Download - Comprehensive Exam (Question 2) Erica Garnett Missouri ...ericagarnett.weebly.com/uploads/2/7/7/1/27711487/... · Although Chickering’s theory of identity development is a vital

Running head: COMPREHENSIVE EXAM 1

Comprehensive Exam (Question 2)

Erica Garnett

Missouri State University

COMPREHENSIVE EXAM 2

Question 2

Student development theory serves as the cornerstone of student affairs practice that is

focused on student development or student learning. As a student affairs professional working in

the functional area of orientation and new students programs, there are several theories which I

can apply to my professional practice. However, it is important that practitioners critically

analyze the opportunities and weaknesses of applying particular student development theories to

certain subpopulations of students.

Chickering’s Theory of Identity Development

Arthur Chickering’s theory of identity development is a psychosocial development theory

that expanded on Erik Erikson’s discussion of identity achievement. Chickering’s research

endeavored to evaluate the impact of curricular practices and campus environment on how

students experience development (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010). In 1995, he

worked with Linda Reisser to revise his theory.

The theory is comprised of seven development vectors: (a) developing competence; (b)

managing emotions; (c) moving through autonomy toward interdependence (d) developing

mature interpersonal relationships; (e) establishing identity; (f) developing purpose; and (g)

developing integrity (Foubert, Nixon, Sisson, & Barnes, 2005). He believed that students moved

through the vectors at different rates and could reexamine issues associated with previous vectors

in which they had already moved through. Chickering noted that in order for a student to reach

the fifth vector, he or she must have already moved through the previous four vectors (Evans et

al., 2010).

Also included in the theory are seven key educational environment factors that influence

development: (a) institutional objectives; (b) institutional size; (c) student-faculty relationships;


(d) curriculum; (e) teaching; (f) friendships and student communities; and (g) student

development programs and services (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Furthermore, Chickering

included a warning for practitioners to heed when looking to apply the theory to practice by

including three admonitions: (a) integration of work and learning; (b) recognition and respect for

individual differences; and (c) acknowledgement of the cyclical nature of learning and

development (Alessandria & Nelson, 2005). His work helps to provide a practical basis for

student affairs practitioners to understand how to relate to their students and create environments

that facilitate student development.

As a student affairs professional I can use Chickering’s work as a method of

understanding how students interpret situations and relate to others. In training orientation

leaders the theory can be used to help them understand how they can contribute to creating a

campus environment which facilitates development. It will also be useful when dealing with

conflict amongst orientation leaders because it provides a framework for understanding their

noncognitive development and maturity in dealing with the situation. Furthermore, Chickering’s

key influences and admonitions serve as excellent theoretical foundations for formatting the

orientation leadership training course in order to spur development and contribute to student

learning.

Although Chickering’s theory of identity development is a vital resource for student

affairs practice there are opportunities and challenges of applying the theory to certain

subpopulations of students. For traditional students the theory may be easier to apply because

younger students may more likely to still be moving through the first vectors. This may make it

easier for professionals to recognize their behaviors and create appropriate campus support

structures. However, since not all students move through the vectors at the same rate, when


creating a program –such as an orientation session—it may be more of a challenge to train

leaders to create an environment that responds to multiple vector levels.

For nontraditional students, many of them are more likely to have reached the fifth vector

(establishing identity), but there is still an opportunity to help them develop purpose and integrity

by attaching meaning to learning practices. In orientation this can be accomplished through the

sessions where presenters can take time to more thoroughly explain the meaning behind certain

policies and practices, rather than just listing them. However, at institutions where nontraditional

students are the minority it may be hard to implement Chickering’s theory because programs

may be more catered to creating facilitative environments for traditional students, focused on

moving through the first five vectors. Nevertheless, student affairs practitioners can work to

provide the seven key influences which facilitate development for both subgroups of students.

In order to understand which vectors students are in and establish meaningful resources,

personnel must rely on evidence-based assessment. This evaluation measure allows

professionals to base their programs on factual data rather than make assumptions about

students’ developmental levels. Evidence-based assessment is also useful for showing how

effective the programs, resources, and campus environment are in facilitating student

development.

Perry’s Theory of Intellectual and Ethical Development

William G. Perry’s theory of intellectual and ethical development was created as a study

to examine college undergraduates’ intellectual development (Perry, 1970). Perry and his

researchers examined “how students interpret and make meaning of the teaching and learning

processes” (Evans et al., 2010, p. 84). Through his research he outlined four positions (or stages)

of intellectual and ethical development and declared that development occurred when an


individual transitioned from one position to another. Although Perry made no reference to how

long an individual can remain in a position, he believed that movement occurred on a continuum.

The four positions outlined in Perry’s theory are: (a) dualism, a belief that authorities are

always right; (b) multiplicity, when students learn to think more independently and seek other

sources of information; (c) relativism, when students no longer recognize all opinions as being

valid; and (d) commitment in relativism, when thinkers commit to a certain viewpoint on an

issue based on their internal beliefs or system of reasoning (Evans et al., 2010). In addition to

the four positions included in Perry’s theory, there are three transitional elements which spur

development: (a) cognitive dissonance, which occurs through the transition from dualism to

multiplicity; (b) recognition of the need to support opinions, as a result of the transition from

multiplicity to relativism; and (c) an initiation of ethical development, which happens through

the transition from relativism to a commitment in relativism (Evans et al., 2010). Furthermore,

Perry included three deflections (or deviations) from cognitive growth which can halt a student’s

movement through the continuum: (a) temporizing, a timeout period in which movement is

postponed; (b) escape, an abandonment of responsibility characterized by alienation; and (c)

retreat, a temporary return to dualism which can result from feelings of being overwhelmed

(Evans et al., 2010).

As a student affairs professional I can utilize Perry’s theory when advising incoming

students during orientation programs. If students are looking to me or another authority figure to

provide all of their answers, I can encourage development by asking open-ended questions and

spurring cognitive dissonance. Perry’s theory is also useful for understanding how to advise

incoming students who have deviated from cognitive growth. As an orientation professional and


student advisor I can work to look for signs of deviation and use techniques to help them

continue their cognitive growth.

In thinking about applying Perry’s theory to various subgroups of students (particularly

traditional and adult students) there are some opportunities and challenges to keep in mind. For

traditional students, who are younger there is a stronger likelihood that their intellectual and

ethical development is still in the first few positions of Perry’s continuum. Therefore, there is an

opportunity to create programming that facilitates discussion and causes them to experience

cognitive dissonance or recognize the need to support opinions. However, for the traditional

students in the earlier positions of Perry’s theory it may be a challenge to interest them in

programs that challenge them to begin to think critically. For adult students, Perry’s theory

provides an opportunity for practitioners to create events and orientation programs that highlight

students’ ability to insert their own opinions. Practitioners also have the opportunity to provide

more information to students in advisement sessions who may come prepared with strong

opinions. However, because of the broad age range and developmental level it may be a

challenge for practitioners to distinguish whether students are in earlier positions of the theory or

are experiencing deflections from cognitive growth. The additional challenge for student affairs

professionals will be to create programming that facilitates intellectual and ethical development

for adult students in various positions. Evidence-based assessment will be necessary when

applying Perry’s theory in order to provide data on how students are launched from one position

to another.

Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development

Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of moral development is based on Jean Piaget’s study of

moral development (Crain, 1985). Kohlberg studied the moral interpretation of adolescent males


and found that their reasoning occurred in stages (Evans et al., 2010). Through his research he

developed a six-stage model categorized by three levels. Evans et al. (2010) described three

criteria which frame Kohlberg’s theory: (a) the structure criterion, where the same pattern of

reasoning is exhibited regardless of circumstance; (b) the sequence criterion, where stages occur

only in a specific order with strict linear progression; and (c) the hierarchy criterion, where each

successive stage incorporates the aspects of all previous stages. Kohlberg believed that not all

individuals advanced through all stages nor did they move through the stages at the same rate.

Kohlberg’s theory of moral development consists of six stages:

1. Heteronomous Morality: when the individual believes it is his right to obey rules only to

avoid punishment by physical harm

2. Individualistic, Instrumental Morality: where the individual follows the rules only if he

benefits in the end.

3. Interpersonally Normative Morality: where the individual focuses on maintaining a good

image and meeting others’ expectations takes precedence over his personal interests.

4. Social System Morality: where the individual believes its his duty to follow societal rules

and laws.

5. Human Rights and Social Welfare Morality: when the individual understands the

importance of personal values and moral obligations.

6. Morality of Universalizable, Reversible, and Prescriptive General Ethical Principals:

where the individual takes into account the viewpoint of all who may be affected before

making a moral decision.

However, Kohlberg had trouble demonstrating the existence of the sixth stage of the theory. The

six stages are categorized by three levels: (a) level one: pre-conventional morality, consisting of


stages one and two; (b) level two: conventional morality, consisting of stages three and four; and

(c) post-conventional morality, encompassing stages five and six (Evans et al., 2010).

Kohlberg’s theory will be useful in framing the discussion about conflict management

and decision making processes for new students. As a practitioner, I will keep in mind the levels

of morality and use them as inspiration for appealing to students’ moral judgments and educating

them on how to handle interpersonal conflict. Kohlberg’s theory will also be useful when

training orientation leaders, because it provides a framework for creating job expectations based

on individual understandings of morality.

Although Kohlberg’s theory is applicable to students, there are a number of opportunities

and challenges that can be taken into account when applying the theory to various

subpopulations of students (particularly traditional and adult students). For traditional students,

who are learning to manage conflict for the first time, applying the theory creates an excellent

opportunity to educate students on other ways of reasoning. By introducing them to different

ways of thinking about morality and expectations, practitioners can help to facilitate student

development through the theoretical stages. However, since Kohlberg indicated that not all

individuals move through each stage, student affairs practitioners may experience challenges

when trying to facilitate development for students who have foreclosed in a particular stage.

Student affairs professionals have the opportunity to utilize adult students with higher

levels of moral development to create supportive social networks that assist in facilitating moral

development. However, since Kohlberg’s research of moral development occurred mostly on

adolescent males, the model may not accurately represent adult students’ moral development.

Student affairs professionals may encounter challenges when trying to integrate Kohlberg’s

theoretical framework into program and resource creation for adult students. In order to


understand which levels (and stages) of morality students are actually in, it is imperative to

utilize evidence-based assessment. Also the data will be useful in tracking which students have

developed higher levels of morality and what influenced their advancement. That information

could then be used to assist in creating programs that contribute to students’ moral development.

Schlossberg’s Transition Theory

Nancy Schlossberg set out to “develop a framework that would facilitate an

understanding of adults in transition and aid them in connecting to the help they needed to cope

with the ‘ordinary and extraordinary process of living’” (Evans et al., 2010, p. 213). She

researched a variety of populations including clerical workers and former National Aeronautical

Space Administration (NASA) employees; she also studied the relationship between

geographical mobility and transitions (Evans et al., 2010). As a result of her studies Schlossberg

developed a theory which named three types of transitions and four factors (or four S’s) which

influence an individual’s ability to cope with the transition (Goodman, Schlossberg, and

Anderson, 2006). She also worked with Jane Goodman to describe transition in a series of

phases: (a) moving in; (b) moving through; and (c) moving out (Schlossberg, Waters, &

Goodman, 1995).

The four S’s of Schlossberg’s transition theory are: (a) situation; (b) self; (c) support; and

(d) strategies. The three transition types include: (a) nonevents, which are events that are

expected to occur but fail to do so; (b) unanticipated transitions, which are unscheduled events

that end up occurring; and (c) anticipated transitions, which are schedule events which occur

(Evans et al., 2010). Schlossberg believed that over time individuals moved from a

preoccupation with their transition to an integration of it, and that transitions did not always lead

to personal growth or development (Goodman, Schlossberg, and Anderson, 2006).


As a student affairs professional working in orientation and new student programs,

Schlossberg’s theory is vital to understanding how incoming students experience the transition to

college. Her theory is also useful for inspiring the creation of programs that provide support and

strategies to assist in facilitating a more successful transition to college for new students. It is

also helpful for training orientation leaders to understand their role and how they can have a

major impact on how incoming students cope with the transition.

Although Schlossberg’s theory provides important insight for student affairs practice

there are opportunities and challenges of applying the theory to certain subpopulations of

students (particularly traditional and adult students). For traditional students there is an

opportunity for the theory to be applied as a means of legitimizing the creation of programs and

structures (i.e. orientation) to help students have a successful transition. The programs may be

especially useful when geared toward younger students without the maturity, personal

characteristics, and psychological resources to deal with the transition. However, although the

institution may create the support and strategic resources for traditional students, because of their

age many may not have enough experience dealing with transitions to allow for a successful

process.

In institutions where adult students are the minority, Schlossberg’s theory can be useful

in understanding how they experience two transitions: (a) being a new student and (b) being a

nontraditional student in the midst of a majority population of traditional students. Practitioners

have the opportunity to apply the theory as a means of understanding which support systems and

programs will be most effective in helping students cope with the transition. However, student

affairs professionals may encounter challenges when applying the theory to adult students who

may be experiencing concurrent stress (i.e. a full-time job or family responsibilities). It will be


hard for personnel to create support systems and account for factors outside of their control. It is

important to use evidence-based assessments to evaluate how institutional support systems and

strategies impact students in transition. The data can also be used to continually improve

programs and create meaningful methods of support for students.

Phinney’s Model of Ethnic Identity

Jean Phinney’s model of ethnic identity was based on a survey of 196 Asian American,

African American, Hispanic, and Caucasian college students. Phinney used the survey to

examine the importance of ethnicity to minority students’ identity development (Phinney, 1993).

As a result of her research, she developed a model which consisted of three stages of ethnic

identity development:

1. Stage One – Unexamined Ethnic Identity: where students have not explored personal

feelings about their ethnicity.

2. Stage Two – Ethnic Identity Search/Moratorium: when student go through an experience

that causes them to be aware of ethnic identity issues, and begin a period of exploration

into their ethnic background.

3. Stage Three – Ethnic Identity Achievement: when students resolve their identity conflicts

and accept membership in minority culture.

Phinney determined that students were meant to move through the model in a linear manner and

were able to foreclose at any stage within the process (Phinney, 1993). Acculturation (the extent

to which and individual absorbs dominant culture) was another concept that helped guide the

construction of Phinney’s model, and can be used as a tool to measure an individual’s ethnic

identity (Phinney & Ong, 2007).


As a student affairs professional, I can utilize Phinney’s model as a framework for

developing orientation sessions that generate dialogue among diverse students and promote a

healthy understanding of various cultures. The model can also be used in the advising realm of

orientation for students in the second stage of the theory. I can help those students continue their

process of ethnic identity exploration by suggesting that they take applicable courses.

In thinking about applying Phinney’s theory to various subgroups of students

(particularly traditional and adult students) there are some opportunities and challenges to keep

in mind. Student affairs professionals may discover that this theory may more easily apply to

younger traditional students who are still working to solidify their identity as an individual. In

that case, practitioners have the opportunity to provide outlets that facilitate ethnic identity

development. However, younger students may have trouble feeling comfortable to explore their

ethnic identity and participate in discussions about diversity and ethnicity. Student affairs

practitioners should be mindful of this type of apprehension and provide outlets that will allow

all interested students to explore their ethnic identity.

Student affairs personnel may have an opportunity to help adult students (or older

students) that may have previously foreclosed in a particular stage to restart their interest in

exploring their ethnic identity. However, some adult students may have already solidified their

ethnic identity or foreclosed and may not be open to pursuing efforts to restart their exploration.

Practitioners may experience challenges when trying to apply this theory to adult student

populations.

Competency Application

The study of various student development theories has helped me to wrap my arms

around the “Personal Foundations” and “Student Learning and Development” competencies. In


order to understand student development theory and how to apply it in a manner that will

facilitate student development I had to become aware of my own areas of growth and understand

the stages of moral, identity, and ethnic development that I was experiencing. I was forced to be

self-reflective and identify my attitudes, values, beliefs, and assumptions about various issues.

The study of student development theory has also helped me to unpack ways in which I

can apply the theories to facilitate student development. Through this study I have been able to

identify theories and models that I can use in my own practice as a student affairs professional,

and have realized ways in which they can inform orientation leader training and practices. It has

also helped me to critically analyze several student development theories and identify the

limitation in applying those theories to various student subpopulations.


References

ACPA (1996). The student learning imperative: Implications for student affairs. Retrieved from

http://www.myacpa.org/sli_delete/sli.htm

ACPA (2006). Statement of ethical principles and standards. Retrieved from

http://www2.myacpa.org/ethics/statement.php

ACPA & NASPA (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners.

Alessandria, K. P. & Nelson, E. S. (2005). Identity development and self-esteem of first-

generation American college students: An exploratory study. Journal of College Student

Development, 46(1), 3-12. doi: 10.1353/csd.2005.0001

Alright, R. L. et al. (1987). A perspective on student affairs: a statement issued on the fiftieth

anniversary of the Student Personnel Point of View. Retrieved on May 22, 2011, from

NASPA website: http://www.naspa.org/pubs/files/StudAff_1987.pdf

American Council on Education (1937). The student personnel point of view. Retrieved from

http://www.myacpa.org/pub/documents/1937/pdf

Cape Cod Community College (2013). Leadership Opportunities. Retrieved from

http://www.capecod.edu/web/studentlife/leadership

Chickering, A. W. & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and Identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Dongbin, K., & Rury, J. L. (2007). The changing profile of college access: The Truman

Commission and enrollment patterns in the Postwar Era. History of Education Quarterly,

47(3), 302-327. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5959.2007.00102.x

Dungy, G., & Gordon, S. A. (2011). The development of student affairs. In J. H. Schuh, S. R.

Jones, S. R. Harper, and Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the

profession (5th ed.) (pp. 61-79). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


Evangel University (2012). Student Development. Retrieved from

http://www.evangel.edu/offices-and-directory/student-development/

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student

development in college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Foubert, J. D., Nixon, M. L., Sisson, V. S., & Barnes, A. C. (2005). A longitudinal study of

Chickering and Reisser’s vectors: Exploring gender differences and implications for

refining the theory. Journal of College Student Development, 46(5), 461-471. doi:

10.1353/csd.2005.0047

Goodman, J., Schlossberg, N. K., Anderson, M. L. (2006). Counseling adults in transition. New

York: Springer Publishing Company

Hutcheson, P. A., (2007). The Truman Commission’s vision of the future. Thought & Action.

Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/img/PubThoughtAndAction/TAA_07_11.pdf

Kaplin, W. & Lee, B. (2009) A Legal Guide for Student Affairs Professionals (2nd

ed.). San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

King, P. M., & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2011). Student learning. In J. H. Schuh, S. R. Jones, S. R.

Harper, and Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed.)

(pp. 207-225). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Magolda, P. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2011). Teaching in the co-curriculum. In J. H. Schuh, S. R.

Jones, S. R. Harper, and Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the

profession (5th ed.) (pp. 385-398). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Manning, K. (2013). Organizational theory in higher education. New York: Routledge.

Missouri State University. (2012, August 13). Division of Student Affairs. Retrieved from

http://studentaffairs.missouristate.edu/137057.htm


Missouri State University (2013). Mission Statement. Retrieved from

http://www.missouristate.edu/about/missionstatement.htm

Nash, R. J. (1997). Teaching ethics in the student affairs classroom. NASPA Journal 35(3), 1-11

NASPA (2013). About Student Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.naspa.org/about/student-

affairs

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership (6th

ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nuss, E. M. & NASPA (n.d.). Tough Times at University of Peace.

Ozarks Technical Community College (2012). Student Services. Retrieved from

http://www.otc.edu/currentstudents/studentservices.php

Phinney, J. S. (1993). A three-stage model of ethnic identity development in adolescence. In M.

E. Bernal & G. P. Knight (Eds.), Ethnic identity: Formation and transmission among

Hispanics and other minorities (pp. 61-79). New York: State University of New York

Press.

Phinney, J.S. & Ong, A.D., (2007). Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity:

Current status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 271-281.

Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.missouristate.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

sid=abf33a4a-05c7-4f93-a0fd 635ae54bd574%40sessionmgr12&vid=2&hid=122

Perry, William G., Jr. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years:

A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston


Reason, R. D., & Broido, E. M. (2011). Philosophies and values. In J. H. Schuh, S. R. Jones, S.

R. Harper, and Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th

ed.) (pp. 80-95). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schuh, J. H., Jones, S. R., Harper, S. R., & Associates. (2011). Student services: A handbook for

the profession (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Thelin, J. (2011). A history of American Higher Education. Baltimore: The John Hopkins

University Press.

W.C. Crain (1985). Theories of Development. Prentice-Hall. Retrieved from

http://www.esociales.fcs.ucr.ac.cr/biblioteca/boletin_esoc/alfabet/KXYZ/Kolberg%20des

arrollo.pdf

Williamson, E. G et al. (1949)/ The student personnel point of view. Retrieved from

http://www.myacpa.org/pub/documents/1949.pdf