Supervision of New Professionals in Student Affairs: Assessing - Eric

64 DAVIS BARHAM, WINSTON

Supervision of New Professionals in Student Affairs: Assessing and Addressing Needs Janice Davis Barham, RogerB. Winston, Jr.'

This qualitative stu4J examinedthe superoision 0/newprofessionalsfrom theperspectives 0/ new professionals and their superoisors. Anafysis 0/ interoiews with four new professionals and their superoisors suggested thefollowing: (a) supenisors superoised the wqy tbey wantedto be supennsed, (b) newprofessionals had difficulty identifying and/ or articulating what thry wanted or needed from their superoisors, (c) seasoned superoisors appeared to be better diagnosticians 0/ newprofessionals' needs than novice supenssors, (d) some superoisors lacked the sktlls necessary to diagnose accuratefy the superoision needs 0/ newprofessionals, and (e) there appeared to be little direct connection between identified superoision needs 0/newprofessionals andprofessional development activities.

Student affairs is a profession that has a large cohort of new professionals that enter its ranks yearly. At many institutions nearly half of a student affairs divisions' staff will be relatively new to the field (less than five years experience; Carpenter, 1991). As in many fields, new or emerging professionals in student affairs provide much, if not most, of the direct delivery of programs and services (other than physical and mental health) to students. Somewhat disturbingly, one study estimated that new professionals abandoned the field at a rate of 60% within six years of entering (Holmes, Verrier, & Chisolm, 1983). Most recently, it is reported that the attrition rate of new professionals, during the first five years, is between 39% and 68% (Ward, 1995). Regardless of the exact percent, clearly retention of new professionals is essential to the health of student affairs as a profession. New professionals are both the present and future of student affairs, and as such, a more thorough examination is needed of their work and life experiences.

This research study was designed to increase understanding of new professionals' needs by filling, in part, the information gap that currently exists. A second purpose of this study was to determine supervision needs as defined by the new professionals and to compare those with their supervisors' perceptions of their needs. In other words, do new professionals (NPs) and their supervisors perceive the world through the same lenses? Ultimately,

• Janice Davis Barham is assistant to the vice president of student affiirs, responsible for assessment andstaffdevelopment at the University ofGeorgia. Roger B. Winston, Jr. isprofessor emeritusfrom the University of Georgia. Correspondence concerning this article should be sent to [email protected].

THE COLLEGE STUDENTAFFAIRS JOURNAL

Supen;ision 0/]\

having a greater understanding of ~ development that is purposely cre professionals.

The goal of this article is to firs profess~onals, their supervision, and profeSSIonals growth and developmer ~s presenred along with findings of th implications for practice complete this of the references used in this article curr~nt research on the topic. Whi applicable to current practice, the info understand and address the needs of r note that a thorough literature review ( human resource management, was al: nature of student affairs work and b information was less applicable and wa

Attrition anc Attrition from the Field

Writers have speculated as to why la: leave the field. Some blame the problei 1980). Others claim the lack of autonor as the rigid administrative structures ol

causes (Wood, Winston, & Polkisnik that clearly identifies the factors ili phenomenon. Thus, researchers Me le could .b~ lack of institutional fit, poor unrealistic expectations of the first P' suggested that low starting salaries, dim need to be geographically mobile, the held on many campuses, and frustratiJ causal factors in new professionals exitin

ImportanceofSuperv~wn

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the r between new professionals and their su the attrition of new professionals. At lea they have left the field because they bee of student affairs and the kinds of dr (Winston & Creamer, 1997). Stamatakos crucial to the success and performance

FALL 2006 - VOLU!\!

\RHAM, WINSTON

ssionals in Student Affairs: ~ Needs linston, Jr:

supenision ofnewprofessionalsfrom theperspectives 'ljJeroisors. AnalYsis of interoiews with ]our new uggested the]ollowing: (a) supertisors superoised the ~ new professionals had difficulty identifying and/or ededfrom their supervisors, (cj seasoned supervisors of new professionals' needs than novice superoisors,

!Jls necessary to diagnose accuratelY the superoision there appeared to be little direct connection between 1fessionals andprofessional development activities.

las a large cohort of new professionals that istitutions nearly half of a student affairs to the field (less than five years experience;

, new or emerging professionals in student , of the direct delivery of programs and

mental health) to students. Somewhat It new professionals abandoned the field at tering (Holmes, Verrier, & Chisolm, 1983). . attrition rate of new professionals, during and 68% (Ward, 1995). Regardless of the w professionals is essential to the health of ~ professionals are both the present and 1, a more thorough examination is needed

-d to increase understanding of new ~, the information gap that currently exists. to determine supervision needs as defined compare those with their supervisors'

. words, do new professionals (NPs) and d through the same lenses? Ultimately,

president 0/student qffairs, responsible for assessment ia. Roger B. Winston, fr. isprofessor ementusfrom ce conceming this article should be sent to

lENTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

Superoision ofNew Professionals 65

having a greater understanding of NPs' needs can facilitate intentional staff development that is purposely created to meet the needs of emerging professionals.

The goal of this article is to first present the literature regarding new professionals, their supervision, and the issue that emerges regarding new professionals growth and development. Next, an outline of the research study is presented along with findings of the study. A discussion of findings and the implications for practice complete this article. It is important to note that many of the references used in this article are somewhat dated due to the lack of current research on the topic. While some of the research may not be applicable to current practice, the information serves as the only foundation to understand and address the needs of new professionals. It is also important to note that a thorough literature review of other disciplines, such as business and human resource management, was also conducted; however, because of the nature of student affairs work and because of the nature of this study, the information was less applicable and was not utilized in this project.

Attrition and Supervision

Attrition from the Field

Writers have speculated as to why large numbers of neophyte practitioners leave the field. Some blame the problem on a lack of job satisfaction (Bender, 1980). Others claim the lack of autonomy given in entry-level positions, as well as the rigid administrative structures of such initial positions, are contributing causes (Wood, Winston, & Polkisnik, 1985). There is little research reported that clearly identifies the factors that contribute to the early-departure phenomenon. Thus, researchers are left to speculate the cause. The causes could be lack of institutional fit, poor career decisions, or overly idealistic or unrealistic expectations of the first position. Winston and Creamer (1997) suggested that low starting salaries, difficulty in moving beyond entry-level, the need to be geographically mobile, the low regard in which student affairs is held on many campuses, and frustrating work environments are significant causal factors in new professionals exiting the profession early.

Importance of Supervision

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the nature of the supervisory relationship between new professionals and their superiors also may be a major factor in the attrition of new professionals. At least some new professionals report that they have left the field because they became disillusioned about the purposes of student affairs and the kinds of duties they were expected to perform (Winston & Creamer, 1997). Stamatakos (1978) asserted that the supervisor is crucial to the success and performance of new professionals. Coleman and

FALL 2006 ~ VOLUME 26, NUMBER 1


Johnson (1990) further supported this thought by saying: "Effective supervision is essential to the development of a new professional" (p. 13).

Winston and Hirt (2003) identified, based on an open-ended e-mail questionnaire of the supervisors of new professionals, principal challenges of supervising new professionals as (a) helping new professionals understand the institutional culture and politics, (b) showing patience, (c) assisting new professionals in seeing the big picture, (d) understanding the new professionals' work ethic, (e) dealing with a lack of sufficient supervision time, and (f) addressing errors and mistakes in judgment. In a separate open-ended, e-mail survey of new professionals, Winston and Hirt (2003) identified new professionals' perspectives of the supervision they had received/were receiving. Their criticisms of supervision included (a) lack of structure by the supervisor, (b) lack of autonomy (manifested primarily as micromanagement), (c) infrequency of direct feedback on performance, (d) lack of proper recognition of the new professional's limitations, (e) lack of emotional and material support, (f) ineffective communication, (g) lack of consistency in dealing with issues and persons, (h) being a poor or negative role model, and (i) insufficient professional sponsorship.

Although the research regarding supervision of staff at all levels is limited, when one examines the available research related to supervising new professionals, the literature is even more inadequate. If the future of student affairs is in the hands of new professionals, and their success is contingent, at least to a large degree on good supervision, supervisors need to provide adequate support, intentional and constructive supervision, and purposeful professional development programs (Marsh, 2001). The first step in this process is fully understanding new professionals' specific supervision needs and implementing strategies to meet those needs.

Staff Supervision

It has been established that the student affairs literature provides very little in the area of supervision of new professionals. As such, one is left asking are supervision practices based on theoretical principles such as Chickering and Reisers' (1993) vectors of psychosocial development, adult development theory (Marsh, 2001), practices grounded in supervisors' personal experiences (Arminio & Creamer, 2001) or new professionals' self-identified needs?

Although little is known in this area, research has established that practitioners hold beliefs about the competencies they expect new professionals to demonstrate (Barr, 1997; Burkard, Cole, Ott, & Stoflet, 2005; Rosen, Taub, & Wadsworth, 1985; Schuh & Carlisle, 1991; Wood et al., 1985). "As a new professional, a great deal of information will need to be mastered in a relatively short period of time," asserted Barr (1997, p. 491). Such areas of master identified in the literature include (a) an understanding of the conditions of

THE COllEGE SWDENTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

Supe11Jision ofN

employment, realistic expectations practice, understanding institutional ( communicating effectively, planning stress, gaining control of personal Schutzman, 1982); (c) having good it maintaining quality working relat organizational skills (Burkard et al., 201 functional competence (Wood et aI., 1 developing the mentioned skills be< professional with little responsibility reflected by Coleman and Johnson (19 ... [new professionals] continue in the which they understand their personal a what the individual and supervisor de such development" (p. viii).

In student affairs, there are successful meet the needs of those they supervi literature alludes to the concept of SUj

and Creamer (1997) reported that "sup, when working with employees who h: specific organization" (p. 181). E combination of growth for the individu of the institution (Janosik & Creamer, Chernow, 2000; Winston & Creamer 1 1985; Wood et aI., 1985). '

Saunders et al. (2000) found that inter growth and renewal is crucial to re supervisory relationship. These opportu professional conferences, in-house sernir skills needed to achieve an employee's ul (1991) stated that effective supervi understanding the needs of each indi, directly to those needs. In a study condi quality supervisors were defined as indiv educat~r~ constantly and consistently, : synergrsttc relationships in supportive em

Winston and Creamer (1997) introduced as a new model for supervision. This c<

between the supervisor and the staff m joint efforts to be greater than the sum 196). Intentional collaboration between

FALL 2006 - VOLUN.

\.RHAM, WINSTON

ted this thought by saying: "Effective opmenr of a new professional" (p. 13).

tified, based on an open-ended e-mail f new professionals, principal challenges of .) helping new professionals understand the (b) showing patience, (c) assisting new

re, (d) understanding the new professionals' :k of sufficient supervision time, and (f) udgmenr, In a separate open-ended, e-mail 'inston and Hirt (2003) identified new le supervision they had received/were rision included (a) lack of structure by the ianifesred primarily as micromanagement), k on performance, (d) lack of proper il's limitations, (e) lack of emotional and mmunication, (g) lack of consistency in leing a poor or negative role model, and (i)

pervision of staff at all levels is limited, ~ research related to supervising new riore inadequate. If the future of student sionals, and their success is contingent, at upervision, supervisors need to provide :onstructive supervision, and purposeful

(Marsh, 2001). The first step in this professionals' specific supervision needs hose needs.

nt affairs literature provides very little in ssionals, As such, one is left asking are etical principles such as Chickering and I development, adult development theory

in supervisors' personal experiences ofessionals' self-identified needs?

esearch has established that practitioners ~s they expect new professionals to e, Ott, & Stoflet, 2005; Rosen, Taub, & 1991; Wood et al., 1985). "As a new

n will need to be mastered in a relatively (1997, p. 491). Such areas of master

an understanding of the conditions of

NTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

Supervision q/New Professionals 67

employment, realistic expectations of the supervisor, applying theory to practice, understanding institutional culture (Barr, 1997); (b) managing time, communicating effectively, planning leisure time, dealing with physiological stress, gaining control of personal feelings (Wiggers, Forney, & WallaceSchutzman, 1982); (c) having good interpersonal skills (Burkard et al., 2005), maintaining quality working relationships, quality administrative and organizational skills (Burkard et al., 2005; Ostroth, 1981); and (d) technical and functional competence (Wood et al., 1985). It seems that the responsibility for developing the mentioned skills becomes the sole province of the new professional with little responsibility placed on the supervisor. The ideas is reflected by Coleman and Johnson (1990) who stated that "the likelihood that ... [new professionals] continue in the profession is influenced by the extent to which they understand their personal and professional development, as well as what the individual and supervisor do to ensure a satisfactory experience in such development" (p. viii).

In student affairs, there are successful and effective administrators that fail to meet the needs of those they supervise (Coleman & Johnson, 1990). Some literature alludes to the concept of supervision in times of trouble. Winston and Creamer (1997) reported that "supervision is often seen as important only when working with employees who have problems or who are new to that specific organization" (p. 181). Effective supervision emphasizes a combination of growth for the individual while fulfilling the goals and mission of the institution (Ianosik & Creamer, 2003; Saunders, Cooper, Winston, & Chernow, 2000; Winston & Creamer, 1997; Winston, Hebert, & McGonigle, 1985; Wood et al., 1985).

Saunders et al. (2000) found that intentional encouragement of professional growth and renewal is crucial to realizing positive outcomes from the supervisory relationship. These opportunities could be in the form of formal professional conferences, in-house seminars, or information discussions of the skills needed to achieve an employee's ultimate career goals. Schuh and Carlisle (1991) stated that effective supervision hinges upon the supervisor understanding the needs of each individual staff member and responding directly to those needs. In a study conducted by Armnio and Creamer (2001), quality supervisors were defined as individuals who are "ethical and principled educators constantly and consistently, seeking to accomplish goals through synergistic relationships in supportive environments" (p. 43).

Winston and Creamer (1997) introduced the concept of synergistic supervision as a new model for supervision. This concept calls for "a cooperative effort between the supervisor and the staff member that allows the effect of their joint efforts to be greater than the sum of their individual contributions" (p. 196). Intentional collaboration between the two individuals yields the most


l

DAVIS BARHAM, WINSTON68

successful supervision experience for supervisor and supervisee, and creates the most efficacious outcome for the institution, but, research illustrates that there is often incongruence between supervisor and supervisee's perceptions and needs (Winston & Creamer, 1997; Winston & Hirt, 2003).

The Issue with New Professionals

Much of the literature regarding supervision in student affairs is focused on staff development programs (Newton & Richardson, 1976; Wood et aI., 1985; Young, 1985) or the desired competencies of new professionals (Barr, 1998; Hirt & Winston, 2003; Rosen et al., 1985; Schuh & Carlisle, 1991; Wood et aI., 1985). Although there is little research on the supervision of new and emerging professionals other than the recent books by Janosik et al., 2003 and Magolda and Carnaghi, 2004, calls for continued staff development, programs, and models to further the growth of professionals continues (Coleman & Johnson, 1990; DeCoster & Brown, 1991; Hirt & Winston, 2003; Newton & Richardson, 1976; Winston & Creamer, 1997).

Because the available literature has a limited scope regarding needs of new professionals, this translates to an unknown foundation for the necessary professional development programs required for today's up-and-coming student affairs practitioner. Is there a full understanding of the needs of the new professional as such programs are being developed? Based on a review of the literature, the answer is "no." Thus, a purpose of this study was to determine the supervision needs as defined by new professionals and compare those with supervisors' perception of new professional needs. With this foundational information, practitioners can be more intentional and purposeful in the type of supervision and staff development programs that are provided to new professionals.

The four interrelated research questions which guided this study were these:

1. How do new professionals describe the supervision they received during the previous 12 months?

2. What needs did new professionals report having during the previous 12 months?

3. What were supervisors' perceptions of the supervISIOn needs of the new professionals they supervised during the previous 12 months?

4. Is there a difference in the supervision needs as perceived by new professionals and the needs as perceived by their supervisors?

Supervision of:

Met

In this study, the term newprifession. first three years of their professio} individu~s who graduated from a pl worked ill a traditional student affairs residence life, or Greek affairs. S~ responsible for the management and c

Process

The researchers conducted a qualitat from two institutions in the southe selected new professionals and their d semi-structured protocol. The sele Supervisor/supervisee pairs were selee different types of new profession professionals were no more than thn de~e~. Additionally, only new profess partiCIpate were included.

Participants. The senior author contac names of all new professionals in stue then contacted via e-mail. A brief ov potential participant. Individuals williru for permission to contact their direc unwilling to give permission; therefore, t~e study. Some stated that they did n with their supervisor; others felt thei, eno~~h to ~nswer a battery of question. partiCipate m the study. As a result, the the more negative supervisory relations}

Ultimately, five supervisor-new profess study. In one instance, data were co professional requested to withdraw fro been condu.cted. Therefore, the analysis four supervIsor-new professional dyads southeastern United States.

Although the data collected were tre. matche? nature of the data, it may professional, and supervisors) to discen ~s a result, all participants were infe mformed consent process which occurrer

tne COLLEGE SWDENTAFFAIRSJOURNAL FALL 2006 - VOLUN.

RHAM, WINSTON

for supervisor and supervisee, and creates the institution, but, research illustrates that en supervisor and supervisee's perceptions n; Winston & Hirr, 2003).

h New Professionals

ipervision in student affairs is focused on )fi & Richardson, 1976; Wood et al., 1985; etencies of new professionals (Barr, 1998; 1985; Schuh & Carlisle, 1991; Wood et aI., :h on the supervision of new and emerging oooks by Janosik et al., 2003 and Magolda jnued staff development, programs, and fessionals continues (Coleman & Johnson, :& Winston, 2003; Newton & Richardson,

a limited scope regarding needs of new unknown foundation for the necessary s required for today's up-and-coming a full understanding of the needs of the re being developed? Based on a review of Thus, a purpose of this study was to efined by new professionals and compare of new professional needs. With this

·s can be more intentional and purposeful velopment programs that are provided to

1S which guided this study were these:

the supervision they received during the

; report having during the previous 12

s of the supervrsion needs of the new e previous 12 months?

xrvision needs as perceived by new d by their supervisors?

NTAFFAIRJ'jOURNAL

Supervision ofNew Professionals 69

Methodology

In this study, the term new professional was used to describe individuals in the first three years of their professional careers. The new professionals were individuals who graduated from a professional preparation program and who worked ill a traditional student affairs functional area such as student activities, residence life, or Greek affairs. Superoisor refers to the individual directly responsible for the management and evaluation of the new professional.

Process

The researchers conducted a qualitative study. Five individuals were selected from two institutions in the southeastern U.S.; however, only four of the selected new professionals and their direct supervisors were interviewed using a semi-structured protocol. The selection of participants was purposeful. Supervisor/supervisee pairs were selected based on their functional area so that different types of new professionals would be represented. The new professionals were no more than three years beyond receiving their master's degree. Additionally, only new professionals whose direct supervisor agreed to

participate were included.

Participants. The senior author contacted two institutions and asked for the names of all new professionals in student affairs. Individuals on the list were then contacted via e-mail. A brief overview of the study was given to each potential participant. Individuals willing to participate in the study were asked for permission to contact their direct supervisors. Several individuals were unwilling to give permission; therefore, they were not selected as participants in the study. Some stated that they did not have a "good" working relationship with their supervisor; others felt their supervisor did not know them well enough to answer a battery of questions. A total of four individuals declined to participate in the study. As a result, the sample may not adequately represent the more negative supervisory relationships.

Ultimately, five supervisor-new professional dyads were interviewed for this study. In one instance, data were collected from the dyad, but the new professional requested to withdraw from the study after the interviews had been conducted. Therefore, the analysis reported in this study was based on four supervisor-new professional dyads from two different universities in the southeastern United States.

Although the data collected were treated as confidential, because of the matched nature of the data, it may be possible for participants (new professionals and supervisors) to discern the source of some of the material. As a result, all participants were informed of this limitation during the informed consent process which occurred prior to the data collection.


I


Institutions. Institutions are referred to as Institution "A" and "B." Institution A describes itself as a selective, public, land-grant university in a college-town setting. The student body has about 14,000 undergraduates and 5,000 graduate students. The primary missions of the institution are teaching, research, and public service. Institution A is classified as a Doctoral/Research University Extensive (Carnegie, 2005). Institution B, is an urban, public, Doctoral/Research University - Extensive (Carnegie, 2005). Approximately 10,000 students attend institution B, which is known for its academic excellence and scientific/technical research reputation.

Data collection. Participants were interviewed using a semi-structured protocol. All interviews were tape recorded, and a list of open-ended questions was used to guide the process. The interview protocol was used primarily to assure that the same topics were addressed in all interviews. The interviewer had the liberty to deviate from the protocol to follow-up and probe to assure a deeper understanding of the person's experiences. Once the interviews with the new professionals were completed, their supervisors were then interviewed using a somewhat parallel form of the protocol used with the new professional. Following the interviews, memoing was used to "describe and define concepts, deal with methodological issues, [and] offer initial theoretical formulations" (Babbie, 2004, p. 379). This strategy was used as a way of controlling for individual bias and increase the repeatability of the study. Information gained from memoing was also reviewed by both researchers and used to refine and slightly modify the interview protocol.

It is important to note during the data collection phase scheduling a face-toface interview with one of the supervisors, Lisa (pseudonym), was not possible due to her relocation to the western U.S. Therefore, a phone interview was conducted with her. As with the others, the interview protocol was followed, and the interview was recorded, transcribed, member checked, and analyzed.

Data Analysis

The audio-tapes of each interview were transcribed and evaluated for completeness and relevance. Telephone follow-ups were employed when necessary to clarify responses. Member checks (Miles & Huberman, 1994) were also done on all transcripts to ensure accuracy and completeness of each interview.

Once all transcripts were verified by participants, the researchers examined the information to ensure all data were present and complete, as recommended by Patton (1990). Content analysis, defined as "the process of identifying, coding, and categorizing the primary patterns in the data" (patton, 1990), was used to analyze the interview transcripts and field notes. Each transcript was examined independently and categories identified. Once the categories were identified for all transcripts, the researchers combined the information to separate

tun COLLEGE STIJDENTAFFAIRS'JOURNAL

Superoision of!

description from interpretation (pat ~uberman, 1994) exercise was utili discr~pancies were resolved, and final exanuned f~r congruence and incongt new profeSSIOnals and supervisors (b' or her supervisor, (c) the new profess protocols.

Limitations and Biases

The number of research participants ft and the participants came from a because the study is qualitative thd ' en

ara collection, and therefore, presen and backgrounds. A discussion of eac understanding potential bias.

The researchers. The senior author . wa expenence at the time of the data collec years experience in the field, primarily a: member'.The senior researcher's work and houslng at thr diff ' ..ee rerent uruverSItI< oth~r researcher's work experience, bes affairs administration at a smail, public c

Aspects of the supervision received by and ~xcellent experiences; however, ove descnbed as lacking or poor. Through colleagues, the researchers found that t when new. t? the field, were similar. As the ~upervlsIOn experiences of new proi SpeClficaily, the researchers wanted to ill

as the needs of new professionals and I personally and professionally.

~ of the interviews were conducted b listened to som t d . Y . . e apes, rea transcnpts ( and paft1Clpat~d. in peer debriefing, but h ot~er than aSSIStlng in designing the study actlng as a sounding board to the se progressed.

Bec~use one's epistemology approach infh (design, data collection, analysis and inte the res~archers of this study operated fro~ theoretIcal frame, it is believed that

FALL 2006 - VOLUME

RHAM, WINSTON

to as Institution "A" and "B." Institution A ic, land-grant university in a college-town 14,000 undergraduates and 5,000 graduate the institution are teaching, research, and ,ified as a Doctoral/Research University _ 'istitution B, is an urban, public, xtensive (Carnegie, 2005). Approximately

B, which is known for its academic search reputation.

erviewed using a semi-structured protocol. id a list of open-ended questions was used protocol was used primarily to assure that

all interviews. The interviewer had the to follow-up and probe to assure a deeper iences. Once the interviews with the new supervisors were then interviewed using a otocol used with the new professional. .as used to "describe and define concepts, id] offer initial theoretical formulations" y was used as a way of controlling for atability of the study. Information gained both researchers and used to refine and

Ita collection phase scheduling a face-toisors, Lisa (pseudonym), was not possible U.S. Therefore, a phone interview was

ers, the interview protocol was followed, ribed, member checked, and analyzed.

were transcribed and evaluated for lone follow-ups were employed when ~ checks (Miles & Huberman, 1994) were re accuracy and completeness of each

articipants, the researchers examined the .sent and complete, as recommended by d as "the process of identifying, coding, In the data" (patton, 1990), was used to eld notes. Each transcript was examined . Once the categories were identified for nbined the information to separate

'NTAFFAIR5'JOURNAL

5upenssio« ofNew Professionals 71

description from interpretation (patton, 1990). A peer debriefing (Miles & Huberman, 1994) exercise was utilized to control for reviewer bias. Once discrepancies were resolved, and final themes were agreed upon, the data were examined for congruence and incongruence between (a) the collective group of new professionals and supervisors, (b) each individual new professional and his or her supervisor, (c) the new professionals, and (d) the supervisors' interview protocols.

Limitations and Biases

The number of research participants from which data were collected was small, and the participants came from a single geographical area. Additionally, because the study is qualitative, the researchers served as the instrument for data collection, and therefore, present biases engrained by their experiences and backgrounds. A discussion of each researcher is provided as a guide for understanding potential bias.

The researchers. The senior author was in the first five years of professional experience at the time of the data collection. The other researcher had over 30 years experience in the field, primarily as a student affairs administration faculty member. The senior researcher's work experience was limited to residence life and housing at three different universities (two public and one private), and the other researcher's work experience, besides teaching, includes general student affairs administration at a small, public college.

Aspects of the supervision received by both researchers illustrated both poor and excellent experiences; however, overall supervision they received could be described as lacking or poor. Through informal questioning of friends and colleagues, the researchers found that their own experiences of supervision, when new to the field, were similar. As such, the desire to better understand the supervision experiences of new professionals became an area of interest. Specifically, the researchers wanted to understand better what supervisors see as the needs of new professionals and how this impacted new professionals personally and professionally.

All of the interviews were conducted by the senior author. The other author listened to some tapes, read transcripts of the interviews, defined categories, and participated in peer debriefing, but had no direct input in collecting data other than assisting in designing the study, creating the interview protocol, and acting as a sounding board to the senior author as the data collection progressed.

Because one's epistemology approach influences much of the research process (design, data collection, analysis and interpretation), it is important to note that the researchers of this study operated from a constructivist perspective. In this theoretical frame, it is believed that "meaning is not discovered, but



constructed" (Crotty, 1998, p. 9). Those who define themselves as constructivists also believe "different people may construct meaning in different ways, even in relation to the same phenomenon" (Crotty, 1998, p. 9). A firm understanding of this concept is critical to understanding the results of this study and the frame in which the researchers interpreted the data.

Participants' Backgrounds and Experience

For clarity purposes, a status label was added to the end of each participant's pseudonym. Those who are new professionals are denoted by a pseudonym name and status - New Professional (NP). Similarly, supervisors are listed by a pseudonym and their status - Supervisor (S).

KellY (NP) was in her second year as a new professional in student affairs. She completed a master's degree in education and used independent study courses to specialize in student affairs. Her program was practicum based and provided her with multiple on-site experiences; she had little developmental theory or professional foundations courses in her degree program. It was the practicum experience in student activities that was the most interesting. As a result, upon graduation she sought a position in that functional area. Until Kelly (NP) took her current position at a southern university, she had not been out of the northeast U.S. Her position title at Institution A was associate director. Kelly (NP) advised one student organization, supervised student workers, oversaw the campus pub, and was responsible for planning activities with the student union.

Kelly's (NP) supervisor was Jessica (S), who did not possess a degree in student affairs. Both her undergraduate and masters work was done in English. She entered the field of student affairs by default via the student media office when her husband moved to the area. Through the years, she worked in various functional areas, most recently as a director at Institution A. She had been a supervisor for five years and was currently pursing a doctorate in higher education.

The second new professional was SallY (NP). She was in her second year as the assistant director at Institution B. Sally (NP) graduated with a master's degree in student affairs from a university in the southeast. Her practicum, internship, and work experiences were in the area of career counseling. She supervised three graduate students, several student workers, and two professional staff members. Her job responsibilities included overseeing the career library, serving as a career counselor, coordinating the graduate school fair, and serving as the liaison to an academic college.

Sally'S (NP) supervisor was Francis (S). Francis had been a supervisor for over 10 years and entered the field in her words "haphazardly." After she graduated with a master's degree in training and development, she worked in industry for

mE COllEGE SWDENTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

Superoision ofl

five years. She spent several years we company, and later she took a posii students. After several career shifts ill

associate director. She had been in th

1?e third new professional was Stan ( hig.her education. During his tenure assistanr coordinator in residence life him a full-time coordinator position. befo~e moving to his current positio: full-nme year at Institution B that he while working with his supervisor Lis: female community comprised of rm

somewhat unus~~ position of serving that led to the hiring of Lisa (S)-his f

Lisa (S) had a great deal of experienr ~aster's work in student affairs at a ur 10 .the field for over 10 years. She se bemg a hall director to being an assists transferred positions, she began inter finall~ taki~g the assistant director pos expenence 10 supervising staff-both p

Anita (NP) was the final new profe master's degree in higher education an university in the southeast. She accepte ~eside~ce life because of the challenj mtetvlew, ~he supervised 18 parapro campus residence hall association, and, a I, 100 bed residential facility. Anita (NI

Anit~'s (NP) supervisor was Michelle (S was In com~unications. She spent a I before ~eturmng to a university in the n counseling. She began her work in hous continued in ~ousing through the years. (S) w.as an assrstane director of housing \1

housmg approximately 3,000 undergrae student affairs field for 6 years (all at Inst

Findir

Four main themes emerged from the d supervision needs, (b) supervisors' percep

FALL 2006 - VOLUM

u-IAM,WINSTON

9). Those who define themselves as rent people may construct meaning in .e same phenomenon" (Crotty, 1998, p. 9). It is critical to understanding the results of ~ researchers interpreted the data.

srience

vas added to the end of each participant's .ofessionals are denoted by a pseudonym (NP). Similarly, supervisors are listed by a

isor (S).

a new professional in student affairs. She ation and used independent study courses ~ogram was practicum based and provided s; she had little developmental theory or rer degree program. It was the practicum zas the most interesting. As a result, upon hat functional area. Until Kelly (NP) took university, she had not been out of the nstitution A was associate director. Kelly on, supervised student workers, oversaw e for planning activities with the student

, who did not possess a degree in student masters work was done in English. She default via the student media office when rough the years, she worked in various lirector at Institution A. She had been a :urrently pursing a doctorate in higher

v(NP). She was in her second year as the y (NP) graduated with a master's degree the southeast. Her practicum, internship, ea of career counseling. She supervised ent workers, and two professional staff ncluded overseeing the career library, ring the graduate school fair, and serving

Francis had been a supervisor for over ords "haphazardly." After she graduated Jevelopmenr, she worked in industry for

~NT AFFAIRSJOURNAL


five years. She spent several years working in a human resources position for a company, and later she took a position at Institution A advising engineering students. After several career shifts and promotions, she currently served as the associate director. She had been in this position for seven years.

The third new professional was Stan (NP). He completed his master's degree in higher education. During his tenure as a graduate student, he worked as an assistant coordinator in residence life. Upon graduation, Institution B offered him a full-time coordinator position. He stayed in that position for one year before moving to his current position at Institution B. It was during his first full-time year at Institution B that he worked with Lisa (S).Job responsibilities while working with his supervisor Lisa (S) were the total management of an allfemale community comprised of multiple buildings. Stan (NP) was in the somewhat unusual position of serving on the search committee at Institution B that led to the hiring of Lisa (S)-his former supervisor.

Lisa (S) had a great deal of experience in student affairs. She completed her master's work in student affairs at a university in the mid-west and had worked in the field for over 10 years. She served in various capacities from initially being a hall director to being an assistant dean of students. When her husband transferred positions, she began interviewing for positions within that area, fmally taking the assistant director position at Institution B. She had extensive experience in supervising staff-both paraprofessional and professional.

Anita (NP) was the final new professional interviewed. She completed a master's degree in higher education and student affairs administration from a university in the southeast. She accepted her current position as coordinator in residence life because of the challenge that it posed. At the time of the interview, she supervised 18 paraprofessional staff members, advised the campus residence hall association, and was responsible for the management of a 1,100 bed residential facility. Anita (NP) was in her third year at Institution B.

Anita's (NP) supervisor was Michelle (S). Michelle's (S) undergraduate degree was in communications. She spent a period of time in the business world before returning to a university in the northeast to obtain a master's degree in counseling. She began her work in housing as a graduate student assistant and continued in housing through the years. At the time of the interview, Michelle (S) was an assistant director of housing where she had responsibility for an area housing approximately 3,000 undergraduates. Michelle (S) had been in the student affairs field for 6 years (all at Institution B).

Findings

Four main themes emerged from the data: (a) new professionals' perceived supervision needs, (b) supervisors' perceptions of new professionals' needs,



(c) incongruence between new professionals' and supervisors' perceptions, and (d) the presence of the diagnosis phenomenon. Each theme is discussed below.

New Professionals' Perceived Supervision Needs

Regarding the supervision received, the descriptions new professionals (NPs) provided shared both common and unique elements. Stan (NP) and Kim (NP) mentioned being frustrated with job related tasks whereas the other two NPs mentioned supervisor-specific frustrations. Kelly (NP) and Stan (NP) had what they classified as "good supervision experiences." Anita (NP) had a poor experience, and Sally (NP) was undecided about the valence of her evaluation. This observation suggests that the NPs had a wide range of supervisory experiences. Although there was a great deal of variety among the new professionals' experiences, two experiences emerged as crucial-opportunities to freely express frustrations in a safe environment, and the desire to have a personal relationship with the supervisor. _

The new professionals in this study clearly expressed a need to vent or express their job-related frustration from time to time. They valued having a nonjudgmental person, preferably their supervisor, who would listen to concerns and feelings of disappointment, displeasure, and anger. For some, the need to simply express frustration was sufficient. For others, having the supervisor serve as a sounding board or devil's advocate was also appreciated. Sally (NP) described her opportunities to vent as critical to her professional success.

Being there to listen to me [is important].... Sometimes she [supervisor] plays devil's advocate.... She has helped me to think about things in other ways, other than the way I was thinking about it. So, it has helped me grow in the way I am thinking about situations ... [by] gaining perspectives....

Kelly (NP) also described her supervisor as a good communicator, "a person who will just let you vent.... In my opinion, what stops people from success is not having an outlet for frustration. She [my supervisor] might not be able to give you the tools to make the job get done, but she can ... help you offset the frustration."

Another shared characteristic of good supervision entailed having a personal relationship with the supervisor. New Professionals were not asked a question regarding the relationship with their supervisor; however, when asked "What have I not asked you?" each new professional discussed the personal relationship they shared with their supervisor. For Anita (NP) who had a supervisor who tried to create a "sisterly relationship" with her, the relationship was seen as a hindrance to her personal growth. Anita felt pressure for personal intimacy that she did not desire. She wanted a more "balanced" relationship of personal and professional. She explained,

THE COllEGE STIJDENTAFFAIRS JOURNAL

Super7lision OJ

I feel like she is more of a fr down hard on me; '" it feels lil sometimes I just want that SUp{ on the carpet.... I need her to supervisor, and I am holding yc done, and I am going to give yo get done...."

Anita (NP) singled out Michelle's in most troublesome. The relationsh blurred significantly by the friendsl Anita (NP) states that the "friendshi a professional, and her ability to fum

When there was a "balanced relatior (NP), new professionals felt more Sl relationship and consequently in the "It helps to have a personal relation work lives cross over so much du events. It is really important to have the professional role."

Supervisors' Perceptions of New Pn

~ommonalities were not as prevalent m the new professional interviews. discussed in addition to a series supervi~ion with their new profess professional and their former supervis

Supervisors were asked to discuss \1

supervisee needed to be successful. S\ they thought their supervisee needed. needs. through the stories of strugg expenenced. It is interesting to note

~over 10 ~,ears of professional expc seasoned, younger supervisors (whr

!hose skill areas identified by the sea m professional conferences, (b) in' networking opportunities outside th connections. Both "seasoned" supervi that these were areas they could not G responsibility to facilitate and create I

was to get the new professional invc supervisors were (a) balance, (b) I

maturity/big picture thinking. Other a

FALL 2006 - VOLl

RHAM, WINSTON

essionals' and supervisors' perceptions, and enomenon. Each theme is discussed below.

ervision Needs

, the descriptions new professionals (NPs) unique elements. Stan (NP) and Kim (NP) ) related tasks whereas the other two NPs 'ations, Kelly (NP) and Stan (NP) had what JO experiences." Anita (NP) had a poor ~cided about the valence of her evaluation. ~ NPs had a wide range of supervisory a great deal of variety among the new eriences emerged as crucial-opportunities ife environment, and the desire to have a 'isor. • :learly expressed a need to vent or express me to time. They valued having a nonsupervisor, who would listen to concerns leasure, and anger. For some, the need to icient. For others, having the supervisor advocate was also appreciated. Sally (NP) s critical to her professional success.

aportanr].... Sometimes she [supervisor] s helped me to think about things in other linking about it. So, it has helped me grow tuations ... [by] gaining perspectives....

risor as a good communicator, "a person pinion, what stops people from success is She [my supervisor] might not be able to •done, but she can ... help you offset the

d supervision entailed having a personal , Professionals were not asked a question supervisor; however, when asked "What ,. professional discussed the personal mpervisor. For Anita (NP) who had a ~ly relationship" with her, the relationship .rsonal growth. Anita felt pressure for desire. She wanted a more "balanced" ial, She explained,

~NTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

SupeT7Jision tfNew Professionals 75

I feel like she is more of a friend than someone who is going to come down hard on me; ... it feels like we are on the same level sometimes, and sometimes I just want that supervisor [to] ... hold me accountable, call me on the carpet.... I need her to be my supervisor, and be like, "I am your supervisor, and I am holding you accountable for what you are not getting done, and I am going to give you the support to get done what you need to get done ...."

Anita (NP) singled out Michelle's inability to play the role of supervisor as the most troublesome. The relationship of supervisor and supervisee became blurred significantly by the friendship that was promoted by the supervisor. Anita (NP) states that the "friendship" became a barrier to her development as a professional, and her ability to function successfully ill her job.

When there was a "balanced relationship," as reported by Stan (NP) and Kelly (NP), new professionals felt more supported and satisfied in their supervisory relationship and consequently ill their roles as employees. As Stan (NP) put it, "It helps to have a personal relationship with your boss. Our home lives and work lives cross over so much due to emergencies, crisis, and after-hours events. It is really important to have an understanding of each other outside of the professional role."

Supervisors' Perceptions of New Professionals' Needs

Commonalities were not as prevalent in the supervisor interviews as they were in the new professional interviews. Needs of the new professional were discussed in addition to a series of questions on, how they approach supervision with their new professional, their own experiences as a new professional and their former supervisor's supervision style.

Supervisors were asked to discuss what they believed the new professional supervisee needed to be successful. Supervisors struggled to state directly what they thought their supervisee needed. They were able to indirectly offer a list of needs through the stories of struggles and problems the new professional experienced. It is interesting to note the two most "seasoned" supervisors (over 10 years of professional experience) saw more needs than the less "seasoned," younger supervisors (who had approximately 5 years experience). Those skill areas identified by the seasoned supervisors were: (a) involvement in professional conferences, (b) involvement in campus committees, (c) networking opportunities outside the department, and (d) bigger picture connections. Both "seasoned" supervisors, Francis (S) and usa (S), mentioned that these were areas they could not directly provide, but they felt it was their responsibility to facilitate and create opportunity. The key as stated by both was to get the new professional involved. The four themes common to all supervisors were (a) balance, (b) communication, (c) support, and (d) maturity/big picture thinking. Other areas mentioned, but not common to all



the supervisors were (a) confrontation skills, (b) administrative skills, and (c) staff management/supervision skills.

In all interviews, supervisors were asked how they approached supervision with their new professional, how they preferred to supervise, and how they experienced professional life as an emerging professional. In all cases, supervisors reported that they supervised the way they wanted to be supervised. Most reflected on both positive and negative experiences with former supervisors. They mentioned that it was through their former experiences that they gained and refined the supervision skills used with their new professional. Supervisors did for their staff what they wanted done to themselves, and they do not do for their staff that which they did not want. No supervisors reported tailoring their supervision style to the individual needs of the new professional. In one instance, a supervisor stated, "I am a person who does not like to be closely supervised. I like to be given a broad picture. So, this is what I want you to do [referring to new professional]. Now, go do it. If you have questions, come back. I try to let everyone that I supervise know that." In each case, the supervisor took an approach to supervision (in this incidence labeled by Winston and Creamer (1997) as laissez faire) based on their personal preference, and not specifically on the need of the new professional. This finding was common among all supervisors interviewed.

Lastly, supervisors also made it clear that they did provide for the new professional needs when the needs are made known. " ... If she will tell me what she needs, I will give it to her.... " This statement or a variation of it was heard from all of the supervisors interviewed.

New Professionals' Perspective Compared To Supervisors' Perspective

An unanticipated theme emerged during the study. Both new professionals and their supervisors seemed to lack the ability to articulate the new professionals' areas of supervision needs or professional experiences. There were stated needs, which were relatively few in number, and implied needs, which were extensive. Understanding the needs, commonalities, and perceptions of the new professionals and supervisors can best be understood by examining the commonalities and differences of each dyad. Below is a comprehensive list of stated and insinuated needs (summarized ill Table 1) by new professional/supervisor pairing.

Michelle (S) identified the following as needs for Anita (NP): (a) stronger administrative skills, (b) big picture perspective, (c) confrontation skills, (d) boundary setting skills/balance, (e) lessening the need for control, (f) time to process experiences and vent emotions, (g) decision making skills, (h) personal support systems, and (i) assistance with transition. Anita (NP) on the other hand recognized only one area identified by Michelle (S), but her list of needs was far more extensive. She added the following areas: (a) direct presence of

THE COllEGE SIVDENTAFFAIRS JOURNAL

Supervision ofNei

supervisor, (b) professional support ane from the supervisor and co-workersupervIsor who serves as an advocate, V (h) some~ne to anticipate profession growt~, (1) acculturation, 0) better s supe~lsor to vent, process, and discU' Identtfied the areas of administrative ~ weakness, These, however, were the onh

lisa (S) identified the following areas of' (b) better communication with .b certain s et~er big picture understanding, (e) pre

reglOnal . associations, and within t] ~onversattons, (g) better decision rnakinj (1) personal support systems and r;) identified his needs as (a) dir' t i v I per, ec 1OVoverr superv~sor and department, (c) opportu~

vent ~lth supervisor (d) personal contari supervISIon skill development, (g) involv personal relationship with ' , SupervIsor (JaSSIstance with personal tr " Th' , an~tton e nme, and big picture understanding.'

Francis (S) recogniLed Sally's (NP) educari ifi nee ucanon speer tc to the position and with (c),greater personal maturity, (d) structuree gU1~anCe and support, (f) personal balar aSSIstance transitioning and (I') b tt " ' e er coml (N, P) ldenttfied her supervision needs as f!lends Co-workers and ' .h', ' superviso-, (b) oJ wit s~pervlsor, (c) improved supervision: supervIsor, (e) acculturation to th ' . , . e instn transition to the institution and (h)

b ' room tl to ot~ Stan (NP) and Sally (NP) was the n super:lsor one-on-one, assistance with the and Improved supervision skills ' ' . 10 wo adffilfl1strative staff.

FALL 2006 ~ VOLUME 2

illAM, WINSTON

ion skills, (b) administrative skills, and (c)

ked how they approached supervision with preferred to supervise, and how they

ill emerging professional. In all cases, ipervised the way they wanted to be 1 positive and negative experiences with ned that it was through their former ined the supervision skills used with their or their staff what they wanted done to teir staff that which they did not want. No upervision style to the individual needs of e, a supervisor stated, "I am a person who . I like to be given a broad picture. So, this ) new professional]. Now, go do it. If you :t everyone that I supervise know that." In oproach to supervision (in this incidence )7) as laissez faire) based on their personal the need of the new professional. This visors interviewed.

ear that they did provide for the new are made known. "... If she will tell me ,." This statement or a variation of it was viewed.

7pared To Supervisors' Perspective

lng the study. Both new professionals and ability to articulate the new professionals' essional experiences. There were stated number, and implied needs, which were commonalities, and perceptions of the

In best be understood by examining the h dyad. Below is a comprehensive list of ummarized in Table 1) by new

as needs for Anita (NP): (a) stronger perspective, (c) confrontation skills, (d) ssening the need for control, (f) time to s, (g) decision making skills, (h) personal ith transition. Anita (NP) on the other ied by Michelle (S), but her list of needs e following areas: (a) direct presence of

~NTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

Superoision ifNew Professionals 77

supervisor, (b) professional support and development, (c) structure, (d) support from the supervisor and co-workers, (e) better administrative skills, (f) supervisor who serves as an advocate, (g) personal relationship with supervisor, (h) someone to anticipate professional and personal needs and facilitate growth, (i) acculturation, (j) better supervision skills, and (k) time with supervisor to vent, process, and discuss problems. Both Anita and Michelle identified the areas of administrative and processing time as needs or areas of weakness. These, however, were the only areas in common.

Lisa (S) identified the following areas of need for Stan (NP): (a) individual time, (b) better communication with certain student groups, (c) structured time, (d) better big picture understanding, (e) professional involvement, on campus, in regional associations, and within the department, (f) developmental conversations, (g) better decision making skills, (h) assistance with transitions, (i) personal support systems, and (j) personal balance. Conversely, Stan (NP) identified his needs as (a) direct involvement of supervisor, (b) support - from supervisor and department, (c) opportunity to discuss, process, question, and vent with supervisor (d) personal contact, (e) structure and less ambiguity, (f) supervision skill development, (g) involvement in big picture discussions, (h) personal relationship with supervisor, (i) acculturation to position, and G) assistance with personal transition. The shared perspectives were individual time, and big picture understanding.

Francis (S) recognized Sally's (NP) needs as (a) increased experience and education specific to the position and with the institution, (b) supervision skills, (c) greater personal maturity, (d) structured time to discuss situations, (e) direct guidance and support, (f) personal balance, (g) decision making skills, (h) assistance transitioning, and (i) better communication skills. Alternatively, Sally (NP) identified her supervision needs as (a) emotional support from family, friends, co-workers, and supervisor, (b) opportunities to process experiences with supervisor, (c) improved supervision skills, (d) personal relationship with supervisor, (e) acculturation to the institution, (f) support in making the transition to the institution, and (h) room to learn things for herself. Common to both Stan (NP) and Sally (NP) was the need to process experiences with the supervisor one-on-one, assistance with the transition to the current position, and improved supervision skills in working with paraprofessional and administrative staff.

FALL 2006 - VOLUME 26, NUMBER 1

.

f


tu« COlLEGE .'I7VDENTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

process, questior vent with supervls

Table 1

Needs ofNew Professionals: Comparison Chart

Dyad Number New Professional Needs

Dyad One Anita (NP)

• Better administrative skills*

• Time to vent with supervisor and discuss problems*

• Direct presence of supervisor

• Professional support and development**

• Structure**

• Support from co-workers and supervisor**

• Supervisor who serves as an advocate**

• Personal relationship with supervisor**

• Someone to anticipate professional and personal needs and facilitate growth in these areas**

• Acculturation**

• Better supervision skills**

Supervisor Perceived Needs ofNP

Michelle (S)

• Stronger administrative skills*

• Time to process and vent frustrations*

• "Big Picture" perspective at the institution**

• Confrontation skills**

• Boundary setting skills/Balance

• Less need for control

• Decision making

• Assistance with transition

• Find personal support systems

• Assistance with transition

Table continues

S1IjJcroision 0/

Table

Dyad Number New Professional"

Dyad Two Stan (NP)

• Opportunities to (

• Involvement in bi~_. discussions*

• Direct involvemen supervisor**

• Personal Support supervisor and department**

• Personal contact**

• Less ambiguity**

• Supervision skill deve/opment**

• Personal relationsh supervisor**

• Accutturanon to pos

• Assistance with per transition**

FALL 2006 ~ VOLUME 26, NUMBER 1 ~NT AFFAIRSJOURNAL

DAVIS BARHAM, WINSTON80 Supervision ofN

Table 1 continued Table 1

Dyad Number New Professional Needs Supervisor Perceived Needs ofNP

Dyad Three Sally (NP) Francis (S)

Opportunities to process • Structured time to discuss• experiences with situations* supervisor*

• Support in making the • Supervision skills*

transition to the institution* **

• Improved supervision • Assistance with transition* skills* **

• Emotional support from • Increased experience and

family, friends, co-workers education in position and and supervisor with the institution**

• Personal relationship with • Greater personal maturity**

supervisor**

• Acculturation to the • Direct guidance and institution** support**

Room to learn things for • Better communication• skills**self**

• Personal balance**

• Decision making skills**

• Find personal support systems**

Table continues

tun COllEGE STIJDENTAFFAIRS JOURNAL

Dyad Number New Professional Ne

Dyad Four Kelly (NP)

• Acculturation to uni' region and position'

• Skills in supervising student staff* -*

• Opportunity to vent emotions and discus happenings with supervisor*

• Information aboutjot area of responsibility

• Assistance transitioni the university and community**

• Emotional support frol supervisor and coworkers**

• Clearly articulated structure and organization**

• Professional role mode

• Standards of accountability in the position**

• Confrontation skills**

• Higher salary

• More administrative support

• Personal relationship wi supervisor*

:*Indi~ates commonalities within the new profe Indicates a need that was not directly stated

FALL 2006 - VOLUME

0

HAM, WINSTON

1 continued

'eeds Supervisor Perceived Needs ofNP

Francis (S)

process • Structured time to discuss with sltuations"

king the • Supervision skills· the

pervision • Assistance with transition". :>rt from • Increased experience and -workers education in position and

with the institution··

ship with • Greater personal maturtty"

the • Direct guidance and support'"

lings for • Better communication skills··

• Personal balance··

• Decision making skills··

• Find personal support systems··

Table continues

:NTAFFAIRSJOURNAL


Table 1 continued

Dyad Number New Professional Needs Supervisor PerceivedNeeds ofNP -Dyad Four Kelly (NP) Jessica (S)

• Acculturation to university, • Becoming acculturated to the region and position" •• region and institution· ••

• Skills in supervising • Managerial skills student staff" •• (supervision)" ••

• Opportunity to vent • ..Time to process experiences· emotions and discuss happenings with supervisor"

• Information about job and • Acquiring institutionally area of responsibility" specific information about the

position and areas of responsibility" ••

• Assistance transitioning to Assistance with transition" •• • the university and community"

• Emotional support from • Budgeting skllls'" supervisor and coworkers··

• Clearly articulated • Establish a balance between structure and professional and personal organization·· life··

• Professional role rnoder" • Decision making skills··

• Standards of • Daily supervisory involvement accountability in the posltiorr"

• Confrontation skills·· • Find personal support systems··

• Higher salary • Decision making skllls'"

• More administrative support

• Personal relationship with supervisor"

• Indicates commonalities within the new professional and supervisor dyad. •• Indicates a need that was not directly stated, but was inferred.


T DAVIS BARHAM, WINSTON 82

As the supervisor, Jessica (S) identified the areas of need for Kelly (NP) as (a) becoming acculturated to the region, (b) acquiring institutionally specific information about the position and areas of responsibility, (c) budgeting skills, (d) managerial skills (mainly supervision), (e) balance of professional and personal lives, (f) daily supervisor involvement, (g) time to process experiences, (h) find personal support systems, (i) assistance transitioning, and G) decision making skills. In turn, Kelly (NP) identified the following as her areas of supervision needs (a) emotional support from the supervisor and co-workers, (b) opportunity to vent emotions and discuss happenings and issues with supervisor, (c) clearly articulated structure and organization, (d) a professional role model, (e) standards of accountability in the position, (f) skills in supervising student staff, (g) confrontation skills, (h) enculturation to university, region, and position, (i) information about job and area of responsibility, G) higher salary, (k) more administrative support, 0) personal relationship with supervisor, and (m) assistance transitioning to the university and the community. Commonalities included acculturation to the region (South), assistance transitioning, information about position, processing/discussion time, and structure and skills In supervising paraprofessional staff.

The overall findings from this study indicated that there were primarily only two areas of commonality between both the new professionals and the supervisors. "Talk/processing time" emerged as a universal concern to all four dyads, and "improved skills supervising paraprofessional staff' was identified as an area of need by only two dyads.

The Diagnosis Phenomenon

A somewhat perplexing finding related to diagnosis of supervtsI0n needs emerged during this study. Both NPs and their supervisors seemed to lack the ability to identify and articulate what the NPs needed in the way of supervisory interventions or designed professional development experiences. We labeled this inability to identify and directly state needs as the diagnosis phenomenon. It is a problem because if neither supervisor nor NP is able to clearly articulate needs, supervision becomes a process of the blind leading the blind.

As the interviews were analyzed, there were stated needs, which were relatively few in number, and implied needs, which were more common and more prevalent in the data. Although supervisors seldom stated directly the need for growth in a specific skill area, there were several broadly stated need areas: (a) better communication, (b) better administrative skills, and (c) improved budget management skills. Identification of broad categories of needed improvement, is perhaps a good starting point; without specificity, but it is extremely difficult for the NP to initiate changes.

mE COllEGE S1UDENTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

Supervision oj

The majority of needs identified we examples, and basic descriptions abe imp~ed ,needs common to all super ~he insnruuon's political structures Informed deci~ion,s, (c) transitioning new c,ommuruty/mstitution, (d) fir balancmg one's professional and pen

The diagnosis phenomenon was n prevalent among new professionals. , a few.skill areas or needed change ~upervt~ors an,d NPs, however, spo little guidance In establishing concrete more adept at .articulating their super t~an were their supervisors. If neith diagnose specific areas of weakness 0

looses much of its power to im] professional development.

Disc There

, are five findings which d

(

supervIsors supervised the way in wh se~soned supervisors proved to be bet ~kills to diagnose new professional Iden~fyin? a problem and devising modifi~~tton of supervisory practice ~ supervIsIon needs of new professionals

Supervisor's Style

In this stu,dy, supervisors had a propen: be sup~rvtsed. Past experiences, both r ~or their supervision style and the soure ~nt~r:iews suggest supervisors are taile IndiVIdual needs of the new professior own personal history and needs. Basec note that the supervision approach used NPs' perceived need.

When supervisors and new professions together, the satisfaction for both w: preferences m~tched. This fact support (1997). In one Instance, a supervisor stat, on a ~egu1ar basis. "I am a pop in 1 supervisor used "pop-in" approaches, }

FALL 2006 - VOLU]\.

lHAM, WINSTON

fed the areas of need for Kelly (NP) as (a) ion, (b) acquiring institutionally specific areas of responsibility, (c) budgeting skills, vision), (e) balance of professional and olvemem, (g) time to process experiences, ) assistance transitioning, and (D decision identified the following as her areas of oort from the supervisor and co-workers, ind discuss happenings and issues with cture and organization, (d) a professional untability in the position, (f) skills in frontation skills, (h) enculturation to ) infonnation about job and area of lore administrative support, 0) personal assistance transitioning to the university

; included acculturation to the region g, infonnation about position, structure and skills in supervising

indicated that there were primarily only both the new professionals and the

nerged as a universal concern to all four 19 paraprofessional staff' was identified

:ed to diagnosis of supervision needs ind their supervisors seemed to lack the e NPs needed in the way of supervisory development experiences. We labeled

te needs as the diagnosis phenomenon. visor nor NP is able to clearly articulate f the blind leading the blind,

vere stated needs, which were relatively vhich were more common and more iors seldom stated directly the need for 'e several broadly stated need areas: (a) strative skills, and (c) improved budget ad categories of needed improvement, t specificity, but it is extremely difficult

ITAFFAIRSJOURNAL


The majority of needs identified were implied through the supervisors' stories, examples, and basic descriptions about how NPs were doing in their jobs. The implied needs common to all supervisors in the study were (a) understanding the institution's political structures and limitations, (b) making sound and informed decisions, (c) transitioning both personally and professionally into a new community/institution, (d) finding personal support systems, and (e) balancing one's professional and personal life.

The diagnosis phenomenon was not limited to supervisors, but was also prevalent among new professionals. All new professionals were able to identify a few skill areas or needed changes in order to be more successful. Both supervisors and NPs, however, spoke in broad generalities, which provided little guidance in establishing concrete plans or clear directions. NPs seemed no more adept at articulating their supervision or professional development needs than were their supervisors. If neither the supervisor nor the NP is able to diagnose specific areas of weakness or needed change, the supervisory process looses much of its power to improve performance and support NPs' professional development.

Discussion

There are five findings which deserve further discussion. In general, supervisors supervised the way in which they wanted to be supervised; more seasoned supervisors proved to be better diagnosticians; supervisors lacked the skills to diagnose new professional needs; a disconnect exists between identifying a problem and devising a professional development plan; and modification of supervisory practice should occur to adequately address the supervision needs of new professionals.

Supervisor's Style

In this study, supervisors had a propensity to supervise the way they wanted to be supervised. Past experiences, both negative and positive, were the impetus for their supervision style and the source of training on supervision. Data from interviews suggest supervisors are tailoring their supervision style not to the individual needs of the new professional, but are grounding it more in their own personal history and needs. Based on NP interviews, it is important to note that the supervision approach used mayor may not be congruent with the NPs' perceived need.

When supervisors and new professionals described their experience working together, the satisfaction for both was far greater when the supervision preferences matched. This fact supports the findings of Winston & Creamer (1997). In one instance, a supervisor stated, she was not one who liked to meet on a regular basis. "I am a pop in kind of supervisor." The NP whose supervisor used "pop-in" approaches, however, felt she was constantly "on



guard." The NP would have preferred a supervisory approach based on regular supervision sessions with planned agendas. In this instance, the supervisor took a specific approach to supervision which seemed to be based primarily on personal preference, and not specifically on the need of the NP. All four supervisors in this study reported basing their approach to supervision largely on their own personal preference for supervision. N one reported any theory based-approach to supervision or any extensive training in providing supervision.

Experience and Ability to Diagnose

There appears to be a direct relationship between years as a supervisor and ability to recognize supervision needs. The two most "seasoned" supervisors (over 10 years of professional experience each) identified more needs than seen by the younger supervisors (who had approximately 5 and 6 years experience respectively). More seasoned supervisors saw things such as involvement in professional conferences, campus committees, and departmental committees as important. We were unable to deduce whether this was a function of length of experience as a supervisor or level of involvement in student affairs professional organizations. The more experienced supervisors were however more professionally involved than the less experienced supervisors. This is an area which should be examined further.

Diagnostic Skills

An interesting finding that repeated throughout the analysis phase was the discrepancy in the number of stated needs versus implied or insinuated needs. Supervisors seldom explicitly identified the needs (improved skills and/or greater knowledge) of their new professionals. This phenomenon was not isolated to the supervisor data as it also occurred with the new professionals. It is important to note that although those supervisors who had extensive experience (10+ years) were able to identify needs, the number of needs these supervisors identified was still far less than the number of needs identified by the new professional.

In all incidences, both new professionals and supervisors identified one list of needs, but also implied a far longer list. The cause of this discrepancy might arise from an inability of supervisors to see the needs of their staff and from new professionals' inability to fully understand their own needs. The responsibility of the new professional, the supervisor, or a combination of both should be further examined. Winston and Creamer (1997) asserted that it is the responsibility of both supervisors and supervisees in their synergistic supervision model. If both parties are challenged to fully understand and articulate needs where then does the responsibility lie to ensure that the synergy occurs? Are new professionals at a level developmentally to (a) fully understand what they need, and then (b) clearly articulate those needs? This

THE COllEGE SIVDENTAFFAIRS JOURNAL

r Superoision of

new professional initiated approach s~pervisors in this study. One repor will do what I can to meet it." r

supervisors; however, for their appn both accurately diagnosis and clear] was not the case in this study.

The difficulty may reside with the exercise a level of higher order reaso self-directed) action. Although an int conducted, the new professionals' (Babbie, 2004) yielded information tl the new professionals intellectual "transitional knowers" (Baxter Ma conclusi.on er.nerged when new pre needed III their position. They were a were not able to see beyond the pe~spective was lacking. Asking me faCIlitate their own development witJ seems likely to fail much of the time.

Translating Problem to Professional.

Another interesting finding was in the ~xamining data, it is important to ex Import.ant to examine what is not pre s~pervl~ors was the area of professio either directly or indirectly identified r no~ ~r~nslate those needs into a speci acnvines tailored to address the ne supervisors stressed the importance of professional organizations, but this inv new professional's diagnosed needs. C first diagnosing the need that is the p cannot be stated and agreed upon by development seems unlikely.

Addressing Supervision Needs of Nev.

Only one of the four supervisors was diagnosed need and concrete plans of a the connection. All four new professio to process, talk, and brainstorm." All aspect of supervision. For Michelle (S) other practices designed to enhance the described. The concept of translating.

FALL 2006 ~ VOLU

M,WINSTON

supervisory approach based on regular as. In this instance, the supervisor took ich seemed to be based primarily on lly on the need of the NP. All four g their approach to supervision largely upervision. None reported any theory Iny extensive training in providing

rip between years as a supervisor and The two most "seasoned" supervisors ~ each) identified more needs than seen pproximately 5 and 6 years experience rs saw things such as involvement in iittees, and departmental committees as hether this was a function of length of

of involvement in student affairs :xperienced supervisors were however ess experienced supervisors. This is an

iroughout the analysis phase was the :ds versus implied or insinuated needs. 1 the needs (improved skills and/or essionals. This phenomenon was not occurred with the new professionals. It hose supervisors who had extensive itify needs, the number of needs these ran the number of needs identified by

s and supervisors identified one list of . The cause of this discrepancy might see the needs of their staff and from understand their own needs. The

e supervisor, or a combination of both d Creamer (1997) asserted that it is the nd supervisees in their synergistic

challenged to fully understand and responsibility lie to ensure that the at a level developmentally to (a) fully J) clearly articulate those needs? This

ITAFFAIRSJOURNAL


new professional initiated approach seemed to be the strategy employed by the supervisors in this study. One reported "if they tell me what they need, then I will do what I can to meet it." This was the prevailing approach of the supervisors; however, for their approach to be successful, NPs must be able to both accurately diagnosis and clearly articulate their own needs. This clearly was not the case in this study.

The difficulty may reside with the ability of new professionals to actually exercise a level of higher order reasoning as well as higher order (independent, self-directed) action. Although an intellectual development assessment was not conducted, the new professionals' interviews and the memoing field notes (Babbie, 2004) yielded information that lead the researchers to informally place the new professionals intellectual development at the point of being "transitional knowers" (Baxter Magolda, 1992). Further support for this conclusion emerged when new professionals were asked about what was needed in their position. They were able to identify several skill areas, but they were not able to see beyond the short term. A more complex, global perspective was lacking. Asking most new professionals to anticipate and facilitate their own development without assistance from other professionals seems likely to fail much of the time.

Translating Problem to Professional Development

Another interesting finding was in the area of professional development. When examining data, it is important to examine what is present, but it is equally important to examine what is not present. Absent from the discussion of the supervisors was the area of professional development. Where all supervisors either directly or indirectly identified needs of their new professional, they did not translate those needs into a specific regime of professional development activities tailored to address the new professionals' specific needs. Two supervisors stressed the importance of involvement in campus committees and professional organizations, but this involvement was not directly related to the new professional's diagnosed needs. One, therefore, is led to believe that it is first diagnosing the need that is the pivotal point in the process. If the need cannot be stated and agreed upon by both parties, then potent professional development seems unlikely.

Addressing Supervision Needs of New Professionals

Only one of the four supervisors was able to make the connection between diagnosed need and concrete plans of action. The others did not appear to see the connection. All four new professionals and supervisors identified a "need to process, talk, and brainstorm." All four dyads seemed satisfied with that aspect of supervision. For Michelle (S), Jessica (S), and Lisa (S), however, no other practices designed to enhance the growth of the new professional were described. The concept of translating professional needs into a professional


:


development plan was clearly a void in the data and is something that should be examined further.

Implications for Practice

It seems that supervisors need to further develop their skills as diagnosticians in order to strengthen their supervisory effectiveness. As a supervisor there are certainly areas of growth that the new professionals are unable to see. Additionally, there are areas of struggle and frustration that supervisors must be sensitive to in order to facilitate development. This study suggests that a new mindset may be required for many supervisors.

There are also other suggestions that can be gleaned from this study. Each area offers an opportunity for greater success, competency, and matriculation for new professionals.

First, greater attention should be devoted to staff supervision in graduate preparation programs due to the extent new professionals identified this as a need. Supervision is also an area that seems to deserve concentrated, prolonged attention from the professional associations as they design and offer professional development activities, workshops, and convention programs.

Second, professional development activities that address staff supervision should include a comprehensive model or models of supervision that can help practitioners break out of the mode of supervising by imitation, that is, uncritically and theoretically supervising as they have been supervised. Many supervisors need to undergo training to become better diagnosticians. They need to be trained on how to make a diagnosis and, in collaboration with the staff member, develop this diagnosis into a plan for professional development. Lastly, they must learn to tailor their supervisory style to the individual needs of the new professional.

Third, greater creativity and expenditures are needed to stress the importance of supervision among practitioners. Before there can be any wide-spread improvement in staff supervision in student affairs, most seasoned practitioners need to realize that this area is one in which they could use education and assistance.

Fourth, new professionals must take ownership of their own professional experience. Responsibility for development cannot rest solely in the hands of the supervisor. New professionals need to push and challenge themselves, and they also need to be assertive and seek mentors (who are not their supervisors) who can guide them in their professional growth (Winston & Hirt, 2003).

Additionally, it is clear that the responsibility for development cannot rest solely in the hands of the new professional. Supervisors need to challenge new professionals in their current position and in preparation for their next

THE COllEGE SIVDENTAFFAIRSJOURNAL

Supervision of

position. This takes time. Failur, lffiplications for achieving the stude future of the profession. Good sup tools available to promote the re professionals in the field.

COl

~ew professionals are faced with an ill environments unlike those experi, level of ~esponsibility, and they are IT

new environrnem, their primary sour the hands of the supervisor. Yet, I educate supervisors on how to best document, while expanding upon F begun to explore the needs of new re~ationship between supervisor and SCIence and an art - it is laced with C( that can be explained through one st research is needed. Only through an «

?ew professionals can supervisors ~ Int~nt1onally structure the experience their growth, development and success

Refer

Arminio, J:,. & Creamer, D. G. (2001 s~pervlslOn. Journal ojCollege Student

Babble, E. (2004). The practice oj so, Wadsworth.

Barr, M. J. (1997). Making the transit Coleman & J. Johnson (Eds.), The student ciffairs profissionals and their Sl

Vol. 10). Columbus, OH: Nation Administrators.

Baxter Magolda, M. (1992). Knowing and, students' intellectual development. San Fra

Bender, B. E. (1980). Job satisfaction in 2-9.

Burkard, A., Cole, D. C, Ott, M., competencies of new student aff NASPA Journa4 42(3), 283-309.

FALL 2006 - VOLUM

'\M, WINSTON

I the data and is something that should

for Practice

ier develop their skills as diagnosticians effectiveness. As a supervisor there are

lew professionals are unable to see. e and frustration that supervisors must evelopment. This study suggests that a supervisors.

n be gleaned from this study. Each area ess, competency, and matriculation for

"Oted to staff supervision in graduate t new professionals identified this as a ems to deserve concentrated, prolonged ociations as they design and offer :kshops, and convention programs.

tivities that address staff supervision or models of supervision that can help of supervising by imitation, that is,

g as they have been supervised. Many :0 become better diagnosticians. They ignosis and, in collaboration with the staff a plan for professional development. ipervisory style to the individual needs

es are needed to stress the importance lefore there can be any wide-spread in student affairs, most seasoned area is one in which they could use

ownership of their own professional lent cannot rest solely in the hands of to push and challenge themselves, and nentors (who are not their supervisors) l growth (Winston & Hirt, 2003).

nsibility for development cannot rest nal. Supervisors need to challenge new 1 and in preparation for their next

IJTAFFAIRSJOURNAL


posmon, This takes time. Failure to provide superior supervision has implications for achieving the student affairs divisions' goals and insuring the future of the profession. Good supervision may be one of the most potent tools available to promote the retention of the best and brightest new professionals in the field.

Conclusion

New professionals are faced with an array of challenges. They find themselves in environments unlike those experienced in the classroom; they have a new level of responsibility, and they are more accountable than ever before. In this new environment, their primary source of support and understanding rests in the hands of the supervisor. Yet, professional literature has done little to educate supervisors on how to best handle new professionals' needs. This document, while expanding upon previously published literature, has only begun to explore the needs of new professionals, and more specifically, the relationship between supervisor and supervisee. Human interaction is both a science and an art - it is laced with complicating factors and is not something that can be explained through one study or one evaluation. As such, further research is needed. Only through an enhanced understanding of the needs of new professionals can supervisors and the field of student affairs more intentionally structure the experience of the new professional and maximize their growth, development and success.

References

Arminio, J., & Creamer, D. G. (2001). What supervisors say about quality supervision. Journal ifCollege Student Personnel, 21,35-44.

Babbie, E. (2004). The practice if social research (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Barr, M. J. (1997). Making the transition to a professional role. In D. D. Coleman & J. Johnson (Eds.), The new professionaL' A resource guide for new student eiffairs professionals and their supenssors, (NASPA Monograph Series, Vol. 10). Columbus, OH: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.

Baxter Magolda, M. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender-relatedpatterns in students' intellectual development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bender, B. E. (1980). Job satisfaction in student affairs. NASPA [oumal, 18(2), 2-9.

Burkard, A., Cole, D. c., Ott, M., & Stoflet, T. (2005). Entry-level competencies of new student affairs professionals: A delphi study. NASPAJourna~ 42(3), 283-309.



Carnegie Foundation. (2005). The Carnegie classification if institutions if higher education. Retrieved July 8, 2005, from http://www.carnegie foundation.org/ Classification/

Carpenter, D. S. (1991). Student affairs profession: A developmental perspective. In T. K. Miller & R. B. Winston, Jr., (Eds.), Administration and leadership in student 4fairs: Actuali::jng student development in higher education (2nd

ed., pp. 253-279). Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development. Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L., (1993). Education and Identity (2nd ed.). San

Francisco: jossey-Bass, Coleman, D. D., & Johnson,]. E. (Eds.). (1990). The new professional.- A resource

guide for new student 4fairs professionals and their supennsors. Columbus, OH: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundation if social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

DeCoster, D. A., & Brown, S. S. (1991). Staff development: Personal and professional education. In T. K. Miller & R. B. Winston, Jr., (Eds.), Administration and leadership in student 4fairs: Actuali::jng student development in higher education (2nd ed., pp. 563-613). Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development.

Hirt, ]. B., & Winston, R. B., Jr. (2003). Professional development: Its integration with supervision processes. In S. M. Janosik, D. G. Creamer,]. B. Hirt, R. B. Winston, Jr., S. A. Saunders, & D. L. Cooper, (Eds.) , Superoising new professionals in student eifJairs: A guide for practitioners (pp. 85121). New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Holmes, D., Verrier, D., & Chisholm, P. (1983). Persistence in student affairs work: Attitudes and job shifts among master's program graduates. Journal if College Student Personnel, 24, 438-443.

Janosik, S. M., & Creamer, D. G. (2003). Introduction: A comprehensive model. In S. M.Janosik, D. G. Creamer,]. B. Hirt, R. B. Winston,Jr., S. A. Saunders, & D. L. Cooper, (Eds.), Supervising newprofessionals in student 4fairs: A gUideforpractitioners (pp. 1-16). New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Janosik, S. M., Creamer, D. G., Hirt,J. B., Winston, R. B.Jr., Saunders, S. A., & Cooper D. L. (2003). Superoising newprofessionals in student 4fairs:A gUide for practitioners (pp. 43-83). New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Magolda, P., & Carnaghi,]. (Eds.). (2004). Job one: Experiences if new profes~o~als

in student 4fairs. Washington, DC: American College Personnel Association and University Press of America.

Marsh, S. R. (2001). Using adult development theory to inform staff supervision in student affairs. College Student Affairs Journal, 21(1), 45-56.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994).Qualitative data anaiysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Newton, F. B., & Richardson, R. L. (1976). Expected entry-level competencies of student personnel workers. Journal ifCollege StudentPersonnel, 17,426-430.

THE COllEGE STIJDENTAFFAIRS JOURNAL

Supervision rfN

Ostroth, D. D. (1981). Competencie employers look for when hiring ru 22,5-11.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evalUaJ Park, CA: Sage.

Rosen, A., Taube, S. R., & Wadswo! year. NASPA Journal, 23, 52-59.

Saunders, S. A., Cooper, D. L., Wim Supervising staff in student af approach. Journal ifCollege Student L

Schuh,]. H., & Carlisle, W. (1991). SUI for emerging professionals. In T. Administration and leadership in studel higher education (2nd ed., pp. Development.

Stamatakos, L. C. (1978). Unsolicited College Student Personnel, 19,325-30.

Ward, L. (1995). Role stress and propen professionals. NASPA Journal, 33, 3

Wiggers, T. T., Forney, D. S., & Wallao necessary: Prevention and recovery.

Winston, R. B., Jr., & Creamer, D. G. C 4fairs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Winston, R. B., Jr., & Hirt, J. B. (20( approaches: Practical suggestions. II Hirt, R. B. Winston, Jr., S. A. Saund newprofessionals in student 4fairs: A , York: Brunner-Routledge.

Winston, R. B., Jr., Hebert, D. A., & 1\ staff development as management tl 12-25.

Wood, L., Winston, R. B., Jr., & Polkosl and professional development of Journal ifCoflege Student Personnel, 26, 5.

Young, R. B. (1985). Impressions of the From program to practice. NASPA],

FALL 2006 ~ VOLUMJ

I

lAM, WINSTON

'arnegie classification if institutions if higher om http://www.carnegie

affairs profession: A developmental B. Winston, Jr., (Eds.), Administration and (g student development in higher education (2nd

derated Development. 193). Education and fdenti!) (2nd ed.). San

ls.). (1990). The new professional.' A resource ials and their ssperusors. Columbus, OH: ersonnel Administrators. aal research: Meaning and perspective in the : Sage. 991). Staff development: Personal and Miller & R. B. Winston, Jr., (Eds.),

~t affairs: Actualii!ng student development in 563-613). Muncie, IN: Accelerated

(2003). Professional development: Its ses. In S. M. Janosik, D. G. Creamer, J. l. Saunders, & D. L. Cooper, (Eds.), , affairs: A guide for practitioners (pp. 85e.

P. (1983). Persistence in student affairs 19 master's program graduates. Journal if

003). Introduction: A comprehensive mer, J. B. Hirt, R. B. Winston, Jr., S. A upervising newprofessionals in student affairs: ;v York: Brunner-Routledge. '., Winston, R. B.Jr., Saunders, S. A, & professionals in student affairs: A glllde for

'runner-Routledge. 4). Job one: Experiences of new professionals nerican College Personnel Association

evelopment theory to inform staff StudentAffairs [ournai; 21(1), 45-56. ~). Qualitative data analYsis: An expanded

6). Expected entry-level competencies 'ofCollege StudentPersonnel; 17,426-430.

ttAFFAiRSJOURNAL


Ostroth, D. D. (1981). Competencies for entry-level professionals: What do employers look for when hiring new staff? Journal ofCollege StudentPersonnel, 22,5-11.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Rosen, A, Taube, S. R., & Wadsworth, E. L. (1985). The first professional year. NASPAJourna4 23, 52-59.

Saunders, S. A, Cooper, D. L., Winston, R. B., Jr., & Chernow, E. (2000). Supervising staff in student affairs: Exploration of the synergistic approach. Journal ofCollege StudentDevelopment, 41, 181-192.

Schuh, J. H., & Carlisle, W. (1991). Supervision and evaluation: Selected topics for emerging professionals. In T. K. Miller & R. B. Winston, Jr., (Eds.), Administration and leadership in student affairs: Actualii!ng student development in higher education (2nd ed., pp. 495-531). Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development.

Stamatakos, L. C. (1978). Unsolicited advice to new professionals. Journal if College StudentPersonnel; 19,325-30.

Ward, L. (1995). Role stress and propensity to leave among new student affairs professionals. NASPAJournal, 33, 35-44.

Wiggers, T. T., Forney, D. S., & Wallace-Schutzman, F. (1982). Burnout is not necessary: Prevention and recovery. NASPAJourna4 20(2), 13-21.

Winston, R. B., Jr., & Creamer, D. G. (1997). Improving staiJingpractices in student affairs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Winston, R. B., Jr., & Hirt, J. B. (2003). Activating synergistic supervision approaches: Practical suggestions. In S. M. Janosik, D. G. Creamer, J. B. Hirt, R. B. Winston, Jr., S. A. Saunders, & D. L. Cooper (Eds.), Supervising new professionals in student affairs: A glllde for practitioners (pp. 43-83). New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Winston, R. B., Jr., Hebert, D. A., & McGonigle, R. B. (1985). Professional staff development as management tool. College StudentAffairs Journal, 6(2), 12-25.

Wood, L., Winston, R. B., Jr., & Polkosnik, M. C. (1985). Career orientations and professional development of young student affairs professionals. Journal ofCollege StudentPersonnel, 26, 532-539.

Young, R. B. (1985). Impressions of the development of professional identity: From program to practice. NASPAJourna4 23(2) 50-59.

FALL 2006 - VOLUME 26, NUMBER 1

....

Documents

Supervision of New Professionals in Student Affairs: Assessing - Eric