by Brenna Gomez, Director of Career Integration, Career Development Center

Part of my role as the Director of Career Integration in the Career Development Center is to collaborate with my colleagues in the University Exploratory Studies Program (UESP) and teach ALS 114: Career Decision-Making once a year. Each time I teach the course, I make updates reflecting student need, the evolving role of AI, and more.

If you’re not familiar with Career Decision-Making, it’s a course largely for UESP students to explore majors and career paths that make the most sense for their individual goals. Students engage in lots of personal reflection about their strengths, values, and interests, while participating in career activities.

With Core Education right around the corner, many instructors and faculty are working to integrate career into existing courses or create new career courses. In this article, you’ll find some tips and tricks for thinking about career in the classroom based on my experience with ALS 114.

Share your own career path

I teach ALS: 114 on Ecampus. After my spring 2023 session, I received feedback on student evaluations that it didn’t seem like there was “enough of me as a person” in the course. As a result, I recorded personalized videos with my results from some of our career activities. Focus 2 is an interests and values assessment that gives students ideas for majors and career paths (free to use for OSU students through the Career Development Center). I have students download their results and submit them for a grade. This year, I completed the assessment myself, showed students my results in a video, and talked through the majors and career paths Focus 2 suggested, including what aligned with my personal and professional goals and what did not.  I also did this with a community map assignment, showing students who has had an influence on my life. It can feel vulnerable to share with students, and as instructors we should never share anything we aren’t comfortable with. But doing the assignments we ask them to do, and talking through our own results, can build students’ connection to me and to the course, while clearing up any questions they may have about the assignment itself. That said, these assignments are relatively short and did not take me much time to complete. That wouldn’t be true of every assignment in every course, so this may not be a realistic solution for everyone.

Yes, you do need an AI policy

In spring of 2023, I taught ALS 114 for the first time and naively believed I could avoid an AI policy because the writing assignments my students completed were mostly personal or career reflections. To me, these reflections seemed short and like it would be more work to get AI to answer them. I was reminded that we don’t know the full picture of students’ lives. If they are in a difficult period, or incredibly stressed about their future, AI can be a tempting tool that provides answers without the student having to engage in the mental process of reflection. In fall of 2023, I introduced an AI policy that largely reduced the AI usage I saw in the course. Students were allowed to use AI to help them organize their thoughts but not to draft assignments wholesale. Being transparent and communicating about AI use allows students to stay within assignment guidelines and understand instructor expectations from the start of the term

Define your preferences, especially whether you prefer a “professional tone” or an “authentic voice”

Some students were tempted to still use AI to produce a more “professional tone.” In talking with students about this, they felt a professional tone reflected higher level diction than they would consider using on their own. To them, this diction made the assignment more formal. This resulted in an excellent opportunity to discuss my bigger priority than word choice: authentic voice. I was able to speak to our reflections as informal writing with my emphasis on getting to know each student’s authentic voice. We also discussed professionalism as a skill that can be built over time and does not need to be done all at once in a single assignment by changing specific words. In other courses I teach, I’ve started giving disclaimers about how authentic voice is my priority. My hope is that by discussing authentic voice in informal reflections on the front end, students won’t feel the need to use AI to enhance their word choice.

Each time I teach this class I learn new things about my teaching practice, what I’d like to emphasize for students, and what students need to feel connected. I know I’ll continue to make changes that center students and hopefully encourage them to reflect on their lives and careers in their own authentic voices.

by Clare Creighton

Each fall, our Fall Student Survey team works with campus partners to develop a survey administered to all undergraduate Corvallis-based students. This effort began in April 2020 when we wanted to understand how the remote learning and pandemic conditions were impacting students. Over time, the survey has evolved to help us get a general pulse of the student experience and timely information on a few key topical areas relevant to OSU initiatives and efforts.

For Fall 2023, the survey was opened on October 23, ran for approximately two weeks, and closed on November 9, 2023.

This year we asked questions in a few key blocks:

• General overview questions that ask students about how they’re doing, their level of concern with different elements of the student experience, and their perception of their success this term.
• A block of questions about their experience with on-campus and off-campus work/employment (hours, goals, desires)
• A block of questions about the email communication students receive from OSU was devised in consultation with the Beaver Hub implementation team to gauge the impact of Beaver Hub on how students experience communication from OSU.
• A block of questions about perceptions of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and its role in students’ academic experiences.

Results from the full survey will be presented at an upcoming FYI Friday presentation on March 8, 2024 (via Zoom). Registration for that event is online (OSU Login). Following the presentation, the report will be released in a Box folder to internal OSU audiences.

The Final Question

In anticipation of that, however, I wanted to share a bit about my experience coding the final question “What else should we ask about”? Because this is an open-ended question, students can use this space in a number of ways. Here are a few trends, along with some insights those trends offer for future survey construction.

First, many of the respondents provided example topics on which they’d like us to ask questions. This was valuable data that showed us some of the issues important to students. Additionally, some of the topics were particularly grounded in the timing of the survey (e.g. referencing October safety announcements).  These results provided a useful reminder to ground interpretation within the context of when the survey was run and cues us to keep timing and current context in mind when drafting surveys and evaluating the results.

Second, a number of respondents used the open-ended question to provide answers for the questions they wish we had asked. While it’s challenging to code responses for essentially a “wild-card” question, we gathered insights from a range of topics we might not have thought to ask on a survey of this scale. Quite a few students wanted to give input on programs, services, or other ways they experienced OSU. I appreciate noting for myself that students are interested in opportunities to provide feedback on programs and services and recognized that they may not always be clear on where they have opportunities to do so outside of this survey – an area we can improve on locally within each program and more broadly across the OSU experience.

Third, some students gave feedback on the survey itself or indicated places of confusion with the available responses. There were a few places where questions or answer choices that make sense to us, did not fit the wide array of choices students need/want. In the next round of the survey, we can take into account student perspective more fully by planning time for student review of the format, options, and wording prior to the survey launch.

I hope you’ll join us for the FYI Friday session to learn more about how student perspectives are shaping our understanding of the student experience. For questions about the Fall Student Survey effort, contact Maureen Cochran, Senior Director of Strategic Initiatives and Assessment, Division of Student Affairs.

by Bria Kettenhofen and Bonnie Hemrick

Background and Scope of the Mental Health Improvement Project

Oregon State University’s (OSU) Counseling & Psychological Services (CAPS) was approached by the College of Engineering (COE) to engage in a collaborative effort to assess and create an action plan to improve the mental health of COE students. Starting in Fall 2022, CAPS has participated in a collaborative project with COE to complete a thorough needs assessment, which informed the creation of an action plan to improve on three focus areas of impact. The collaborative effort to create the Mental Health Improvement Plan concluded as of January 2024, with a recommended implementation and assessment to occur over the following three years.

The scope of the project was to collect and analyze existing and newly collected data to understand the experiences and challenges of students in COE and determine an action plan to guide efforts to improve the mental health of COE students. Risk and protective factors which were associated with mental health challenges in OSU’s COE students were determined based off surveys, facilitated focus groups, and ongoing dialogue and engagement with an Advisory Board (AB).

Advisory Board Makeup, Collaboration, and Guidance

A diverse Advisory Board was formed and consisted of COE students, COE administration, COE faculty, COE academic advisors, and other key OSU stakeholders. The AB was involved at the outset of the COE Mental Health Improvement Project, meeting weekly during the 2022-2023 academic year (AY) and Fall 2023 to collaboratively create needs assessment data collection tools, interpret themes from analysis, and provide perspective on the culture and policies of COE. Five COE students from various majors, lived experiences, and extracurricular involvement served as active members of the AB alongside OSU Faculty and staff, to center the student voice and perspective, and keep the student experience central to the project activities and decision making.

Maintaining student participation in the AB was one of the primary goals of the Mental Health Improvement Project. The AB was frequently consulted with relating to the needs assessment content and logistics, and the goal was for efforts to reflect the genuine student perspective and experience in COE.

What We Learned and What We Can Take Forward

The process of including an Advisory Board made up of subject matter experts, COE Faculty and staff, and students with lived experiences proved to be invaluable to the COE Mental Health Improvement Project. This suggests that this process could be duplicated in other colleges and communities which could benefit from informed and intentional intervention and advisement. Upon the culmination of the COE Mental Health Improvement Project, it became evident that the completion and fidelity of this community assessment was only made possible through active stakeholder engagement and involvement at all levels of the institution, from students to college leaders. Foundational to this endeavor was the buy-in from administrators in COE, as the leadership at COE was catalyst for this multi-year needs assessment effort.

Throughout the data collection, analysis, and interpretation phases of the project, COE administrators were provided updates and reports detailing the extensive efforts of the AB. After careful review and evaluation, the AB identified three priority areas for impact:

• Academic Practices
  • Practices in the classroom, on Canvas, during advising, or relating to an academic obligation of a course. Such practices include group work requirements, universal flexibilities around deadlines, discussion requirements, exams, and assignments.
• COE Culture & Classroom Climate Practices
  • The current attitudes, behaviors, and standards of faculty, staff, and administrators that influence the culture in COE. The shared beliefs, behaviors, and attitudes of students and teaching faculty in the classroom setting which determine the ways in which students interact and learn.
• Personal Well-being
  • How to address individual level well-being; how to teach students about mental health and supportive practices for their personal well-being.



COE administrators continuously demonstrated an openness to shift practices, policies, and embed health education throughout the curriculum and culture in COE, which made the project possible. With an engaging and open partnership between CAPS and COE, the COE Mental Health Improvement Project demonstrates that similar efforts can be undertaken at other colleges and institutions with the support and intentional buy-in from administrators.

If you have any additional questions about the COE Mental Health Improvement Project, please reach out to Bonnie Hemrick (Bonnie.Hemrick@oregonstate.edu).

by Clare Creighton

One-on-one meetings (or 1:1s) is the shortcut term our department uses for meeting individually with someone, most often with a direct report or supervisor. Student employees meet with their supervisor in 1:1s at various frequencies throughout the year, and professional staff meet with their reporting line supervisor in 1:1s on a regular basis as well. I love thinking about how the questions we ask open up possibilities for different conversations. I asked the team what kind of prompts they use in their 1:1s with student employees and there were a lot of thematic similarities.

In these conversations, the question below is just a starting point, from there we can ask follow-up questions and unpack responses in detail. Some supervisors give their questions to the team member in advance, and not all questions make it into every conversation. Here’s a collection:

1. How has this past [week, month, term] been?
2. Tell me about a highlight from this past [week, month, term]. Or What do you feel like you’re doing particularly well?
3. What challenges have you experienced/faced? Or What’s been challenging about your work?
4. What is on your radar as you look ahead? What’s coming up?
5. What skills do you want to further develop this term? What types of projects do you want to take on? What areas of development do you have in mind?
6. In general, or specific to the projects and skills above, what kind of support would you like from me? What would be helpful this [week, month, term]?
7. Here’s an upcoming project, change, or workflow ____. What role do you want to play in that project? What do you think your strengths or contributions might be?

These prompts strike me as useful in a range of conversations – in your own 1:1s or similar conversations. I’ll add one of my favorite prompts to the list as well, which is to ask folks, “what would you like me to ask you about/check in on when we meet next?”

by Clare Creighton

In April 2020, a small team of folks from Student Affairs and Academic Affairs designed and administered a survey to undergraduate, Corvallis-campus based students to better understand the student experience during the transition to remote learning. Since then, this team has conducted four additional surveys to gain insights into students’ experiences and perspectives.

In late October 2022, we initiated the fifth survey in this series and received responses from 2600 students. We will be releasing the full findings within the next few weeks, but I wanted to pull out a few key points that piqued my curiosity on the broader question: “What should communication look like between students and OSU?” Fortunately for all involved, I’m not the one answering this question. In fact, the Constituent Relationship Management (CRM) team is engaging in that work right now, and that group will review the responses on a few questions they helped design. For the scope of this blog, I want to highlight some areas of curiosity that came up relative to that theme of communicating with students:

1. I coded the question “What support do you think you most need so you can be successful this year at OSU?” – the top two themes were financial support and academic resources, but many students used that space to give feedback on a specific course or instructor. The survey isn’t designed for local feedback of that sort, so I interpret this to mean we have a gap in our communication structure. How do we empower students to talk to their instructors? And, when needed (although rare), what mechanisms are in place for students when genuine issues with an instructor arise? I am intrigued by the feedback form the College of Science has in place and wonder what the role this form or others like it might play in supporting interaction between students and instructors.
2. Near the end of the survey we asked “What do you wish we would have asked about in this survey?” Erin Bird coded these responses, and I saw in those themes an opportunity to do more to hear from students. They asked that OSU ask more about their experience as a student, ask questions about their mental health, and check in on them more. We don’t need to survey students more to create spaces for them to feel heard and to convey that they matter to the university. What opportunities already exist for students to share about their experience, or for an instructor, advisor, or support personnel to indicate interest in how they’re doing? What would that look like?
3. At the end of the survey, we asked students to leave their name and email address if they’d like to receive follow-up information and resources. Getting email outreach after finishing a survey isn’t an ideal way to connect, and yet 33% of our respondents were interested in additional communication at the end of the survey. There is a clear interest for students in timely information about resources. I am curious where the appropriate home might be for an “I want outreach/help/information” request within our university ecosystem.
4. The overall survey response rate was low (under 20%)—lower, in fact, than the other surveys in the series. On the other hand, the students who completed the survey gave rich and robust responses. When asked to define success, over 2100 respondents offered up 35,000 words. With both of those data points in mind, I am curious: how can we create routine mechanisms for students to share feedback that will be reviewed and shared more broadly?

I may have just offered four reasons not to administer a large-scale survey, but I actually believe wholly in this effort (and want to increase the response rate).  But a survey alone can’t accomplish our communication needs, and I believe that students and administrators, faculty, and staff would benefit from more nuanced conversation. For students, the value is in learning about resources in a timely fashion, an ability to give input and share their experience, and, at times, be checked-in on. From OSU’s perspective, having student input and perspective is vital in key success initiatives, effective communication, and our overall understanding of what needs and concerns exist.

We can and are working on large-scale communication through the CRM project and survey efforts like this, but I don’t want to lose sight of the ways we can do the work of communication at the small scale too. Individual people – student support personnel, advisors, instructors can play an important role here through day-to-day conversations with students. This week I’m going to pay attention to the conversations I’m having, and identify places where checking-in, inviting perspective, and offering resources can show up within existing dialogues.

For those interested in the full results of the survey, Erin Bird, Maureen Cochran, and I will be presenting as part of the FYI Friday series on Friday, February 3^rd, at 1:00 pm via Zoom. Registration is required. If you are unable to attend, a recording will be available in Box along with the final report.