internship learning summary_2

7/29/2019 Internship Learning Summary_2

1/7

Internship learning summary 1

Running head: INTERNSHIP LEARNING SUMMARY

Internship learning summary

Jason Champagne

Wright State University


2/7


Summary

My internship experience in the Division of Enrollment Management allowed me to work

with areas of the university with which I had a previous, cursory relationship. I had an

opportunity to work on projects which were specific to one or two divisions as well as projects

which involved a variety of individuals from across the institution. As with all things academic,

some projects ran smoothly and with great collaboration while others seemed to be almost

circular in nature as the same ground was tread upon over and over again. The one constant that

was driven home with each project is that universities are made up of individuals, each with his

or her own personality and agenda which must be dealt with in a variety of ways if one is

accomplish anything of value.

Over the course of the internship, I was involved with several large scale projects which

necessitated campus wide involvement and some which involved just several departments. All

met with varying degrees of success based on a variety factors both internal and external. While

none were failures, there were certainly varying levels of accomplishment with those having the

greatest success receiving the most support from higher administration.

Enrollment management meetings

The original focus of the enrollment management meetings was to address the need to

include faculty in the enrollment management process, specifically student retention. Meetings

included deliberation about the current level of faculty involvement and what kind of support

could or should be expected from this group. In order to ask for specific types of support, the

enrollment management group was initially creating a presentation for faculty senate with

deliberations centering on content, who should view the presentation first, who should actually


3/7


present, and so on. The political aspect of these discussions cannot be overstated as great care

was taken to craft the right message for the right audience.

However, a major change in the focus of the enrollment management group occurred

approximately two months into the meetings. Due to some external, high level committees, the

focus of the group was altered to address enrollment management in the broader context of

student success. Instead of simply getting students to graduate, the group was tasked with

finding ways to enhance the overall student experience. The conversations about student

engagement and faculty involvement reminded me of discussions we had in class about higher

education generations ago when faculty were the main caretakers of student needs. Universities

seem to be coming back toward that model both at institutions of higher education in general and

at Wright State in particular. I dont foresee faculty totally regaining that role but see them being

asked to be more involved in non-academic processes especially as services are cut due to

budgetary issues.

The enrollment management group stopped meeting in May which was a bit unfortunate.

While we did spend time treading over the same ground, the group was very useful to me as I

was able to gain a better understanding of how the various departments interrelate. It also gave

me an opportunity to put faces and names together and begin to build relationships with peers

with whom I will continue to interact for years to come. As the group focus was primarily on

undergraduate students, I was essentially an observer more than a participant but learned quite a

bit from this diverse group which included both service and academic administration.

On-line open house

Another project I was participated in was a university wide online open house. Having never

had the opportunity to participate in an e-event before, I looked forward to working with the


4/7


Cathy Davis in undergraduate admissions and learning from both her and the individuals within

her department who had some experience in the topic. The process was quite interesting and

allowed me to learn quite a bit about virtual recruiting and how to make it work effectively. One

of the most informative opportunities was the occasion to watch people in undergraduate

admission run a chat session, which was something that I had never done or even seen.

The overall collaborative effort on this project was much more focused as there was a

defined goal which was to be accomplished, have a virtual open house, and those involved

seemed to be satisfied with the result. In fact, we will be holding another university wide virtual

open house this spring. While this event was geared toward high school students, it did afford an

opportunity for me to apply what I had learned from Cathy in the creation of a graduate studies

virtual booth. It also reminded me that students interact and communicate in diverse ways and

we need to be able to reach out to them through a variety of channels.

One-stop web site

The One Stop web site committee was similar to the enrollment management committee

in that it was comprised of members from across the university community. It was tasked with

creating a web site through which undergraduate students and parents could find answers

regarding a variety of issues related to the daily functioning of the university. From the

beginning, the high level political correctness that filled the meeting room was quite evident as

people tried desperately not to offend colleagues. Phrase such as I really like it, but I do have a

couple ofsuggestions would invariably lead to that individual wanting an entire re-work of

what was presented.

The project also highlighted the pitfalls of trying to gain consensus among a diverse

group of stakeholders. The very name One-stop was debated several times and included

diatribes as to whether or not students would understand that all their questions would not be


5/7


answered at this one web site. In the end, the decision to call it a One-stop was made at the

executive level and the site launched just slightly behind schedule. To this committees credit,

students were also consulted as to what content and look should be present within the site. I

point this out because we in higher education often make decisions without gaining input from

those whom our decisions will affect.

This project provided me with an opportunity to study group interaction in a regulated

environment in that there was a specific outcome with a specific deadline. As I look at this

project and the consensus that always seems to need to be built, I am amazed that anything gets

accomplished at this university. Its also important to note that many of the people on the One-

stop web site committee also served on the enrollment management committee. In fact this

phenomenon of the same people serving on multiple committees seems to be fairly widespread

on this campus. One has to wonder if this stunts fresh ideas and perspectives which are needed

to move forward or is a necessary fact as so few are willing to volunteer.

Retention project

The final and most involved project was the launch of a retention software application

called Retain. In summary, the Retain software was purchased as part of an enterprise package

which also included student recruitment and application software. Based on the initial meetings

with the enrollment management group, I suggested putting together a small group to test the

Retain software for possible use across the campus. The vice-president of enrollment

management, Jacqueline McMillan, was very interested in moving forward so a small committee

consisting of myself, representatives from the college of business, the veterans affairs office,

and institutional research began the process of launching this software package.

While I was obviously representing graduate studies in this endeavor, no one at the

undergrad level has been identified as the lead for retention initiatives so the thought was to roll


6/7


it out college by college, identifying contacts in each. As the idea to utilize this software was

mine, I was tapped to oversee this multi-departmental project in conjunction with enrollment

management. Even as we began, I had some apprehension based on the fact that this project was

being run by a committee made up totally of volunteers; that it to say there was no edict from

higher administration to make this software operational nor were people assigned to serve on the

committee.

Needless to say as the project progressed more people became involved and what started

out as a few people wanting to make use of idle software which the university had already

purchased ballooned into a project which had to have campus wide involvement and input. The

goal of the project was never to replace any system or software but rather to utilize an untapped

resource. While collegiality is the buzzword in higher education, territoriality more often than

not rules the day. People have great anxiety over what they dont know and in this case, that

anxiety stalled and almost ended the project. In the end, the provost became involved and the

decision was made to move forward with a graduate studies only role out. While this will benefit

me in my current position, the experience has made me leery of reaching out to other

departments on future projects, especially if their delay or incompletion will have an impact on

my area.

Conclusion

My internship was a valuable experience in that it gave me a greater appreciation for

those who must deal with the large and diverse populations within the university on a daily basis.

While a university thrives on its diversity, it is also this diversity and varying schools of thought

which can make action difficult and make progress slow. However, what I learned can best be

summarized in the tenants below.


7/7


Support from above always helps - projects seem to move quickest when supported byupper administration

Someone needs to be responsible - projects move slowest when no one has ultimateauthority or responsibility

Groups need specific goals; not nebulous rhetoric - goals, objectives and timelines arecrucial as they keep committee members focused

Now when to cut your losses or continue the fight - if a project is going nowhere, there

comes a time to decide when to run and when to stand

You cant please all the people all the time - while consensus can move a project along,trying to reach it can stop a project in its tracks

Inputs great, but lets get something done - as the old saying goes, too many cooks spoilthe broth and sometimes things just have to get done

I think the main driver in the success of projects is the amount commitment from the

universitys upper administration. The One-stop project and the virtual open house were given

much more in terms of resources (money, people, etc.) than the retention software project. In

addition, those involved in the One-stop and virtual open house had clear cut goals given to

them by upper administration whereas the enrollment management and retention committees

were essentially volunteers and as such there was not higher level mandate to accomplish a goal.

As a result, it was more difficult, especially in the case of the retention software, to compel

cooperation when it was needed.

internship learning summary_2

Documents