Running head: #SATECHSEA REFLECTION

#SATech Seattle Reflection Christopher J. Van Drimmelen Seattle University Student Development Administration

#SATECHSEA REFLECTION Introduction On March 8, 2014, Seattle University hosted the first ever #SATech Seattle

Unconference, co-sponsored by the Seattle University Division of Student Development, the University of Washington Division of Student Life, and the Seattle University Student Development Association (SUSDA). As the Conference Chair for this event, I had been a part of #SATech Seattle from the beginning. After attending #SATech Oregon in April of 2013, I felt that Seattle and the Puget Sound region were ripe for such an event and so I took it upon myself to get the ball rolling and put on our own #SATech Unconference. After nearly a year, my planning committee and I made it happen. This reflection will detail my learnings and implications for my professional practice from this event. To begin, I want to give the reader a brief overview of what an unconference is, since the concept is still new. At an unconference, there are no pre-determined sessions, no call for proposals, and no facilitators like there are at a normal conference. The event is almost entirely discussion based with the participants taking on the role of both teacher and learner. Its a democratic learning process that can be uncomfortable at first, but lets everyone engage as much or as little as they want. Our participants ultimately decided upon the following session topics for #SATech Seattle: Session 1 Engagement & Effective Integration of Technology Building Buy-In for Tech & Social Media Access & Equity Process Improvement/Assessment Session 2 Social Justice Movements on Social Media Beyond Social Media Capturing the Student Experience through Social Media Student Conduct & Technology: A Love Story Session 3 Buy-In and Strategic Partnerships Digital Identity Development Un-Social Media Open Source and Free Stuff

#SATECHSEA REFLECTION What I Learned Aside from what I learned at the event, I learned a great deal just by putting on the unconference itself. First, I learned that the process of funding and putting on such an event can be intensely political. While I had originally approached the event with the idea

that the Division of Student Development would fund the majority of the event, with a small contribution coming from SUSDA and the Graduate Student Council. When this did not turn out to be possible, I had to seek broader co-sponsorship, which eventually included departments in Student Life at the University of Washington. Professionals from all of our co-sponsors ended up on my planning committee, in what Bolman & Gallos (2011) would call a coalition within the political frame of leadership. I learned that, based upon who attended the conference, this political coalition building probably attracted individuals who might not have come otherwise, since their institution had a stake in its success. Second, I learned that clear communication is essential to pulling off an event like this when the planning committee is scattered across four different institutions. We had to get creative, since several of us did not meet in person until the day of the actual event. We developed a system of regular video-calls and weekly wrap e-mails to clearly define what each committee member was working on and needed to accomplish. Finally, I learned that the converse of what I said in my first learning was true on an individual level since the event was free: about 70 participants registered for the event, but we only ended up with about 40 who actually came. I received feedback that free was perceived as low stakes, and so participants registered on the off-chance that they would come, rather than as a firm commitment. I had concentrated on making the event as

#SATECHSEA REFLECTION accessible as possible, which meant keeping the cost negligible for participants, but this ended up not working out the way that I had originally intended. Implications for Professional Practice The biggest implication that this event will have for my future practice is that I am

now much more effective at coalition building, and will probably engage in the practice first when planning future events like #SATech Seattle, rather than as an afterthought or reaction to circumstances. As I wrote in my Leadership Philosophy for EDAD 570, which I took concurrently with the final stages of unconference planning, I found that I needed to switch to gathering a different resource [than money], first that of support in order to gain access to those who could provide funding. (Van Drimmelen, 2014). This process, now that it is clear to me, will make me a better negotiator as a professional. The second biggest implication for me as a professional from this event is that I am now much more comfortable exercising leadership in a non-positional capacity. The great thing about the political frame of leadership is that it can occur at any level of an organization (Bolman & Gallos, 2011). I had no positional authority on which to base my requests for #SATech Seattle, so it forced me to exercise genuine leadership rather than power. This will enable me to continue to do big, profession-advancing things like the #SATech Seattle Unconference in my future roles, even if they are not directly tied to said role. My experience with #SATech Seattle will help me to (tactfully) ask why not? when faced with such opportunities in the future.

#SATECHSEA REFLECTION Resources Bolman, L. G., & Gallos, J.V. (2011). Reframing academic leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Van Drimmelen, C. J. (2014) Leadership philosophy. (Unpublished paper). Seattle University, Seattle, WA.