When I accepted my offer for admission to the Higher Education program and my Assistant Resident Director (ARD) position in Residence Life on March 8, 2013, I don’t think I could have imagined the incredible journey that was about to occur.  At the time, I was a Resident Assistant (RA) for three years, a Barista for six years at Starbucks, and wondering how I could use my business degree in the Higher Education setting.  After arriving on campus, meeting the students, and networking with the professionals, I knew that continuing my education at Loyola was exactly where I needed to be.  Many of my mentors questioned my motives moving from one Jesuit university to another, however, I knew that I needed to be grounded in the Jesuit mission of Loyola in order to learn and develop as a professional.  I vividly remember having a conversation with a former supervisor who told me to accept my offer to Indiana University’s program because I needed a ‘new’ experience.  It definitely would have been something ‘different,’ but I was sure that Loyola’s program had everything that I needed.  Through my coursework and assistantship I have learned so much about myself, the field of higher education, and social justice that I will continue to use as I pursue my career aspirations.

Course Content

            Challenge is the common theme that I found throughout my Loyola experience.  In the classroom and through countless papers and projects, I was encouraged to challenge myself to be a critical consumer of information, academic literature, and my own identities.  During my first semester of classes at Loyola, I realized that my business background definitely did not prepare me for the amount of reading and writing I encountered in my classes.  Additionally, I realized that I have never used a critical lens to better understand who I am as a person and how I can use my spheres of influence to create change. 

            This challenge was first presented in my Multiculturalism for Social Justice in Higher Education course during the first semester.  I remember being in class on the first day and secretly being terrified with the idea of not only being in a dialogue, but having to facilitate one as well.  I asked myself: what are people going to find out about me and will their perceptions of me change?  As I looked around the class, I saw myself immediately assuming each person’s story and recognizing that I really had nothing to contribute to the discussion and I should be prepared to be on the defensive when in dialogue.  This mindset really prevented me from being involved in class (I don’t think I participated in any of the first dialogues) and made me question my reason for choosing this program.  When sharing these trepidations to my fellow ARD, Lisa Rogers, she pushed me to be comfortable in my own skin and approach the learning and dialogues from a place of better understanding each person’s story and not forcing a narrative on to someone.

            I also vividly remember my first meeting with Bridget about my upcoming dialogue with Ali Reimel about heterosexism.  Thinking that we had a good handle on our material, we were excited to meet with Bridget and gain some clarity for our dialogue paper and discussion.  In that meeting, Bridget asked what reflections we had about how Ali and I have perpetuated the systems of heterosexual privileges in our own narrative.  I remember feeling like my brain was about to short-circuit because I realized my place in perpetuating this type of oppression.  At that point, I realized that I needed to find a way to situate myself in the stories and literature presented in my courses in order to identify my own privilege and use those privileged identities to help break down systems of oppression.  In this experience, I was challenged to see an issue from multiple perspectives and not allow my own privileged identities think that I am on the outside of an issue.

            This challenge continued into my three courses with John, who challenged me to be a critical consumer of knowledge, literature, and theory.  In Student Development Theory and Leadership, I was excited for the ability to better understand a student’s growth in school and be able to name what ‘stage’ they may be situated.  I was surprised to be challenged by John during the semester to not think about how I could recite theories verbatim, but to think about how the theories could inform the way I ask questions in one-on-ones, conduct meetings, and personal conversations with students.  Recognizing that not every theory outlines a student’s experience, we were asked to think about the ways we could apply the concepts to our work or areas of interest.  For a very ‘concrete’ thinker like myself, thinking this way seemed very abstract.  However, it was through a conversation with John that reminded me that it is ok to be uncomfortable and sit in a place that is full of questions.  In that state, I can learn more about myself and find ways to grow and develop as a result of being uncomfortable.  Since that course, I have embraced that challenge to think about how I can practice vulnerability and uncomfortability with my students in order to walk with them on their developmental journey.

            This theme continued in Rome, where John challenged us to be critical consumers of the artifacts around us.  My most vivid memory was having ‘class’ in the Forum and being asked to take twenty minutes to look at the various artifacts and take note of how tourists and guides interacted with the space.  Specifically at the Arch of Titus, our class noticed the beauty of the arch and noted that the tour guides spoke of a glorified battle with Jerusalem.  John then introduced us to the counter-narrative that explained the tragedies of the battle and we discussed how we could be critical consumers of artifacts while when we are taken outside of our comfort zone.  This prevailed as the theme of the trip, but inspired me to reflect on my own journey and ways to be a critical consumer of my story and environment.

Professional Experiences

            As a RA for three years, I came into my Loyola experience being very confident in my ability to supervise RAs and work in the Department of Residence Life.  While it was an enjoyable first year, I encountered many challenges and growth throughout the experience.  Specifically, I have learned about how to have relationships with students that my personal and professional roles and how to work in a collaborative environment.  Coming into my ARD role, I knew I wanted to emulate every best supervision practice I experienced over the past four years in Seattle in order to be the ‘best’ supervisor.  I quickly realized that not every student took well to my style, which was preventing me from having deep conversations with them about their own development as a RA and as a person.  I had to learn to be open to feedback and provide many different ways for students to define what the experience looks like for them and what they want to gain from the RA role.  While this was a difficult place to be in, I knew that if I was not open to feedback from my students, I could not build any meaningful relationship with them. 

            In addition to better understanding my supervision style, I also was challenged in many ways to understand what it means to work collaboratively within in the department.  I had trepidations coming into Loyola because I would be supervising upper-class (sophomore, junior, and senior) residents, an experience I did not have in Seattle.  On top of that, I worked on a supervision team of three (including myself), whose offices were spread across two blocks.  This was very intimidating to me because I did not want to overstep my boundaries and create a hostile team environment.  Through this experience, I had to rely on my co-ARD and supervisor in order to hold our students to consistent standards and refine the way that I usually work in teams.  Additionally, I had to critically reflect on how I show up in spaces given my outgoing personality and various agent identities.  When working in a team or group, I have found this as crucially important and as an area of continued development as I move through the field of higher education.

Conclusion

            While not every important learning and development I have had throughout this program could not fit on a five page reflection, I believe that I have grown in my understanding of social justice and my commitment to challenge myself and my students.  Before entering the program, I was committed to hearing other’s stories in order to understand their experiences.  As a result of the program, I am dedicated to not only listen to their stories, but to empower students to use their voices to enact change in their communities.  In order to do this, I know that I need to challenge myself as a professional to better understand my own identities and engage students and professionals in dialogues about social justice issues.  I have learned that my passion for working with students is directly related to understanding each person’s story and my commitment to support the whole person. 

            I came into this program wanting to understand how I can professionally enact cura personalis and am leaving it knowing how to not only care, but empower each student as well.  I know that I also need to empower myself to embrace challenges and be open to everyone’s narratives.  Through the support of the faculty, professionals, and peers at Loyola, I know that I am prepared to move into this field and continue to enact change, no matter how big it may be.