This material resides on an Indiana State University server and is maintained by Will Barratt.
Please forward any problems and comments to him.
The ultimate criterion of success for any organization is to be effective in its overall functioning. The achievement of organizational effectiveness is largely dependent on the simultaneous satisfaction of the needs and goals of all organizational constituent groups, whether they be consumers, members, and/or owners (Katz & Kahn, 1978). Universities would do well to recognize this concept, especially in light of increasing environmental constraints on their functioning (e.g., decreasing financial resources and enrollments, and increasing selectivity by students). When viewed in this manner, organizational effectiveness presents universities with a perplexing problem, in that their various constituent groups each possess vastly different goals, attachments and loyalties.
A unique position within the campus community which has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of a university is the campus ombudsman. Because the ombudsman bridges the gap between different constituent groups on campus, an ecological approach is particularly amenable to the ombudsman role in that such an approach encourages examination of both individual constituent group needs and views, and various facets of the campus environment.
The Campus Ombudsman Ombudsmen first appeared on college and university campuses in the institutions' attempts to deal with student dissent (Eddy,1968). In some ways, the ombudsmen served as a pressure valve, relieving student frustration (Roland, 1969) and offering an alternative to possibly more violent confrontations (Mundinger, 1967; Packwood, 1977). By offering a way in the system to redress grievances, ombudsmen could resolve disputes before they grew into major crises (Kolsofsky, 1971).
The psychological value of the ombudsman office was that the individual student knew he or she was not helpless before a large and impersonal bureaucracy (Roland, 1969). Currently, there are over 100 university ombudsmen in the United States and Canada. In recent years, the concept of ombudsmen has expanded into organizations such as prisons, schools, municipalities, hospitals, and large industries, thus humanizing many of these bureaucratic entities.
The basic assumption justifying the existence of the ombudsmen position is simple: humanizing the bureaucracy. By hearing grievances, investigating facts, suggesting a fair solution, and recommending necessary approaches and corrective measures, ombudsmen can effect a better balance in the existing asymmetry of individual to bureaucracy (Schlossberg, 1970). Campus ombudsmen have a responsibility to respond to the individuals who come to their offices and to the many individuals who do not (Chaney & Hurst, 1980). As individuals who receive and examine complaints, ombudsmen are in a unique position to measure stressors in the campus community. By virtue of their position, they can determine patterns of complaints and may also recognize when a single grievance brought to their attention signals a malfunction in the system (London, 1970).
Campus Ecology The concept of campus ecology was developed in reaction to the observed preponderance of student personnel activities which focused on changing the individual student to fit the institution. Banning and Kaiser (1974) outlined three traditional student intervention perspectives which highlight this one-sided (i.e., change the individual) approach to institutional problem solving: the unenlightened, counseling and developmental perspectives. It is our belief that at times, the counseling and developmental perspectives are appropriate methods of intervention. Although the counseling and developmental approaches are often used, because they fail to explicitly consider the environment as part of the problem and focus only on the individual, they may fail to truly contribute to the overall effectiveness or health of the institution.
The ecological perspective shares the foregoing concern for individual change and, in addition, incorporates the importance of the need for environmental change. This perspective is based on the belief that behavior is a function of the person and the environment: environment has an effect on people and their behavior, and people also have an effect on their environment. In other words, the ecological perspective focuses on the transactional relationship between the individual and his or her environment. Thus, instead of concentrating energy on changing the individual, an ecological intervention would consider both environmental and individual adjustments.
Ombusdman and the Ecological Approach: Contributing to Organizational Effectiveness Because of the special nature of the ombudsman position, the ombudsman can serve as a broker for important information exchange among campus constituents. With the ombudsman's commitment toward an ecological approach campus constituents could better understand where breakdowns in campus policy and procedures occur. Redesigning campus policies and procedures which truly reflect the needs and values of the campus community can have a humanizing effect on an otherwise impersonal bureaucracy. Thus, by combining the unique role of the campus ombudsman with an ecological approach, such interventions could enhance the overall effectiveness of the University.
References:
Banning, J.H. and Kaiser, L. (1974). An ecological perspecective and model for campus design. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 52(6), 370-375.
Chaney, C. & Hurst, J. (1980). The applicability and benefits of a community health outreach model for campus ombudsman programs. Journal of College Student Personnel, 21 (3), 215-222.
Eddy, J. P. (1968). Campus ombudsman in American higher education, Kappa Delta Pi Record, 5, 34-35.
Kanter, R. M. (1983). The Change Masters. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Katz, R. L., and Kahn, R. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Koslofsky, N. (1971). The critical role of the ombudsman. Clearing House, 48(7), 399-401.
London, H. (1970). Underground notes from a campus ombudsman. Journal of Higher Education, 41(5), 350-364.
Mundinger, D. (1967). The university ombudsman - his place on the campus. Journal of Higher Education, 38(9), 493-499.
Packwood, W. T. (1977). College Student Personnel Services. Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.
Rowland, H. R. (1969). The campus ombudsman: An Emerging Role. Educational Record, 50(40), 442-448.
Schlossberg, N. (1970). The ombudsman in current status and theory. NASPA Journal, 7(4), 215-219.
Editor's Note: Paul Hobson-Panico is currently a Ph.D. candidate in the Organizational Psychology program at Colorado State University. Linda Ahuna is Director of Services for Asian American Students at Colorado State University. Susan Hobson-Panico is the Ombudsman at the University of Colorado-Boulder .
Oetting (1967) developed the thesis that the counseling psychologist should be concerned not only with the individual and his or her development, but also with the insurance that the appropriate developmental tasks are present in the campus environment. Insuring the presence of growth inducing opportunities on campus presents a difficult challenge. Hollister (1964) speaks to this issue when he quotes Margaret Mead: "Our English language is deficient in some respects. We have the word 'trauma' to denote an unfortunate blow that injures the personality, but as yet we have no word that desdribes an experience that is fortunate, that strengthens the personality. The closest we come to this is to say it is a blessing, but counting our blessings does not really meet our need for a word directly opposite in meaning to 'trauma'."
Hollister proposes a new term to fill this void called "stren". Stren is defined as an experience in a person's life that builds strength into his or her personality. The task for the campus ecologist becomes the identification and designing of the "strens" in the campus ecology - those strength-giving experiences that can be mobilized to build stronger individuals within the university community.
References:
Hollister, W.G. (1964) The concept of "stren" in preventive interventions and ego-strength building in schools. Mental Health Monograph #5, The Protection and Promotion of Mental Health in Schools. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Betting, E.R. (1967) Developmental definition of counseling psychology. Counseling Psychology Vol . 14, No.4, 382-385.
The Ecology of Human Development is must reading for all who purport to be working in student development and/or student affairs administration. Bronfenbrenner provides a well defined conceptual framework for the notion that human development is an outcome of the transactional relationship between person and environment. He presents this framework through a series of definitions, propositions, and hypotheses.
"Definition 1." sets the basic thrust of the book: "The ecology of human development involves the scientific study of the progressive, mutual accommodation between an active, growing human being and the changing properties of the immediate settings in which the developing person lives, as this process is affected by relations between these settings, and by the larger contexts in which settings are embedded." (Page 21).
To further define and give "heuristic" direction to this basic definition, Bronfenbrenner introduces the concepts of microsystem, mesosystem, ecosystem, macrosystem, ecological transition, ecological validity, etc. These concepts are not presented to form a "cookbook" approach to the nature and design of environments that promote development. Bronfenbrenner's work is too rich to suggest such a strategy, but the application of his concepts to the campus ecology is both provoked and given direction. For example, Definition 6. states: "An ecological transition occurs whenever a person's position in the ecological environment is altered as the result of a change in role, setting, or both." (Page 26). A student entering a campus environment is in an "ecological transition". The purposes, goals, and nature of traditional college orientation programs can be reviewed from this perspective. The notion that every ecological transition is both a consequence and an instigator of a developmental process further illustrates the utility and the excitement of applying Bronfenbrenner's work to student development and the campus ecology. Reading the book should provide you with a "cognitive-ecological transition".
Editor's Note: You are encouraged to share your thoughts regarding Bronfenbrenner's work and its application to the campus ecology with The Campus Ecologist.
"By coining the term counseling ecology, I am not attempting to introduce a new specialty to add to counseling psychology, clinical psychology, and counselor education, or to human ecology and social ecology. Heaven forbid-we have enough turf wars already to keep everyone busy! Yet I find the label a powerful one for trying to capture the thrust of what it means for a counselor to adopt an ecological frame of reference for practice, and, thus, to potentially redefine a professional focus." (Page 2-3) " . . . counseling ecology offers a compelling model for helping to improve both people and environments." (Page 11)
This material resides on an Indiana State University server and is maintained by
Will Barratt.
Please forward any problems and comments to him.