1. 347 N Monmouth Avenue
Monmouth, OR 97361
March 18, 2014
Patrick Moser, Associate Director of University Housing
University Housing Office
347 N Monmouth Avenue
Monmouth, OR 97361
Dear Patrick:
WOU’s University Housing does an excellent job of creating a safe, friendly,
environmental and inclusive environment for students. Professional and student staff
alike share a common goal to give the on campus residents of Western a positive and
impactful experience during their college experience. Although these are the efforts being
made and UH’s goals are prominent, RAs are often not able to reach the greatest number
of residents possible. One of the pieces of being an RA that is sometimes seen as
hindering is the programming model that we are required to follow.
Although the majority of RAs make an effort to bring a diverse range of residents to their
programs, often times these events have poor attendance and are thrown together with
minimal effort. There are quality programs executed every term of every year, but they
do not outweigh the programs that have more RAs attending than residents. These
programs often have resources being wasted: chips and cookies ending up in various staff
offices, craft supplies going unused, and UH’s money being thrown away.
Within this document is a further description of my concerns about the current RA
programming model and a list of possible solutions to create an even more rich, and
captivating experience for on campus residents. I would appreciate it if you took the time
to review these solutions and assessed their potential.
Thank you for taking the time to look at this report.
Sincerely,
Giovanna M. DiFalco

2. 2
Improving the RA Programming Model
Of WOU’ University Housing
Submitted To: Patrick Moser, Associate Director of University Housing
Housing Office
347 N Monmouth Avenue
Monmouth, OR 97361
Submitted By: Giovanna M. DiFalco
RSC Box # 2144
347 N Monmouth Avenue
Monmouth, OR 97361
Date: 3-18-2014

3. 3
Abstract
Students new to college, transferring from another institution or returning to school to complete
their education have found their place at Western Oregon University. Many of these people have
found their place in Western’s Residence Halls as well. Resident Assistants (RAs) work in each
hall in order to guide, support and educate the diverse population that Western holds on its
campus.
Programming is a primary piece of the RA’s job, and is used to foster community development.
Inopportunely, these programs are often ill attended and poorly executed, neglecting to serve
their purpose. Surveys of WOU students, benchmarking statistics, and interviews have shown
that programming is not the primary way to reach WOU’s population of on campus students.
There are a variety of solutions that could be implemented to connect to a wider variety of
residents. These include intentional interactions with residents, more defined programming
guidelines or even a decreased number of structured programs. Over the course of this report a
number of options will be evaluated. Concluding this compilation of research and opinion I will
recommend that changes be made to the current RA programming model. With less programs,
and more time being spent bonding with residents one-on-one, the RA of a community has a
much greater chance of meeting a wide variety of resident’s needs.

4. 4
Executive Summary
Problem:
Unfortunately, many residents show little interest in being a part of the on campus living
community. In addition, RAs have a programming model that is not conducive to reaching the
greatest number of residents. This model consumes the time of the RA’s, asking them to plan
scarcely attended events, and hinders them in meeting the needs of the greater amount of on-
campus residents. Residents are not attending these programs that are supposed to educate them
and help them feel connected to their peers and the university. In turn, they may not learn about
WOU’s resources that can benefit their academic, emotional and social success, and choosing to
leave the university due to a lacking connection in their college environment.
Causes:
 Lack of motivation from RAs
 Loosely interpreted guidelines
 Lack of guidelines in programming expectations
 Lack of creativity in program ideas
Effects:
 Residents do not attend programs
 RA funding potentially wasted
 Lack of connectedness between RAs and residents
 Decrease in retention in first year students
Multiple Solutions:
 Program simulations in RA training
 Amendments to Programming Model in RA contracts
 Intentional interactions
 Decreased number of programs
 Mix of programs and intentional interactions
Recommended Solution:
A mixture of fewer programs and intentional interactions
Objectives/Feasibility:
 No additional cost
 Impact on residents
 Individually encourage community building
 Greater knowledge of program ideas (needs/wants)
 Reach residents that would not be reached through programming

5. 5
Problem Description
Problem Statement
Ideally, on campus residents at WOU would immediately take interest in being involved
in residence life upon arrival. They would attend events that their RA designed for them,
and show a general curiosity about how to stay involved in the future. RAs would
actively take the initiative, through programming, to connect to a variety of residents.
Through these programs the majority of residents would feel connected to their
communities and the University. RAs would take advantage of their programming
resources to ensure that they were attracting the greatest majority of residents.
Unfortunately, many residents show little interest in being a part of the on campus living
community. In addition, RAs have a programming model that is not conducive to
reaching the greatest number of residents. This model consumes the time of the RA’s,
asking them to plan scarcely attended events, and hinders them in meeting the needs of
the greater amount of on-campus residents. Residents are not attending these programs
that are supposed to educate them and help them feel connected to their peers and the
university. In turn, they may not learn about WOU’s resources that can benefit their
academic, emotional and social success, and choosing to leave the university due to a
lacking connection in their college environment.
Past
Although there is not a specific reason to why this problem exists, there are a collation of
contributing factors including different resident personalities, RA staff morale, and the
perception of programming that changes year to year.
In the past the RA programming model was not intentional in promoting University
Housing’s core values (community, communication, sustainability, wellness, support,
inclusion, and learning). Only providing a checklist of social, educational, and
community development programs. The RAs evaluations of these programs also lacked
intentionality in reflecting on the success of the program, and what could be improved
upon when future RAs wanted to emulate this program.
Having both a lack of intentionality in programming, and in evaluations (the RAs
opportunity to reflect on the impact, relevance, and creativity of the programs), could
potentially create a lack of enthusiasm in residents to attend these programs.
Even after providing the current programming model, with requirements to program for
each core value, educating residents about their importance, events are still receiving
poor attendance and a lack of enthusiasm.

6. 6
When a former RA, serving in a first-year community for two years was asked to
comment on the current model he stated.
“I feel it’s [programming model] a way that they [professional staff] measure how
involved or engaged we are in our community. I feel like that’s not sound. Most of how I
connect to my residents is not around my programs. I was all about moments that you
don’t plan, that make you a part of your community.”
- Travis Mewissen, Former Heritage RA
Present
WOU’s University Housing (UH) employs RAs to live in their residence halls and help
foster the growth and development of their students. UH’s mission emphasizes words
such as support, responsibility, growth and inclusion. It encompasses ideas such as
creating a living-learning experience, and evolving society while encouraging personal
and academic growth. The RA position is designed to further make this mission become a
reality. They are assigned a variety of tasks in their job contracts to aid them in making
these ideas come to life. The programming model they are trained on being an RA’s
primary tool. This programming model, although created with good intent, can actually
hinder RAs in providing the rich, and diverse experience that UH hopes to provide to
students residing on campus.
When RAs, Professional Housing staff, and residents were asked how they felt about the
current programming model there were a variety of less than ideal responses.
 “No, no I do not. Majority of RA’s do not use their full funding account,
nor do they use other funding resources [Weekend Wolfpack, academic
initiative budget, GA].”
-Ashley Kysor, Area Coordinator in Heritage Hall
 “…(The) Value is there in the programs, and I think the education is there,
and residents might not be aware of it.”
-Blair Osburn, Area Coordinator in Ackerman Hall and previous RA
 “People having a set number of programs see quantity over quality. [It’s]
less about putting time and effort into making programs successful…”
-Daniel Tew, Heritage RA
 “I didn’t know that my RA put on that many programs [6] each term. My
whole year living in res. life, I only remember my RA putting on one or
two programs.”
-Andy Daniels, former on campus resident and Peer Mentor leader
The core values that University bases its actions off of, and the level of community
building that WOU would like to achieve for its residents is not being attained.

7. 7
Unanimously, different representatives of Western recognize the RA programming model
is not achieving what the goals that University Housing has set for on campus residents.
In addition to interviews, I conducted a very brief survey. I asked a variety of RAs (past
and present), professional staff members, and residents to use three words to describe
RAs current programming model. The results are attached to the end of this document
and are in the form of a Wordle document. This survey displays its results in terms of the
amount of times a word is repeated. Words that appear larger were used a greater number
of times than the smaller words. These results were overwhelmingly constructive in
comparison to the amount of positive feedback that was give.
Future
This problem may seem catastrophized and lacking urgency, but this lack of community
building could eventually result in a drop in retention. The number of on campus
residents have continued to decrease over the past couple of years. This has resulted in
budget cuts, a raise in campus living costs, and even shutting down an entire residence
hall. RAs do not determine whether residents stay or leave the on campus community but
their impact can create a positive or negative light in a student’s college experience.
The interactions that RAs do or do not have with their residents can create a large impact
on their day-to-day experience at WOU. The graph on the following page contains data
from last year’s (2012-13) EBI (Educational Benchmarking Instrument) survey.
70%
69.70%
69.30%
67.30%
66% 66% 67% 67% 68% 68% 69% 69% 70% 70% 71% 71%
Social/Educational/Social Programs
Variety of Program
Quality of Programs
Athletic/Recreational Activities
EBI Results on Program Performance

8. 8
This survey provided campus-wide results on student’s perceptions of our programing
capabilities. After receiving the feedback from WOU’s campus population this survey is bench
marketed with schools of like-size of campus population, and/or other schools in Oregon.
Although this data is not entirely based off of RA programs, but includes other University
Housing organizations, it gives a picture of how residents perceive campus programs.
The results of the EBI based off of quality of each program area
EBI Break Down:
- 0%-70% = Issue
- 71%-74% = Needs Work
- 75%-100% = Good
Three out of the four areas evaluated in this survey indicate that there is an issue with the quality
of University Housings programs and one area, still, is below average and needs work.
Possible Solutions
The following five solutions have the ability to resolve this problem and enhance the
effectiveness of the RA’s role and programming model.
Intentional Interactions
These interactions would be required once per term, but encouraged to have a higher frequency.
The RA would need to have a meeting with each resident that could take the form of getting a
meal together, coffee a walk, or talking in the RA’s room. These meetings would great an open
space for residents to use their RA as a resource for topics that they may not feel comfortable
discussing in a group-setting. This would also help make the RA more approachable on a regular
basis. In addition, giving the RA a more clear idea of how to program for a greater variety of
resident’s needs.
Decreasing Number of Programs
Requiring an RA to implement 3 programs per term instead of 6 could allow them to spend more
time bonding, and connecting with a greater number of residents. Also, it would allow the RA
more time to thoughtfully plan out quality programs for their community.
Mix of Intentional Interactions and Social Programs
Implementing 3 programs per term in addition to the once per term intentional interactions would
give RAs the greatest chance of connecting with the majority of their residents. Receiving
feedback from the intentional interactions and using that in planning their programs would allow
for programs based directly on residents needs and would still allow RAs to be a more visible
resource to those residents that will not attend programs.

9. 9
Program Simulations in RA Training
This would require professional staff to create a program that would take place during fall
training. RAs would attend this program and observe the qualities that do and do not work
effectively through the perspective of an attendee. Viewing a strong and effective program from
a resident’s perspective would enhance an RAs ability to recognize things that will or will not
work when planning their own programs.
Amendments to Programming Model in RA Contract
Amending the piece of the RA contract that covers programming, and adding more specific
details as to what does and does not qualify as a program. For example: stating a minimum
number of residents that need to attend in order for a program to count toward your required
number for the term. Also, stating what kind of preparation requirements there are such as
meeting with your supervisor to explain the purpose of your program and why it would be
meaningful to your residents.
Comparison of Solutions
In the Following table I have created a matrix, rating the feasibility of each solution based on the
criteria of:
1) Money
2) Time
3) Increasing Accessibility to Residents
4) Potential to Solve the Problem
Table 1:
Money Time Increasing
Accessibility to
Residents
Potential to
Solve Problem
Intentional
Interactions (I.I.)
+++ ++ +++ ++
Decrease # of
Programs
+++ +++ +++ +
Mix of Programs
and I.I.
+++ + +++ ++
Program
Simulation in
RA Training
++ + + +
Amendments to
Programming
Model in RA
Contract
+ + + +
Legend: Fair= + Good= ++ Excellent= +++

10. 10
1) Money
a. Intentional Interactions (+++)
There is no cost involved
b. Decrease Number of Programs (++)
This solution could potentially decrease the amount allotted to RA programming
funds.
c. Mix of Programs and Intentional Interactions (+++)
This solution could also result in a cut in RA programming funds because there
would be a decreased number of programs and funds are unnecessary for I.I.
d. Program Simulation in RA Training (++)
Creating effective program simulations with a variety of outside organizations
may cost more money in order to pay for people’s time and participation and/or
supplies
e. Amendments to Programming Model in RA Contract (+)
Depending on how the RA contract was amended, there could be an increase or
decrease in costs.
2) Time
a. Intentional Interactions (++)
This solution would involve a large time commitment depending on the number
of intentional interactions an RA would be required to have with each resident
b. Decrease Number of Programs (+++)
Although this solution would decrease the amount of time that RAs spend on
programs it would not decrease the amount of time spent working with residents.
Inevitably it may increase the amount of time RAs dedicate to
education/connecting with residents
c. Mix of Programs and Intentional Interactions (+)
This solution would require an increased time commitment and potentially create
more stress for RAs to balance programs and a set number of intentional
interactions
d. Program Simulation in RA Training (+)
Throughout the academic year this solution would not increase time
commitments, but extra time may need to be allotted during fall and/or winter
training
e. Amendments to Programming Model in RA Contract (+)
If RA contracts were amended to increase complexity to each program, then this
would increase the amount of time that went into programming significantly
3) Increasing Accessibility to Residents
a. Intentional Interactions (+++)
This solution would require and challenge RAs to interact with residents and find
ways to become more accessible to residents
b. Decrease Number of Programs (+++)
Decreasing the number of programs could potentially increase the amount of time
RAs had to spend unstructured time with their residents (i.e. in their community
areas, having meals together, studying together)
c. Mix of Programs and Intentional Interactions (+++)

11. 11
This solution could serve as a ‘trial run’ to indicate what would be the most
effective form of communication between RAs and residents. RAs could evaluate
the merit of their one-on-one interactions and the diversity of people that they
interact with in comparison to the standard program setting
d. Program Simulation in RA Training (+)
These programming simulations would give RAs more tools to program more
successfully, therefore reaching a greater number of residents
e. Amendments to Programming Model in RA Contract (+)
Amendments in the way that RAs program and cater to the needs of residents
could increase attendance to programs and cause a more diverse group of
residents to attend programs
Recommendation
Based off of the surveys, interviews and research that I have done, in addition to the goals that
are sought to be achieved by WOU University Housing, the recommendation that I see being
most effective would be to create a mixture of programs and intentional interactions that would
be required of the RAs each term. This solution still leaves room for RAs to exercise their
creativity in structuring events to build community for residents, while also allowing them to
communicate regularly with a larger number of residents.
When 100 residents were surveyed, the results showed that the majority (60 %) of residents
preferred to speak with their RA in their room, and/or in community areas. This survey showed
that resident’s preference was to spend casual unstructured time with their RA. Having
intentional interactions combined with programs would be structured for RAs but would not
have to appear that way to residents. Instead, it would create more opportunities for residents to
communicate with their RAs and for the RA to better understand the needs of their residents.
Decreasing the number of programs, from six programs per term to three or four, would give
RAs the opportunity to pay more attention to detail and create events that are specifically catered
to the needs and wants of residents. Also, with a decreased number of programs, and increased
expectations there would be a necessary concerted effort to create programs that residents will
want to attend.
Programs do not have to take place in residence halls, but could be based around education
residents on other organizations. Instead of having RAs hanging up informative posters and
lecturing about on campus resources, they could take their residents to programs being put on by
other campus organizations. This would require less time spent on the design of programs, and
would also immerse students in the resources that campus has to offer.
Feasibility
Stages/Schedule:

12. 12
Planning
These changes would most likely be considered for implementation throughout this
academic year, and potentially introduced during an in-service to seek feedback from
current RAs and other student leaders. Throughout the RA selection process for the
following academic year (2014-15) this change, with potential modifications, could be
introduced to the incoming RA’s.
Realistically, due to the timing of this recommendation, the changes would most likely
not be put into full effect until the academic year of 2015-16. In the time preceding there
would be room for this idea to be further formed by the returning and incoming RA’s in
order to make this change as effective as possible.
Implementation
The full implementation would most likely take place in the academic year of 2015-16.
The changes would have to be stated in the RA contracts so that returning and incoming
RAs would be aware of the new commitments they would be making in their position.
The changes would appear in the RA’s contract as 3 programs per term and a mandatory
intentional interaction (one-on-one meeting) with each resident per term.
During fall training, prior to resident’s arrival, RAs would be trained on what an
appropriate intentional interaction would consist of. It would be encouraged to meet with
as many residents as possible, more than once per term. Also to evaluate which residents
may need more attention than others.
In addition to the training on intentional interactions, RAs would also be trained on how
to create meaningful, quality programs. Following the standard program training RAs
would also be trained on how to research on campus events to take their residents to, as a
program. Also, what questions to ask during intentional interactions to plan effective
programs based off of residents wants and needs.
Evaluation
An evaluation of the presented idea before the 2015-16 academic year to get a sense of
how successful the student staff deem the changes will be.
Then having a survey after RAs first term with the changes implemented to evaluate the
effectiveness of the changes and how RAs are adapting. At the end of the year having a
final survey to see how RAs used these changes over the year.
Personnel
Personnel (for University Housing) would not be effected. Although, personnel from
other organizations around campus could be positively affected because the modifications
could enhance resident’s knowledge of them as resources.

13. 13
Resources
One of an RA’s goals is to inform residents of the different resources that WOU has to
offer. With modifications to the current programming model and requiring RAs to take
residents to events put on by other campus organizations, the resources that we would
need to make this happen would be limited, while generating a more enriching experience
of Western’s resources for students.
Budget
This solution would allow RA’s term budget to be reduced from $60 per term to $30. If
RAs are encouraged to seek out other campus events to enrich their residents on campus
experience, a budget to would be in lower demand. Also, cutting the number of programs
required per term in half, would make a higher budget unnecessary.
Special Concerns
Unfortunately no matter what modifications are made to the RA position, programming model,
or their contract, it is not feasible to connect with every resident. These changes may not reach
all residents because there will always be those students that are not interest in having the
involved, community experience that Western strives to provide. These changes would create
more avenues for RAs to extend themselves to residents, giving residents a wider variety of ways
to connect to WOU. Although these changes may not enable RAs to reach all of their residents, it
offers a greater number of opportunities that are available for residents to use.
Conclusion
The lack of connectedness between residents and their communities is a problem that may never
be solved in its entirety. The solution of combining intentional interactions with a decreased
number of programs may create a mixture that is more effective in reaching a greater number of
residents. Not all residents will be reached and feel connected to WOU, but this solution would
help residents that may never attend a program. This solution will also benefit those residents
that do enjoy programs because a RAs could put more time and energy into a fewer number of
programs. Creating a more valuable and impactful experience. This is a feasible solution that will
hopefully increase residents WOU experience and make it even more impactful.

14. 14
References
Daniels, Andrew. "Past Resident Interview." Personal interview. Feb. 2014.
EBI Survey Results. Survey Results. May-June 2013. Raw data. Western Oregon University, University
Housing, Monmouth.
EBI Survey Results. Survey Results. May-June 2013. Raw data. Western Oregon University, University
Housing, Monmouth.
Heritage Hall Survey Results. Residence Hall Survey. Oct.-Nov. 2013. Raw data. Western Oregon
University, University Housing, Monmouth.
Kysor, Ashley. "Area Coordinator Interview 1." Personal interview. 23 Jan. 2014.
Osburn, Blair. "Area Coordinator Interview 2." Personal interview. 27 Feb. 2014.
Tew, Daniel. "RA Interview." Personal interview. 16 Jan. 2014.