Running head: STRENGTHS

Strengths
Jacob A. Hartz
Seattle University
Portfolio
Erica K. Yamamura, Ph. D.

STRENGTHS

Strengths (LO 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10; Artifacts B1, B2, C1, C2, F2, I, H)

Reflecting upon my time in the Student Development Administration (SDA) program
proved to be a transformative experience in and of itself. I found myself focusing on how much I
have learned, grown, and ultimately transformed since first applying to the program. From day
one, my courses and professional experiences reshaped my perceptions of not only myself, but
also how I navigate professional environments. It is through this reflective process that I have
come to realize the thematic strength I have gained from the SDA program as understanding how
I view myself as a professional. Through an intersection of (a) leadership (b) assessment and
communication, and (c) the transferability of knowledge and skills, I have begun to reshape my
professional identity.
Leadership (LO 3, 6; Artifacts C1, B2)
One of the more drastic realizations I have had in relation to how I view leadership
involves a necessary requirement to better understand who I am and the salient identities I hold.
Without this understanding, I do not think my view of leadership in professional practice would
be whole. Chickerings (1969) vectors of identity, highlights Establishing Identity as one
particular vector that creates the foundation for an individuals sense of social and cultural
heritage (Evans et al., 2010, p. 68). My understanding of my identities was never challenged in
the environments I found myself in prior to Seattle University. My classroom and professional
experiences in the SDA program forced me take a critical look at my identities, especially around
their relation to SDA Learning Outcome (LO) 3, exhibiting professional integrity and ethical
leadership in professional practice. The SDA programs impact on my awareness of my identities
and their associated perceptions provided additional context as to how others might collaborate
with me and ultimately view me as a leader. My Leadership in Education paper (Artifact C1)

STRENGTHS

allowed me to further explore my identities and how they relate to ethical leadership in
professional practice. Artifact C1 provided a venue to further explore how my salient identities
as a white, middle-class, heterosexual male, impact my interactions with others, especially in
how I lead diverse teams and understand perspectives outside of my own. Through the
frameworks learned in Leadership in Education, I was able to inform my approach to
strengthening my ability to lead ethically and inclusively.
Again, as a white male in a program that consistently requires its students to dig deeper
and consider the intersection of salient identities and their impact on how to navigate
professional settings, I have been challenged to reconsider many of the societal norms I had
previously thought to be standard throughout my upbringing. Admittedly, my initial
assistantship in the International Student Center (ISC) introduced me to student populations I had
little experience with, and required supervision and leadership of a diverse body of students
implementing varying cultural programs and experiences. My concurrent enrollment in Student
Development Theory, Research and Practice (SDA 578) with my work in the ISC provided
theories and frameworks that helped to better understand my own identity development and
inform how I work with and lead students with diverse identities outside of my own. Helmss
(1995) white identity development spoke to the necessity to take a thorough look at my
whiteness and my role in creating and maintaining a racist society and the need for [me] to
act responsibly in dismantling it (Evans et al., 2010, p. 260). Artifact C1 allowed for an
exploration of my responsibilities to dismantle a racist society through leadership frameworks
that directly inform LO 6, developing and demonstrating skills in leadership and collaboration.
My leadership approach with both my current and future professional roles (Artifact B2)
is informed, in part, by Artifact C1, in that my implementation of ethical leadership revolves

STRENGTHS

around a combination of Heifetz et al.s (2009) Adaptive Leadership Model and Bolman and
Galloss (2011) Human Resources Leadership models. Both frameworks have provided context
in my observations of how professional mentors exhibit leadership as well as my ability exercise
my own leadership skills. I have found that context, communication, and an awareness of my
identities to be integral in both my role as a Program Coordinator in the ISC and my role as an
Internship Coordinator at McKinstry. Although inherently different, both positions required an
understanding of the contextual factors the students I work with come from, my salient identities,
and how I approach communication, collaboration, and guidance given those identities.
Assessment & Communication (LO 2, 7, 8; Artifacts C2, J)
The SDA programs strong emphasis on the importance of assessment to improve
professional practice has slowly become central to my professional identity. While being wary of
how assessment is used and what is being measured, I have learned that effective assessment
strategies and the ability to translate what is being assessed into communicative results are
essential for improving practice. My groups final paper for Best Practices in Student Affairs
(SDAD 575; Artifact C2) directly correlates LO 7, utilizing assessment, evaluation, technology,
and research to improve practice, with LO 2, understanding students and student issues. While
visiting colleges in the greater Portland area for SDAD 575, one particular statement from Dr.
Daniel Newhart, Director of Student Affairs Research, Evaluation and Planning at Oregon State
University, really resonated with me. Paraphrasing Dr. Newhart (2014), lifelong learning and
improving the professional services offered for students depends on creating a culture of
inquiry, rather than performing assessment without particular focuses. With this concept in
mind, my groups final paper evaluated Portland institutions student services and made
recommendations on identified gaps in performance and offerings. While the information

STRENGTHS

collected on the institutions was solely qualitative, I realized that as I continue to establish my
professional identity, it will be vital to better understand how I work with individuals and how I
can better support them.
My current internship in Seattle Universitys Career Services (Artifact J) demonstrates
the necessity for LO 8, communicating effectively in speech and in writing, to make
recommendations for enhanced student services. The internship investigates the Career Services
utilization of the First Destination survey implemented by University Planning on how students
in the College of Arts and Sciences engage with the department. At the completion of my
internship, a written proposal of program enhancements or additional offerings is required based
on students answers to the survey. It will be crucial to adopt assessment strategies and the ability
to communicate results to my peers into my professional practice as I continue to develop
throughout my career in working with and for students in varying capacities.
Transferability of Knowledge and Skills (LO 5, 10; Artifacts B1, H, I, F2)
Lastly, stemming from a greater understanding of leadership as well as the necessity of
assessment and communication, the ability to transfer the knowledge and skills gained
throughout the SDA program to other professional environments is inherent to my professional
identity. My personal mission statement (Artifact B1) embodies LO 5, adapting student services
to specific environments and cultures, in the sense that the newfound knowledge gained from the
experiences and conversations had in the SDA program ultimately applies to how I work with
students outside of higher education. As I continue to learn and develop, I understand the broad
application of many of the skills gained throughout the SDA program, for instance the necessity
for a better understanding of identities and their implication on professional environments. In my
roles at McKisntry, my identities are consistently at the forefront of my actions in how I interact

STRENGTHS

with interns through our internship program, how I approach corporate recruiting, as well as
identifying resources to highlight when onboarding new employees. Without the SDA programs
intensive focus on who I am both personally and professionally, my identities and their
interaction with diverse communities, I can honestly say my professional approach would be
lacking an important and drastically necessary component.
Kegans (1994) Theory of the Evolution of Consciousness discusses the self-authoring
mind in that the individual has an ability to take responsibility in owning their personal authority
as they navigate new ways of thinking and in light of new experiences (Evans et al., 2010, p.
179). The SDA program has certainly challenged my ability to navigate my own personal
authority, particularly in light of my interests in working outside of higher education. However,
my five-year professional development plan (Artifact I) elaborates on my plan to gain
transferable skills and knowledge regardless of the environment. While I recognize my
professional course may be drifting away from traditional Student Affairs positions, my five-year
plan highlights areas of the ACPA and NASPA competencies (Artifact H) as a valuable
framework for skills that translate into varying professional focuses. Given my initial
professional experiences at Seattle University through the ISC, I now have an understanding of
my professional needs and mentorship, which has influenced my decision to work with students
in a corporate environment. LO 10, establishing and enhancing professional identity, is primarily
informed through the transferable skills established in the Human & Organizational Resources
competency, through the various professional opportunities provided by McKinstry. My
professional letter of promise (Artifact F2) written by my internship site supervisor, Sarah
Thomson, highlights Sarahs views of my ability to overcome and learn from professional
obstacles, and adopt lessons learned into my practice, directly correlating to LO 5 and 10.

STRENGTHS

Demonstrating Sarahs letter of promise, my experience at McKinstry has been an alternative

environment to the higher education roles I originally set out to do. With the professional
foundations established through my experiences in higher education and the SDA program, I
have found it empowering to utilize the programs content in working with students at the
corporate level through internship programs and collegiate recruiting and partnerships.

STRENGTHS

References
Bolman, L. G., & Gallos, J. V. (2011). Reframing academic leadership. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
Chickering, A. (1969). Theory of Identity Development. In Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F.,
Patton, L.D., & Renn, K.A. (Eds.). Student development in college: Theory, research,
and practice. 2nd Edition. (pp. 64-81). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and
tactics for changing your organization and the world. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
Press.
Helms J. E. (1995). Model of White Identity Development. In Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido,
F., Patton, L.D., & Renn, K.A. (Eds.). Student development in college: Theory, research,
and practice. 2nd Edition. (pp. 260-261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kegan, R. (1994). Development of Self-Authorship. In Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F.,
Patton, L.D., & Renn, K.A. (Eds.). Student development in college: Theory, research, and
practice. 2nd Edition. (pp. 176-183). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
NASPA (1949). Student personnel points of view, 1949.
Newhart, D. (2014). Oregon state assessment presentation. Oregon State University. June 23,
2014.