Running head: CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

Connecting the Curricular with the Co-Curricular:

An Interview with Dr. Jaimie Friedman, Assistant Professor of English at Westmont College
Leah Sadoian
Azusa Pacific University

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

2
Creating a healthy relationship between faculty and student affairs professionals at a
university or college is essential to holistic student development. Learning Reconsidered 2
(2006) states that The capacity to collaborate with other professionals (in or out of student
affairs, and on or off campusbut especially, in the faculty) is central to our success (pg. 63).
As future student affairs professionals, we must begin understanding the faculty perspective in
order to develop co-curricular programming which supports the curriculum already practiced by
faculty and the academic mission of our college. For this paper, I interviewed Dr. Jamie
Friedman, an Assistant Professor of English at Westmont College. Dr. Friedman completed her
B.A. in English and French at Whitworth University, and her Ph.D. at Cornell University,
specializing in medieval English literature, embodiment, and theories of racial, religious, and
gendered identity constructions. Our conversation focused on three main topics: the relationship
between the curriculum and co-curriculum, the role of faculty in student development, and how
to best collaborate between faculty and student affairs. Taking her answers into consideration, I
complied recommendations for student affairs professionals to continue building a healthy
partnership between faculty and student affairs professionals.
I began by asking Dr. Friedman questions about the relationship between the curriculum
and co-curriculum at Westmont. I inquired about Dr. Friedmans major roles and responsibilities
as a faculty member at Westmont, to which she responded with three main areas: teaching,
research, and mentorship. My responsibility towards students is teaching. Good teaching, that
connects with students and empowers them to intervene in their field or discipline (J. Friedman,
personal communication, April 17, 2015). Dr. Friedman also emphasized the role of academic
mentorship. She spoke of knowing them and inviting [students] into conversations beyond the

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

3
classroom, connecting with them on a deeper level to continue supporting them. And when she
could not answer a question or direct support, Dr. Friedman mentioned referring students to
different facets of Student Life where there would be a rich web of resources to catch and
support them (J. Friedman, personal communication, April 17, 2015). This connection between
the curriculum and the co-curriculum became evident, even when collaboration is not clearly
evident, there is a working relationship behind the scenes, that if brought to the surface would be
highly beneficial for students. In Learning Reconsidered 2 (2006), this act of engaging students
is discussed. The work of engaging students is not new to the profession. As we expand our
understanding of learning and how it happens, we will be able to work with the faculty, using a
common language, to develop more integrated learning experiences (pg. 16). I asked Dr.
Friedman when she first became aware of the profession of student affairs. She answered that
fundamentally, it wasnt until she was a teacher herself. As an undergraduate student, they were
simply in charge of socializing programs, addressing social needs, not necessary intellectual or
spiritual needs (J. Friedman, personal communication, April 17, 2015). I then inquired if she had
any experience collaborating with student affairs, and Dr. Friedman spoke highly of the different
opportunities she has had to partner with Student Life at Westmont. This included speaking on
panels for educational events, serving on search committees for Resident Directors, and taking
part in conduct meetings. Having a faculty presence in the judicial process opened Dr.
Friedmans eyes to how Student Life approaches difficult situations. I learned through this
interview that the curriculum and co-curriculum share a relationship under the surface. If student
affairs professionals and faculty communicated more openly, they would realize that the
mentorship and development for students is occurring through faculty one-on-ones as well as in

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

4
co-curricular programming, opening up new areas of opportunity to build upon those
conversations.
As our interview progressed, it became more evident how Dr. Friedman approached
student development as a faculty member. I asked what motivated her as a faculty member, and
she responded that her experience as a student at Whitworth, and interactions she had inside the
classroom shape how she approaches her work now. She felt that she was not a traditional
Christian, and wanted her role as a faculty member to model the diverse ways Christianity can
manifest itself. She expressed motivation to help students turn away from fear when approached
with difficult topics, instead creating conversations inside and outside the classroom where
students and feel courageous and supported (J. Friedman, personal communication, April 17,
2015). I was surprised at how much this aligned with the goals student affairs professionals strive
for. We want students to feel supported and affirmed, which coincidentally is also one of the
motivating factors for Dr. Friedmans work. I also asked what most faculty members feel about
the work of Student Affairs professionals at Westmont, and it was surprisingly positive. Student
Life Professionals are incredibly thoughtful and strategic about the work that they do. Dr.
Friedman used the conduct process at Westmont as an example. I really like the way Westmont
does [the conduct process], how they rethink the disciplinary procedure to grow the student (J.
Friedman, personal communication, April 17, 2015). Hirsh and Burack (2001) writes that
through collaborations, Faculty and Student Affairs staff often develop a greater understanding
of and respect for the expertise each other brings to the institutions [and]these collaborations
have a powerful impact on students (pg. 60). Dr. Friedman spoke of the universal appreciation
for the resources Student Life offers to students, but also criticized the lack of race-focused

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

5
conversations, sexual assault education, and how support/resources are delegated to different
Student Life departments. I learned that the role of faculty in student development is one that
comes alongside what student affairs professionals are doing, but not in the form of
programming or engagement. Dr. Friedman said the majority attitude towards Student Life
professionals at Westmont from faculty is one of, Im not sure what they do, but theyre doing a
good job at it (J. Friedman, personal communication, April 17, 2015). There is a divide between
understanding each others work, and both faculty and student affairs professionals can work to
do better in learning what the other does. Kuh (1996) describes this in the framework of systemic
thinking.
Systemic thinking demands a broad, inclusive understanding of the complex nature of the
institution. Student affairs professionals must be able to see that students, classes,
faculty, and out-of-class experiences are not discrete variables, events, and activities, but
are connected at several levels. That is, they affect one another in myriad ways that are
not necessarily obvious to the casual observer. (pg. 142)
We then turned our conversation to how to collaborate better between faculty and student affairs
in order to better this important relationship.
I asked Dr. Friedman how she believed student affairs professionals should work with
faculty. Her main recommendation focused on keeping the conversation going about the campus
learning environment. Dr. Friedman also stated that she enjoys being invited to participate in
conversations on the Student Life side of campus, as it keeps her in the loop on whats happening
outside of her classroom. I know nothing that goes on. Students will tell me about an event that

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

6
Westmont sponsored and they were animated by it, they wanted to bring it into my classroom (J.
Friedman, personal communication, April 17, 2015). I then asked Dr. Friedman what Student
Life at Westmont could do to better support the academic mission of the college. Dr. Friedman
suggested a collaboration piece that would benefit Westmont in many different ways. She stated
a major improvement would be if Student Life deliberatively and specifically partnered with
faculty to continue conversations inside the classroom, outside the classroom. She described it as
this stretching the intellectual arm of Student Life work (J. Friedman, personal communication,
April 17, 2015). Hirsh and Burack (2001) supports this idea, stating that There is great potential
for faculty and student affairs to interact and collaborate so that students out-of-class time not
only supports classroom learning but also extends and expands it (pg. 60). In this way, Student
Life uses what faculty teach in the curriculum to drive their co-curricular programs, connecting
material and allowing students opportunity to apply what they are learning in the classroom,
outside the classroom.
Taking all of these answers into consideration, I developed three recommendations for
Student Affairs Professions. First, we should understand that mentorship is not purely our
domain. Dr. Friedman spoke passionately about the relationship she builds with students, and
how mentorship plays a role in her classroom. Often, mentorship seems reserved for those who
work in Student Affairs, but we should not reserve this only for us. Second, we must
communicate effectively what we do and the purpose behind it. A short intro seminar for new
faculty members highlighting the various student affairs offices combats the Im not sure what
they do, but theyre doing a good job at it attitude Dr. Friedman described. We cannot assume

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

7
that faculty will learn from just watching or attending our events, we must be proactive in
sharing with them what we do and why we do it. My third recommendation is to begin with the
curriculum when designing co-curricular programming. In other words, have faculty provide the
concept or information that would be presented in co-curricular programming, thus connecting
the information presented inside the classroom outside of it. In Learning Reconsidered (2004),
this connection is emphasized. Student affairs professionals can also help connect academic
learning to student life if they are conscious of the courses their students are taking and what
they are learning (pg. 18). Faculty will be more energized to collaborate with Student Affairs
when they see their work driving a program. Even though there are many obstacles to healthy
partnerships between faculty and student affairs, Kezar (2001) writes to not fear institutional
obstacles and barriers; merely be aware of themAlthough significant obstacles exist, especially
lack of time, strong faculty resistance, and lack of positive relationships among groups, the
strategies being implemented can overcome these challenges (pg. 50). These recommendations
create unique learning opportunities while also strengthening the relationship between faculty
and Student Affairs at any college or university.
Learning Reconsidered sums up my conversation with Dr. Friedman: Every resource on
every campus should be used to achieve transformative liberal education for all students, and all
colleges and universities are accountable for establishing and assessing specific student
outcomes that reflect this integrated view of learning (pg. 35). My conversation with Dr.
Friedman focused on fostering the relationship between the curriculum and the co-curriculum,
the role of faculty in student development, and how to best collaborate between faculty and

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

8
student affairs. Her answers have helped me learn about how to work with faculty together as I
enter the field of Student Affairs, in order to create seamless learning environment for our
students. I am excited to put what I have learned from Dr. Friedman into practice, both
throughout my graduate career and into my professional vocation.

CONNECTING THE CURRICULAR WITH THE CO-CURRICULAR

9
References
ACPA, ACUHO-I, ACUI, NACADA, NACA, NASPA, and NIRSA, (2006). Learning
reconsidered 2: Implementingacampuswidefocusonthestudentexperience.
Hirsch, D.J., & Burak, C. (2001). Finding points of contact for collaborative work. In Kezar, A.,
Hirsch, D.J., & Burack, C. (Eds.), Understandingtheroleofacademicandstudent
affairscollaborationincreatingasuccessfullearningenvironment(pp.5362).New
Directions for Higher Education, 116. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kezar, A. (2001). Documenting the landscape: Results of a national study on academic and
student affairs collaborations. In Kezar, A., Hirsch, D.J., & Burack, C. (Eds.),
Understandingtheroleofacademicandstudentaffairscollaborationincreatinga
successfullearningenvironment(pp.3951).New Directions for Higher Education, 116.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kuh, G. D. (1996). Guiding principles for creating seamless learning environments for
undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, (37)2, pg. 135-148.
NASPA/ACPA (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student experience.
Published by NASPA.