a

50:10

field, such great professional

50:10

development, you go and look,

50:16

there's very minimal

50:16

publications on behind closed

50:19

doors. And so I'm excited, we

50:19

might be doing an experimental

50:24

design using the traditional

50:24

Behind Closed Doors method. And

50:27

then artificial reality

50:27

simulations for training RAs and

50:32

comparing which one students

50:32

learn better on. And like, those

50:36

are things that are like helps

50:36

us innovate our work, but then

50:38

also we can prove it, right? If

50:38

we're going to do it anyway. Why

50:42

not? And this stuff happens

50:42

everyday around us the I think

50:45

just people need that nudge to

50:45

like, this is worth sharing.

50:50

Oh, absolutely. And

50:50

Behind Closed Doors, what a

50:52

great applicable example. I did

50:52

a program a number of years ago,

50:58

just about how to assess Behind

50:58

Closed Doors, like in a more

51:02

effective efficient instead of

51:02

like, two weeks of analyzing

51:05

qualitative data that, like I'm

51:05

thinking about now it's like,

51:11

there's something I can do to

51:11

publish that? You know, that

51:13

there's something there that is

51:13

more than just a conference

51:17

program and nothing against conference programs, because they're, they're important in

51:18

all but I mentioned this on

51:21

Craig's episode, people read the

51:21

journal aren't always the people

51:24

who go to the conference. And they're not always the people who read the Talking Stick. And

51:26

so there's also a value to

51:29

having different audiences to

51:29

spread the message out there.

51:33

Oh, for sure.

51:33

And I just love if you haven't

51:35

dug into the ACUHO-I journal,

51:35

they do such a great job, they

51:39

make it more engaging with the

51:39

text font they use. They have

51:42

discussion questions. I use

51:42

those in my staff meetings, like

51:46

we're doing, like my staff

51:46

meetings, we're going over

51:49

different student development

51:49

theories at the beginning is our

51:51

check in, which is weird, I

51:51

know. But the other thing is

51:54

like, we also have these where

51:54

we go into discussions, they

51:57

have the discussion already in

51:57

the back of the article for you.

51:59

How easy professional

51:59

development we can get?! So

52:02

you're right, there's just so

52:02

much out there that I think

52:04

people just need to realize it's

52:04

so easy to make part of the

52:08

practice, you know?

52:09

What did you think

52:09

of the discussion questions for

52:12

your article?

52:13

You know, it's so funny, because you never really see them until it comes

52:15

out in the journal. And

52:17

sometimes they're, you know,

52:17

very, very different in that

52:21

way. I really appreciated how

52:21

they pulled from the existing

52:25

literature about autism

52:25

spectrum. And then just thinking

52:29

about some of those citations

52:29

were from 2008. And how much has

52:33

changed in that short time. So I

52:33

think the group that developed

52:38

it, so Jamie Workman was the one

52:38

who developed these, and they

52:42

did a great job at kind of like

52:42

what they were doing there. But

52:45

I really liked how they started

52:45

getting at campus partnerships.

52:48

So just as I told you, like,

52:48

potentially bringing in a new

52:51

ally program to talk about

52:51

students with autism, or how to

52:54

create a students on the

52:54

spectrum, LLC, what type of

52:58

partners would you need? They

52:58

kind of get into some of those

53:00

logistics and planning

53:00

conversations, which are really

53:03

good about starting to

53:03

operationalize what was found,

53:06

and I think they did a great job

53:06

there on the questions.

53:10

Yeah, I'd love what I've when I published an article, I love reading the

53:12

discussion questions, just to

53:15

see what my first audience

53:15

member actually took away from

53:19

it. And then I was like, "Wait,

53:19

but why didn't you ask about

53:22

this?" Like, that was the one

53:22

takeaway, I thought everybody

53:25

would go. And apparently, I

53:25

missed the boat on that one.

53:27

Mm hmm. And what

53:27

resonates, it's beautiful to see

53:30

it. And that's, that's part of

53:30

the processes you get to see and

53:34

get to engage people in a very

53:34

different way with with

53:37

publishing.

53:38

What was the

53:38

feeling you got when you saw

53:40

your first article in print?

53:43

Oh, my goodness,

53:43

I think I'll go back to that

53:45

feeling, you know, that imposter

53:45

syndrome that I talked a little

53:48

bit about earlier, like, Y'all,

53:48

I was the student who had like a

53:53

1.8 GPA. My first semester, I

53:53

was about to get kicked out of

53:56

college, like I was that guy on

53:56

campus. And writing was never my

54:02

strength, like, and now after my

54:02

undergraduate program, and my

54:06

masters and my PhD, I feel like

54:06

I'm a strong writer now, which I

54:10

would have never said as a as an

54:10

undergraduate. And so to see

54:14

something published, where I

54:14

wasn't confident in my writing,

54:18

and to get to a point where I

54:18

felt confident about it, and

54:21

realize there's ways if you're

54:21

not confident about your

54:23

writing, to still publish, and

54:23

be part of groups and teams,

54:26

research is not a solo endeavor.

54:26

And to see it in print, I

54:29

finally got over that

54:29

apprehension about my writing

54:33

and that it wasn't good enough.

54:33

And that was a awesome moment to

54:37

have for myself. It wasn't even

54:37

about the topic. It was more

54:40

about just the process of

54:40

writing and feeling confident in

54:43

it. And that's probably what I

54:43

took away from my first

54:46

publication there.

54:48

well, and it's we've said on a number of occasions on the podcast, it's

54:50

like once you get your first one

54:52

done, it makes it a lot easier

54:52

to do the next one.

54:55

Oh, for sure.

54:55

You get a you get into your own

54:57

rhythm, your own process. You

54:57

understand what parts of the

55:01

research process you love, and

55:01

what parts you want to

55:04

outsource, you know, and I still

55:04

outsource editing, like I still

55:07

find other people to edit, you

55:07

know, like, you just learn your

55:11

style. And when you're doing it

55:11

with teams, it's a way to

55:13

collaborate way to do

55:13

professional development just in

55:16

a different way.

55:17

It's just like supervising, you know, delegate the things you don't want to do.

55:20

Heck, yes. Isn't that good supervision?

55:23

That's my

55:23

understanding of it. What's your

55:25

favorite part about the writing

55:25

for publication process?

55:29

Oh, my gosh, I

55:29

am a curious soul. Like I have,

55:33

like, literally, I'm holding it

55:33

up... You can't see it, SWACUHO.

55:37

I have a little journal that I

55:37

carry around with me everywhere.

55:41

I'm showing J.C. It literally,

55:41

it's full of ideas. It's just

55:45

like random curiosities. Like

55:45

when I first got to SMU, I'm

55:48

like, Why does everyone multiple

55:48

major? Like everyone has more

55:52

than one major here versus when

55:52

I was an undergrad everyone just

55:54

had one. It was hard to multiple

55:54

major here, everyone's doing it.

55:57

So we did a study on why

55:57

students multiple major, you

55:59

know, like, another one was on

55:59

like, you know, we had a

56:03

curiosity on like, is Behind

56:03

Closed Doors effective? So I

56:07

talked about that possible study

56:07

there. We did another one on

56:10

right now we're in the middle of

56:10

data collection about social

56:13

class looks very different in

56:13

college, right? Like, how do you

56:16

determine social classes

56:16

normally inherited by your

56:18

family, but what determines

56:18

social money or social capital

56:22

in a currency way, when you're

56:22

college students, so we're

56:26

focusing on this idea of

56:26

discretionary spending, how much

56:29

money students have on a monthly

56:29

basis beyond the necessities to

56:33

participate in social life, and

56:33

like we're doing a whole study

56:36

on that, because SMU, I don't

56:36

know if you've heard is known

56:39

for being kind of a, you know, a

56:39

little bit more expensive

56:43

school. And so we're interested

56:43

in digging into that with more

56:46

students. So curiosities, that's

56:46

my favorite part is getting to

56:49

explore those questions and get

56:49

to explore them in a meaningful

56:53

way.

56:54

I love that because

56:54

Craig Seger, very similar

56:56

comment, like this laundry list

56:56

of ideas that are just out

56:59

there, and some are better than

56:59

others, and some are valid and

57:02

some are not. But a lot of them

57:02

are just kind of fun to think

57:05

about, and then some get legs

57:05

and others don't. So, that's

57:09

great. And you you got a lot

57:09

that you said, you're you're

57:12

working on. Your

57:12

interdisciplinary research team

57:15

is a part of that, right, that

57:15

you all publish a lot. So how

57:22

does this work?

57:23

Yeah, so y'all

57:23

know high impact practices we

57:27

talk about in our field all the

57:27

time. Like, we probably think

57:30

about things like study abroad,

57:30

or internships and stuff like

57:34

that, but one of them is

57:34

undergraduate research. And I

57:37

think a lot of people in student

57:37

affairs, just outsource that and

57:41

said, "That's not us. That's

57:41

academic affairs to do

57:43

undergraduate research." Why not

57:43

create played employment

57:47

positions for students to do

57:47

research for your department and

57:50

help you with your assessment

57:50

work. That's what I did.

57:52

Essentially, I didn't want to do

57:52

it alone. So I'm mentoring

57:56

students on the process. And

57:56

essentially, that's where it

57:59

started was just getting

57:59

students who are interested in

58:02

data analysis. And using

58:02

software like Tableau, or R, or

58:08

Python, or SPSS, whatever the

58:08

skill need was related to the

58:11

data, they're a lot more

58:11

proficient at some of that

58:14

stuff. So essentially, I'm able

58:14

to mentor, they are doing a high

58:18

impact practice and getting

58:18

employed, which is layering, you

58:21

know, emergent high impact

58:21

practice and an established one.

58:24

And then we get to explore these

58:24

curiosities that we have within

58:28

housing within the university

58:28

environment, etc. And it's just

58:32

a lot of fun to not do it alone.

58:32

And now, our department offers

58:36

it not only from students, which

58:36

I can employ, but we also offer

58:40

it as a committee assignment as

58:40

part of our departmental

58:42

structure, where staff can now

58:42

opt into the research team for

58:46

professional development for

58:46

particular projects. So now it's

58:49

a professional development

58:49

avenue as well, for our live-in

58:54

and mid level staff.

58:56

Staff that opt

58:56

in... How do they manage the job

58:59

duties and other

58:59

responsibilities? Like is opting

59:02

into this mean they don't have

59:02

the opportunity to do something

59:06

else, or is it like a committee

59:06

structure? Or is it outside the

59:09

work hours?

59:10

it's within the

59:10

committee structure. So if we

59:12

say that you have to be on two

59:12

this year, it counts as one of

59:15

your two. So we build it in that

59:15

way. But we do have some staff

59:18

that have been here a while that

59:18

kind of gets special approval

59:22

from their supervisors, because

59:22

they're on the two committees

59:26

already, but they want to do a

59:26

third through this project. And

59:30

like one, the social class one,

59:30

Alexander Renz, he's a

59:33

residential community director

59:33

here, and in the higher ed

59:36

program, and so he has an

59:36

interest in it. Not only that,

59:40

but also in school. And we were

59:40

like, yeah, come on, bring the

59:43

idea. Let's go. And so we get to

59:43

do that kind of project together

59:46

as well. So it's really cool in

59:46

that way that I have the support

59:50

of my supervisor and the

59:50

department to count this as part

59:53

of one of those assignments.

59:55

With all the people

59:55

involved. My real question is

59:58

how do you go about determining

59:58

authorship order.

1:00:03

Hmm. So funny

1:00:03

thing that you brought that up,

1:00:06

I actually went to NASPA and

1:00:06

ACPA hosted like a collaborative

1:00:11

research session. And basically,

1:00:11

they talked about that concept

1:00:16

of author order and how you get

1:00:16

credit, right? Luckily, I'm not

1:00:20

in a staff, I'm in a staff

1:00:20

position, I'm not in a faculty

1:00:23

position which requires me to be

1:00:23

first author on everything. So

1:00:27

to me, it's more important for

1:00:27

like the students to experience

1:00:30

first author and what it means

1:00:30

to be a corresponding author

1:00:32

with a journal, and what those

1:00:32

responsibilities look like. So

1:00:35

often we, we being like the

1:00:35

staff, like push them, or the

1:00:39

faculty involved, push them to

1:00:39

the leads a lot of the time, but

1:00:43

you're right, it is it is a

1:00:43

discussion early on. And we

1:00:46

bring it up two or three times

1:00:46

normally, through the project

1:00:50

period, as a way of just

1:00:50

honestly assessing, right? Am I

1:00:55

contributing? What are my

1:00:55

contributions to this project?

1:00:59

And it's a great like self

1:00:59

reflection, and sometimes people

1:01:01

feel guilt and shame, which

1:01:01

motivates them to do their part

1:01:04

a little bit more, while others

1:01:04

are like, "You know what, I'm

1:01:07

fine being last, because I'm

1:01:07

really not sure what's going

1:01:10

on," like, you know, like, it's

1:01:10

whatever it is.

1:01:13

"I'm just happy to be here!"

1:01:14

Yeah, I'm happy to be here! I'm learning about like, regression analysis, and

1:01:16

I'm still like, whoosh, you

1:01:19

know, like, whatever it might

1:01:19

be. And so we have two or three

1:01:22

times we talk about it, but it

1:01:22

is intentional. And it's good

1:01:26

practice to talk about it and

1:01:26

bring it up early. And for me,

1:01:31

it's like sometimes the two has

1:01:31

the idea. But not it goes beyond

1:01:35

that. It's like who can

1:01:35

operationalize the idea because

1:01:37

operationalizing the idea is the

1:01:37

hardest part.

1:01:40

Absolutely. I

1:01:40

worked with the an author once

1:01:44

and I, it was it would have been

1:01:44

this person's first article. And

1:01:47

I said at the beginning, I was like, at the end of this process, when we're all done,

1:01:49

you and I are going to have a

1:01:52

conversation about who deserves

1:01:52

and we're each going to make a

1:01:55

case. Yeah. And we'll decide at

1:01:55

that point. And I part of it was

1:01:59

just to do it right, and but

1:01:59

also to challenge this person to

1:02:03

articulate what it was they did

1:02:03

their involvement, and you know,

1:02:08

their contribution, because I

1:02:08

think that's such an important

1:02:10

part is like, you weren't just a

1:02:10

tag along like you were a

1:02:13

valuable member of this team.

1:02:13

And I want you to be able to

1:02:16

articulate when someone asks,

1:02:16

when you're talking about your

1:02:18

article like, "oh, yeah, of

1:02:18

course I did. These are all the

1:02:21

things I did." And I think

1:02:21

that's just such a valuable

1:02:24

piece, especially for like young

1:02:24

authors, or first time

1:02:27

publishers that you weren't just

1:02:27

along for the ride,

1:02:29

You're already doing the mentoring that I talked about, you're getting

1:02:31

them to articulate the transferable skills and their

1:02:33

impact, and you're doing that

1:02:37

through an author water

1:02:37

discussion, and you're, you're

1:02:39

prepping them for the next

1:02:39

conversation they're going to

1:02:41

have in the interview when the

1:02:41

resume is being reviewed. You

1:02:44

know, like, that's exactly what

1:02:44

you just did there is helping

1:02:47

them articulate their

1:02:47

contributions on a team of

1:02:50

researchers, you know?

1:02:51

yeah, the interesting thing is like this person had a job interview, and

1:02:53

it actually came up in the job

1:02:56

interview about the article and

1:02:56

had the elevator pitch all ready

1:02:59

to go. And I mean, it was great. There's, I can't remember what

1:03:01

it is now. But there's some like

1:03:04

online forum for like,

1:03:04

researchers, where they write in

1:03:07

about, like, complaints about

1:03:07

authorship order or

1:03:11

contributions or things, and it

1:03:11

just is hilarious. Every once a

1:03:16

year, I'll go on there and read

1:03:16

it. And it's like, I mean, it's

1:03:19

a legit place. It's not just

1:03:19

like a Reddit post, but it's

1:03:22

like a legit organization and

1:03:22

I'll have to find where it is

1:03:26

again, but I love reading that

1:03:26

stuff. Because it's just the

1:03:28

politics and those kinds of

1:03:28

things. It's just like

1:03:31

navigating anything in the job.

1:03:33

Oh, my gosh,

1:03:33

and, you know, it gives me some

1:03:35

sensitivity as someone who works

1:03:35

with faculty, in my role, like

1:03:39

now I have insight into some of

1:03:39

the weird things that they spend

1:03:42

an hour talking about, and I'm

1:03:42

nodding my head, I'm like, I'm

1:03:45

not quite sure why this is so

1:03:45

important to them, and why

1:03:48

they're frustrated. But now I

1:03:48

have a little inkling. Yeah,

1:03:50

that is frustrating, like when

1:03:50

someone doesn't pull their

1:03:53

weight on a research project, or

1:03:53

yeah, that hurts when something

1:03:56

you spend a lot of time on, and

1:03:56

your first author on doesn't get

1:03:59

the credibility or the weight

1:03:59

because it was just a weird

1:04:02

journal that was published in

1:04:02

and not recognized by their

1:04:05

field, you know, like, I

1:04:05

understand some of those

1:04:08

concerns now. And I think I'm a

1:04:08

better collaborator, because I

1:04:11

have those kinds of insights, as

1:04:11

well through through my work

1:04:14

with this with this team. So

1:04:14

lots of lots of new politics.

1:04:19

But the one thing I'll just

1:04:19

throw out there too, for folks

1:04:23

that are thinking about getting

1:04:23

into research, like think about

1:04:25

the academy, you work at an

1:04:25

institution of higher ed, what

1:04:29

is its currency? Its currency is

1:04:29

what is written. It's what what

1:04:35

makes a report what makes you

1:04:35

know, the final cut of

1:04:39

something, what's published,

1:04:39

that's the currency of academia,

1:04:43

that's going to be what causes

1:04:43

change. And so for me, like this

1:04:47

topic around students with

1:04:47

autism or other marginalized

1:04:49

communities, you can amplify

1:04:49

voices and student experience

1:04:53

through publication because

1:04:53

that's the currency that the

1:04:56

academy listens to. And I think

1:04:56

that is often what I like about

1:05:01

it is that you can really cause

1:05:01

change through what you write.

1:05:06

And that's really what motivates

1:05:06

me to kind of do this kind of

1:05:09

work and to write it up. But you

1:05:09

know, it also helps me just be a

1:05:14

better contributor to the field,

1:05:14

you know, as a whole.

1:05:18

Absolutely. And

1:05:18

have you ever received any

1:05:20

feedback or comments about

1:05:20

change that any of your work has

1:05:25

inspired?

1:05:25

Oh, my Yes. So

1:05:25

earlier, this or like, late,

1:05:29

late last week, I had an article

1:05:29

that published in the College

1:05:33

Student Retention, and it was

1:05:33

about characterizing why

1:05:37

students were leaving the

1:05:37

university. And it's one of the

1:05:39

first studies that is at a

1:05:39

private school, right? So and it

1:05:45

airs some little bit of laundry,

1:05:45

some dirty laundry, about you

1:05:49

think we have our business

1:05:49

processes down on some of our

1:05:53

departing student processes. We

1:05:53

don't, it's a lot more messy.

1:05:58

And when you have a researcher

1:05:58

that's looking through stuff in

1:06:01

a very systematic way, you start

1:06:01

finding gaps. But that's the

1:06:05

beautiful thing about

1:06:05

practitioner scholars, we are

1:06:07

action researchers, we are doing

1:06:07

the work and trying to inform

1:06:11

our inform our work through a

1:06:11

methodical systematic practice.

1:06:17

And we found a lot of gaps. And

1:06:17

some of the people who were

1:06:20

responsible for those areas felt

1:06:20

some kind of way. But it's done

1:06:25

for improvement. It's not done

1:06:25

to point fingers, it's done to

1:06:28

so look, we have work to do. And

1:06:28

all institutions have areas of

1:06:33

growth, they just have to be

1:06:33

more open to it. But boy, I was

1:06:37

I was pointing those out a long

1:06:37

time ago. But it took till the

1:06:41

publication for that to be taken

1:06:41

with some credibility.

1:06:45

I love everything

1:06:45

about that, because it's so

1:06:47

true. And even just the skills

1:06:47

involved in like, qualitative

1:06:51

research, like, you know, you do

1:06:51

an annual assessment. It's like

1:06:55

got some open ended things on

1:06:55

it, like, professionals

1:06:58

typically focus on the one

1:06:58

hysterical comment, and we got

1:07:01

to resolve that. But like, if

1:07:01

you actually look at that with a

1:07:04

qualitative researcher lens,

1:07:04

that's like, oh, there's a whole

1:07:07

bunch of like non hysterical

1:07:07

things that are thematically

1:07:10

aligned, that oh, we should be

1:07:10

addressing this instead of this

1:07:15

one thing that there you go.

1:07:18

And, and

1:07:18

honestly, those things that

1:07:20

those hysterical, like comments

1:07:20

or suggestions or those really

1:07:25

big outliers, that's what we

1:07:25

would call them in the research

1:07:27

process that outlier, those

1:07:27

things get all the way up the

1:07:30

chain to leadership. And that's

1:07:30

often all leadership hears is

1:07:34

outliers. And so they're forming

1:07:34

themes off of outliers.

1:07:39

Yes!

1:07:40

We that are more

1:07:40

touched with the data, not

1:07:43

saying that our leadership is out of touch. But I'm just saying that we that are in the

1:07:45

data that are mining it that are

1:07:48

going through it in a systematic

1:07:48

way, we're seeing the true

1:07:50

themes of the student

1:07:50

experience. And we've got to do

1:07:53

better about amplifying those

1:07:53

themes, not theming, the

1:07:56

outliers.

1:07:57

Building themes off

1:07:57

of outliers, I never thought of

1:08:00

it that way. You are so right.

1:08:00

Because the further up you move,

1:08:04

like the less involved in the

1:08:04

day to day like you only hear

1:08:07

the outliers, whether they're

1:08:07

the extreme positive or the

1:08:09

extreme negative.

1:08:10

Exactly.

1:08:12

Well, and you talked about writing the currency of like academia, but I

1:08:14

think there's also a currency

1:08:17

like for an individual. And you

1:08:17

talk about reports, it's like,

1:08:21

most Student Affairs divisions

1:08:21

have like an annual report that

1:08:24

every department fills out and

1:08:24

it's got Okay, now list all of

1:08:27

your staffs presentations. And

1:08:27

typically one of those is lists

1:08:30

all your staffs publications,

1:08:30

and in most departments, or

1:08:34

Student Affairs divisions, like

1:08:34

that one's pretty sparsely

1:08:37

filled. And so if you are to

1:08:37

publish something, there's a

1:08:41

currency there because of the

1:08:41

scarcity. If your name is

1:08:44

associated, like I guarantee

1:08:44

your VP is going to see your

1:08:47

name on 100 page report, because

1:08:47

that's a very interesting and

1:08:53

powerful category to be

1:08:53

associated with.

1:08:55

Exactly. So

1:08:55

you're finding out that you're

1:08:58

going to get recognized in a

1:08:58

different way than you thought.

1:09:01

Right. And I think you're right,

1:09:01

that is a scarce area on the

1:09:04

reports. And I'll also point out

1:09:04

too, with with universities

1:09:07

moving towards R1 or R1 focuses,

1:09:07

we're having conversations here

1:09:12

at SMU, how can we get into

1:09:12

Academic Impressions, which is,

1:09:16

if you're not familiar with

1:09:16

that, it's a software where

1:09:18

faculty track their

1:09:18

publications, their service,

1:09:22

their teaching, that kind of

1:09:22

stuff. But why couldn't Student

1:09:25

Affairs, who might be adjunct

1:09:25

faculty, in different

1:09:29

departments contribute

1:09:29

publications to the overall

1:09:32

metric? And so we're talking

1:09:32

about ways where we can benefit

1:09:36

our academic partners, maybe not

1:09:36

in a huge way, if not a lot of

1:09:39

us are publishing but in some

1:09:39

way, we're going to contribute

1:09:42

to some sort of metric that

1:09:42

matters to the larger

1:09:44

university. And it's cool to

1:09:44

think about that in that way as

1:09:48

well that like, yeah, it's

1:09:48

tracked in our in our regular

1:09:52

annual reports with our

1:09:52

division, but what are other

1:09:54

ways we can get it out there to

1:09:54

maybe benefit the institutional

1:09:57

outcomes as a whole?

1:09:59

Yeah, absolutely.

1:09:59

As we wrap up the show, what's

1:10:02

the most memorable piece of

1:10:02

feedback, positive or negative

1:10:06

that you've received from a

1:10:06

manuscript reviewer?

1:10:10

This goes back

1:10:10

to my first ever publication.

1:10:12

You gotta got to come back with

1:10:12

me in time J.C. I'm going back

1:10:15

to like undergrad, okay? I'm,

1:10:15

I'm a end of my sophomore year

1:10:20

going into my junior year, we're

1:10:20

publishing what motivates

1:10:23

students to participate in a

1:10:23

residential leadership Living

1:10:25

Learning Community. I'm working

1:10:25

with two faculty members. One of

1:10:30

them who's highly relational,

1:10:30

like everything's great. My

1:10:33

cheerleader, the other faculty

1:10:33

member, very task oriented,

1:10:37

brash, direct communicator.

1:10:37

Okay?

1:10:39

I already see where

1:10:39

this is going. This is great.

1:10:42

Right? Okay. I thought I was doing

1:10:43

great, because the only person I

1:10:46

was talking to the whole time

1:10:46

was my cheerleader. But then I

1:10:50

went into someone that actually

1:10:50

read everything I wrote, which

1:10:54

was different. My cheerleader

1:10:54

cared about me in some type of

1:10:57

way personally. But the other

1:10:57

task oriented one cared about me

1:11:02

in a different way and showed

1:11:02

their care, through a really red

1:11:06

manuscript that looked like it

1:11:06

was dead, that something died on

1:11:09

it, because that's how I red it

1:11:09

was. But that kind of feedback

1:11:13

that taking feedback as a form

1:11:13

of care that someone took care

1:11:18

to read your work. And she

1:11:18

pointed out to me about how I

1:11:23

write in a very inactive voice,

1:11:23

and not an active voice and

1:11:27

pointed out all the

1:11:27

prepositional phrases that I use

1:11:30

that dilute my sentence

1:11:30

structure. And this might sound

1:11:33

really crazy to talk about on a

1:11:33

podcast. But that piece of

1:11:36

feedback, like changed how I

1:11:36

wrote and how I was mindful of

1:11:41

it now. And it wasn't like I

1:11:41

hadn't gotten that kind of

1:11:44

feedback before in my class. But

1:11:44

it felt different. Because I was

1:11:48

doing this as like an extra

1:11:48

curricular thing. And I cared

1:11:51

about it in a different way than

1:11:51

my class assignments. And so it

1:11:54

resonated. And that was the most

1:11:54

beautiful thing, just working on

1:11:58

how to write in active voice.

1:11:58

And realizing that markups like

1:12:03

that is a form of care. And that

1:12:03

opened me up to really hearing

1:12:07

that feedback for the first time.

1:12:10

On the last

1:12:10

episode, we talked about, do you

1:12:12

want compliments? Or do you want

1:12:12

feedback, I'm just glad you had

1:12:15

both of those and individual

1:12:15

people there to provide that for

1:12:18

you.

1:12:18

Oh, you do need a little bit of both. Because when you're doing for the first

1:12:20

time you need that cheerleader in your court, but you also need

1:12:21

someone who's technical and

1:12:25

going to point out the flaws in

1:12:25

your logic. And that was the

1:12:28

beauty of that duo for me. And

1:12:28

we're not always that lucky on

1:12:31

the reviewer process to have

1:12:31

reviewer one being the

1:12:34

relational one and the reviewer

1:12:34

two being the technical, but we

1:12:37

can only hope that it balances

1:12:37

itself out a little bit.

1:12:40

My first final

1:12:40

paper in my doc program that I

1:12:43

wrote, It was like a 15 page,

1:12:43

something or other... it was

1:12:46

about cultural capital and

1:12:46

student affairs programming. And

1:12:50

I remember reading the feedback

1:12:50

on it. And I loved the professor

1:12:54

gave it to me, and on page

1:12:54

eight, there was a comment off

1:12:57

to the side said, "Well, it took

1:12:57

eight pages, but your paper is

1:13:01

finally starting to get somewhat

1:13:01

good." But it was absolutely, I

1:13:04

mean, he was absolutely right.

1:13:04

It you know, to be able to take

1:13:07

and I think that's such a neat

1:13:07

thing about the anonymous blind

1:13:10

process is like, there's a whole

1:13:10

lot of feedback I've received in

1:13:13

papers I've written or

1:13:13

manuscripts for publication. And

1:13:18

sometimes being able to take

1:13:18

feedback like a champ is one

1:13:21

thing, but also then being able

1:13:21

to respond to stuff you don't

1:13:23

necessarily agree with is also a

1:13:23

skill to develop.

1:13:25

And J.C., you

1:13:25

pointed out too it's like, it's

1:13:28

so important that you put

1:13:28

yourself out there, you're

1:13:31

putting yourself out there in a

1:13:31

very different way than you ever

1:13:35

have been. Right? And I think

1:13:35

also in student affairs, we're

1:13:37

Oh, yeah. And

1:13:37

sometimes just reading those the

1:13:38

used to talking about the fluff

1:13:38

and the big picture. And very

1:13:42

abstractly, you know, we want to

1:13:42

increase students sense of

1:13:45

belonging, you know, we talk

1:13:45

about we talk about the world

1:13:49

that way, but then when you

1:13:49

actually operationalize them,

1:13:52

like I asked my staff like what

1:13:52

a sense of belonging mean, and

1:13:56

they can't even define it. And

1:13:56

then when we actually do a

1:13:59

research study, now we have a

1:13:59

seven part subscale, which

1:14:02

breaks down sense of belonging

1:14:02

into in group homogeneity, lack

1:14:06

of perceived loneliness,

1:14:06

centrality, identification, now

1:14:09

we have operationalize what the

1:14:09

definition of sense of belonging

1:14:13

is, that's, that's the the gap

1:14:13

we're filling here, right? We're

1:14:17

so used to talking abstractly in

1:14:17

our field. And we got to realize

1:14:21

that when we write, and we do

1:14:21

assessment and research, we've

1:14:24

got to get very technical and

1:14:24

narrow and specific. And

1:14:27

sometimes it's, it's hard to do

1:14:27

that because we have half of our

1:14:31

team that's the outgoing big

1:14:31

picture group. And then we have

1:14:35

a technical team. And meeting in

1:14:35

the middle is the hard part, but

1:14:38

it's so necessary for the work. survey instruments about

1:14:43

belonging, like I'd studied

1:14:45

mattering. And just reading the

1:14:45

survey itself gives you like