Theories And Models Of Student Change


Published on

This is an overview of Chapter 2 in How College Affects Students by Terenzini and Pascarella, 2005

Published in: Education
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Theories And Models Of Student Change

  1. 1. Theories and Models of Student Change in College Pascarella and Terenzini Presented by John LeMasney
  2. 2. Pupose and Introduction     <ul><li>Distinctions between development and change </li></ul><ul><li>Development: &quot;systematic [organized and] successive&quot; or growth, positive, striving towards </li></ul><ul><li>Change: &quot;alterations over time in students' cognitive skills, affective characteristics, attitudes, values or behaviors&quot; </li></ul>
  3. 3. Categories of Theories of College Student Change <ul><li>Developmental Theories or Models </li></ul><ul><li>intraindividual changes  </li></ul><ul><li>Nature </li></ul><ul><li>Structure </li></ul><ul><li>Processes </li></ul><ul><li>Dominated by stage theories, such as Erikson's </li></ul><ul><li>Also contains some environmental factors, but less so than -> </li></ul><ul><li>College Impact Models </li></ul><ul><li>Environmental </li></ul><ul><li>interindividual changes </li></ul><ul><li>identify and evaluate sets of variables: </li></ul><ul><li>may be student related (gender, achievement, status, race) </li></ul><ul><li>organizational (inst size, controls, selectivity, mission) </li></ul><ul><li>or environmental (academic, cultural, social, political climate created by members)  </li></ul>
  4. 4. Developmental Theories of Student Change <ul><li>Development: &quot;A general movement towards greater differentiation, integration, and complexity in the ways that individuals think and behave. &quot; </li></ul><ul><li>Four categories or clusters: </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Psychological development (e.g. Identity) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitive-structural theories </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Typological models (looks at differences in people or settings) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Person-environment interaction theories and models </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Psychosocial Theories <ul><ul><li>The accomplishment of a series of &quot;developmental tasks&quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>developmental challenges </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>variables of age and developmental status </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>presented serially but may be encountered out of sequence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  Erikson: &quot;the progenitor of the psychosocial models&quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Epigenetic Principle states  &quot;anything that grows has a ground plan and that out of this ground plan the parts arise, each part having its time of special ascendancy, until all the parts have risen to form a functioning whole&quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Crises: A time for decision requiring significant choices among alternative courses of action resulting in developmental progression, regression, or stasis. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Stage 5) Identity versus Identity Crisis = key developmental task for college age. </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Chickering's Seven Vectors of Student Development <ul><ul><li>Arthur Chickering: key theorist in College Student Development and specifically Identity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vectors: &quot;(each vector) seems to have direction and magnitude--even though the direction may be expressed more appropriately by a spiral or by steps rather than a straight line&quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Development: &quot;differentiation and integartion as students encounter increasing complexity in ideas, values, and other people and struggle to reconcile these new positions with their own ideas, values and beliefs&quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>With Linda Reissner revised and reordered vectors to have them be applicable more universally to all ages, genders and backgrounds.  </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. The seven vectors: <ul><ul><li>Achieving competence (knowledge, intellectual aesthetic, and cultural sophistication, and higher order thinking) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Managing emotions (controlling impulses, developing appropriate responses) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Moving toward autonomy toward interdependence (freedom from the need for reassurance, organization, problem solving, decision making) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing mature interpersonal relationships </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Establishing identity (knowing who you are sexually, in self image, in gender, in society ) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing purpose (Who am I going to be? Where am I going?) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing integrity (&quot;clarification and rebalancing of personal values and beliefs&quot;) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Institutional support: clear institutional objectives, opportunity for participation, developing student faculty relationships, societal integration, flexible teaching, student community, student development </li></ul>
  8. 8. Identity Development: General <ul><li>James Marcia: resolution of 2 psychological tasks  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>exploration, or the search for and choice among many competing alternatives, leading to differentiation and individualization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>commitment, or the level of individual investment in 4 areas (occupational, religious, political, sexual values) promoting stability, continuity, and comfort. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>4 responses:  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Identity-diffused ()  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Foreclosed (C)  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Moratorium (E)  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identity Achieved (EC) </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Identity Development: Gender <ul><ul><li>Ruthellen Josselson's Theory of identity development among women </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Longitudinal study with 60 college age women, then 30 when they were older </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Used Marcia's four groups to classify based on their pathway of decision making </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commitments of social, sexual, and religious issues are less identity forming than a woman's sense of effect upon the world.  </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Identity Development: Racial and Ethnic <ul><li>Helms' 3 components of racial identity: a personal identity, a reference group identity, an ascribed identity, resulting in &quot;resolutions&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>Cross's Model of Nigrescence </li></ul><ul><ul><li>preencounter: eurocentric worldview </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>encounter: awareness of difference through events </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>immersion-emersion: the search for self as black, and emergence from the simplified either-or awareness of immersion </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>internalization: dissonance is resolved </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>internalization-commitment: a course of action </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Helms's people of color racial identity model <ul><li>status 1: Conformity (identity internalized from whites) </li></ul><ul><li>status 2: Dissonance (realization that cannot live fully as part of white society) </li></ul><ul><li>status 3: Immersion (struggle for a new identity, rejection of white) </li></ul><ul><li>status 4: Emersion (a fuller embrace of one's socioracial values) </li></ul><ul><li>status 5: Internalization (commital to own racial group) </li></ul><ul><li>status 6: Integrated Awareness (expression of a positive racial identity) </li></ul>
  12. 12. Helms's White Racial Identity Model <ul><li>Phase 1: the abandonment of racism </li></ul><ul><li>    status 1: Contact (obliviousness to racism) </li></ul><ul><li>    status 2: Disintegration (struggle with notions of equality) </li></ul><ul><li>    status 3: Reintegration (questioning of meaning of race) </li></ul><ul><li>Phase 2: development of a nonracist white identity </li></ul><ul><li>    status 4: Pseudo independence (acceptance of other races) </li></ul><ul><li>    status 5: Immersion-emersion (white individual confronts idea that racial issues are white based issues) </li></ul><ul><li>    status 6: Autonmy (diversity awareness, seek out knowledge, reject benefits of race) </li></ul>
  13. 13. Phinney's Model of ethnic identity development <ul><li>Self-identification as a member of and a sense of belonging to an ethnic group are necessary conditions for an ethnic identity.  </li></ul><ul><li>identity development stages:  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Diffusion-Foreclosure (neither a search for, nor a commitment to, an ethnic identity has taken place)   </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Moratorium (growing awareness, stress, emotion of Ethnic issues, can negatively reflect on own ethnic group) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identity Achievement (resolution to stage 2, and a solid acceptance of one's own group) </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Identity Development: Gay Lesbian, Bisexual <ul><li>Originally seen as pathology, search for cures, causes, biological origin, genetic mutation, etc.  </li></ul><ul><li>recent identity formation study is compicated by sexual nature of concepts, political views, ideological agenda.  </li></ul><ul><li>Broido: Gay and Lesbian refer to identity which homosexual descibes behavior, and Bisexual and Heterosexual define both identity and behavior.  </li></ul><ul><li>The following models apply to gays, lesbians, and bisexuals </li></ul>
  15. 15. Cass's Psychosocial model of Sexual Identity Formation <ul><li>Stage 1: Identity Confusion (unexamined awareness of possible gay or lesbian feelings, possibly leading to conflict) </li></ul><ul><li>Stage 2: Identity Comparison (begins to consider the possibility of being gay or lesbian, and the realization of the challenges that may bring) </li></ul><ul><li>Stage 3: Identity Tolerance (a separation from heterosexual culture and a move toward identity with a homosexual culture begin, though this lifestyle is hidden) </li></ul><ul><li>Stage 4: Identity Acceptance (increasing relationship and acceptance from the gay society) </li></ul><ul><li>Stage 5: Identity Pride (Coming out, Gay pride, rejection of hetero culture non-acceptance) </li></ul><ul><li>Stage 6: Identity Synthesis (private and public lives come together with considerable support) </li></ul>
  16. 16. D'Augelli's model of lesbian, gay, and bisexual development <ul><ul><li>Does not see sexuality as stable, but as an ongoing social construction over time, malleable and variable, affected by internal and external conditions.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identity requires rejection of hetero lifestyle and creation of a new identity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3 factors influence identity formation: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>personal subjectivities and actions (feelings and beliefs) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>interactive intimacies (with everyone) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>sociohistorical connections (society, law and culture) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>leads to six identity processes: </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. D'Augelli's model: Six Identity Processes: <ul><ul><li>Exiting heterosexual identity (recognizance) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing a personal lesbian-gay-bisexual identity status (challenging beliefs) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing a lesbian-gay-bisexual social identity (support) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Becoming a lesbian-gay-bisexual offspring (disclosure to family) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing a lesbian-gay-bisexual intimacy status (developing cultural guidelines) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Entering a gay-lesbian-bisexual community (sociopolitical action) </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Cognitive-Structural Theories <ul><li>Jean Piaget is the Erikson of these theories </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>&quot;cognitive-structural theorists seek to describe the nature and processes of changes, concentrating on the episemological structures individuals construct to give meaning to their worlds&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>Differences between psychosocial and cognitive-structural theory: &quot;One descibes what students will be concerned about and what decisions will be primary; the other suggests how students will think about those issues and what shifts in reasoning will occur&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>Involves stimulus and response </li></ul>
  19. 19. Perry's Scheme of Intellectual and Ethical Development (King's 4 clusters) <ul><ul><li>Dualism (pos 1 & 2) expert based dichotomy and black/white worldviews and the uncertainty that emerges </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Multiplicity (pos 3 & 4) multiple perspectives are possible, other views are tolerated </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relativism (pos 5 & 6) &quot;knowledge is contextual and relative&quot; and analytical thinking skill emerges -- choosing truth can be difficult amongst seemingly equal choices </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commitments in Relativism (pos 7, 8 & 9) &quot;active affirmations about themselves and their responsibilities in a pluralistic world&quot; commitments such as career and marriage occur. </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. King and Kitchener's Reflective Judgement Model (critical thinking) <ul><ul><li>Prereflective thinking (stages 1-3) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 1 knowledge is assumed to be concrete </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 2 knowledge is not available to everyone </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 3 knowledge may not always be known </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quasi reflective thinking (stages 4-5) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 4 knowledge is uncertain and abstract </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 5 knowledge is contextually shaped </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reflective thinking (stages 6-7) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 6 knowledge requires action and construction </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 7 knowledge is an outcome of active inquiry </li></ul></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Baxter Magolda's Epistemological Reflection Model <ul><li>Fours ways in which (study's) students make meaning: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Absolute knowing: taking in what is projected, and accepting it as concretely correct. Recieving pattern (listening) vs mastery pattern (inquiry and interaction) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transitional knowing: knowledge may or may not be certain. Reliance on experts recedes. Understanding > acquiring. Interpersonal pattern (gathering) vs. Impersonal pattern (prodding).  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Independent knowing: Knowledge is uncertain. Open mindedness. Authorities may argue. Interindividual pattern (interactive and collective) vs. individual pattern (internal) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contextual knowing: independent thought within the context of others. Judgement of claims and evidence. No gender specificity was determined due to low numbers. </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. Baxter Magolda longitudinal work <ul><li>Homogeneity of study participants makes the study potentially non-generalizable.  </li></ul><ul><li>3 story-lines that are generalizable: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>development of voice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>shifting relationships with authority </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>evolving relationships with peers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>longitudinal work led to 4 phases on the way to 'self-authorship' which focused on 3 dimensions of development: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>epistemological (how do I know?) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>intrapersonal (Who am I?) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>interpersonal (What relationships do I want with others?) </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development <ul><ul><li>Level 1: Preconventional </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 1: obedience and punishment orientation (concern for law is based on consequence) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 2: naively egoistic orientation (others are considered secondarily) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Level II: Conventional </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 3: good boy orientation (need for approval) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 4: authority and social order orientation (social obligation, aversion to social chaos) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Level III: Postconventional  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 5: contractual legalistic orientation (duty as part of a social contract, such as the Constitution)  </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>stage 6: conscience or principle orientation (value of life, equality and dignity) dropped due to lack of evidence </li></ul></ul></ul>
  24. 24. Gilligan's Model of Women's Moral Development (revelation of gender bias in Kohlberg theory) <ul><ul><li>Sees Kohlberg's theory as socially oriented rather than individully oriented, which potentially reflects male view. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Female identity is highly defined via interpersonal interactions with others.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Justice is a male voice, whereas care is a female voice. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rights versus responsibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Three stages of female moral development from individual to societal to universal morality: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>orientation to individual survival (self-preservation) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>goodness as self-sacrifice (&quot;good is equated with caring for others&quot;) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>morality of nonviolence (&quot;nonviolence as a moral principle and a basis for decision making&quot;) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  25. 25. Other Models <ul><ul><li>Kegan's constructive-developmental model: 5 orders of consciousness relating to &quot;cognition, self-concept and interpersonal relations&quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fowler focused on spiritual development, sees making meaning as a spiritual as well as cognitive process, and is more interested in the path to belief than the belief itself.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Daloz Parks examines the development of a sense of purpose in life as the development of an inderstanding of faith. Four stages are shaped by cognitive processes, relationships, and community are: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Adolescent </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Young Adult  </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Tested Adult </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Mature Adult </li></ul></ul></ul>
  26. 26. Typological Models <ul><ul><li>Focuses on the ways in which individuals perceive the world and respond to it.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>MBTI and Multiple Intelligences are well known examples. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Features include </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>differential characteristics appear early and change infrequently </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>people may act outside of their type, but tend to act and react according to type </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>explain commonalities, but do not explain differences (e.g. zip code) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Change is of marginal importance to type theorists </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Theorists include David Kolb, John Holland, Katherine Briggs, Isabel Briggs Myers, Witkins, Gardner, Evans, Forney, and Guido-DiBrito </li></ul></ul>
  27. 27. Person-Environment Interaction Theories and Models <ul><ul><li>Like type theories, do little to interpret change or development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can help assess or explain cases or situations, and how they may be affected by or interact with developmental stage  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Clusters of models (Strange and Banning): </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Physical Models </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Human Aggregate Models </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Organizational Development Models </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Constructed Environments </li></ul></ul></ul>
  28. 28. Physical Models <ul><ul><li>Focus on external environment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>determines affect on behavior by setting controls  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>may be walled or open, such as a tent, a dormitory, or an urban setting.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>may focus on architecture, social psychology, cultural anthropology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>environments encourage or constrain behaviors depending on physical and symbolic characteristics of the setting, as well as co-users of the space </li></ul></ul>
  29. 29. Human Aggregate Models <ul><ul><li>Environmental influence in regards to aggregate human characteristics such as: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>sociodemographic traits </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>goals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>values </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>attitudes </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strange suggests two groups of models: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>subcultures, typologies and styles </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>person environment interactions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Often an aspect of other models and theories described here. </li></ul></ul>
  30. 30. Organizational Environment Models <ul><ul><li>Environments can be systems influenced by organizational goals, values, activities which shape organizational structures and design (Strange) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>environments may be static or dynamic, depending on the organizations change tolerance and culture </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>nature of the environment depends on an organization's complexity, centralization, stratification, production, efficiency (Hage & Aiken) </li></ul></ul>
  31. 31. Constructed Environments <ul><ul><li>Deep roots in social psychology and cultural anthropology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Occupant perception defines and characterizes environment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pascarella and Terenzini called these perceptual models </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strange has 3 categories: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Environmental Press </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Social Climate </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Campus Cultures </li></ul></ul></ul>
  32. 32. Commonalities in Developmental Theories <ul><ul><li>These theories differ in important ways: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Structure of developmental process </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>end points </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>number of developmental stages </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>origins of developmental growth </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>characterizations and labeling of stages </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But there are many similarities </li></ul></ul>
  33. 33. Similarities in Substance <ul><ul><li>emergence of self-understanding and awareness of self as a learner </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>with experience, external controls give way to internal controls </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>regardless of primary diversity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>growth in self awareness </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>appreciation of roles of, and obligation to others </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stage theories lead  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to self definition and self direction </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to greater differentiation and greater integration </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to responsibility and interdependence </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>to self control and maturity </li></ul></ul></ul>
  34. 34. Similarities in Process <ul><ul><li>psychosocial development is continuous </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>psychosocial development is cumulative </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>development progresses from simple to complex </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>developmental progress is orderly </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>developmental progress depends on the completion of tasks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitive readiness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Recognition of complexity precedes higher-level developmental change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developmental movement originates in a challenge to the current state of development (a structure at rest will remain at rest unless challenged) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The capacity for detachment from self and for empathy controls access to higher developmental levels. </li></ul></ul>
  35. 35. Sociological Perspectives <ul><ul><li>Feldman: Developmental models psychologize student change and ignore a variety of other changes that students experience, such as social experiences.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dannefer says the entire developmental approach is flawed, in that the sequentiality, unidirectionality, permanence, etc, all disregard or diminish social and environmental influences.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dannefer says that environment affects development: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>macro/societally </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>local/organizationally </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>micro/social </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>College as gatekeeper determines who is fit for development, affecting it directly (Clark; Feldman) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>environmental effects, social effects, cultural effects are largely ignored by developmental theory as influencers. </li></ul></ul>
  36. 36. Sociological Perspectives <ul><ul><li>Academic tribes exert a net influence on students' abilities, skills, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors (Smart, Feldman, Ethington).  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pascarella and Terenzini find that the net effects are small compared to other factors.  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Smart argues that this is because sociological social psychologists focus on processes rather than psychological social psychologists who emphasize effects. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Resultant point: please consider that developmental theory must be applied in context of other factors, such as society, environment, academic setting, and others. </li></ul></ul>
  37. 37. College Impact Models of Student Change <ul><ul><li>Origins and processes of change is the focus </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Less specific and detailed than individual development theories </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>less related to other theorist work </li></ul></ul>
  38. 38. Astin's I-E-O Model and &quot;Theory&quot; of Involvement <ul><ul><li>Input-Environment-Outcome </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Conceptual, methodological guide to the study of college effects </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Inputs: demographics, family background, academic history </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Environments: The people, programs, policies, cultures, and experiences encountered </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Outcomes: characteristics, skills, knowledge, attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors after college </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Theory of Involvement: students learn by becoming involved </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>investment of energy in objects (tasks, people, activities) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>involvement is continuous </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>involvement is quantitative and qualitative </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>higher involvement = higher learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>capacity to induce involvement predetermines success </li></ul></ul>
  39. 39. Tinto's Theory of Student Departure <ul><li>Seeks to explain the withdrawal process </li></ul>
  40. 40. Pascarella's General Model for Assessing Change
  41. 41. Weidman's Model of Undergraduate Socialization
  42. 42. Commonalities in College Impact Models <ul><ul><li>Each looks at the context in which a student acts and thinks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutional structures, policies, programs, services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Attitudes, values, behaviors of others </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Environment as active force in development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Change is influenced by how the student responds as well as the environmental approach as designed by the institution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>tend to generalize the individual traits so deeply focused upon in developmental theories. </li></ul></ul>
  43. 43. Conclusions <ul><ul><li>College can be a psychosocial moratorium, an opportunity to experiment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>College can be a culture shocking experience, one which provides Eriksonian crises with which students can develop the identity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>College is a socializing and desocializing experience </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Exposure to diversity is a key capability of the college experience </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>developmental and social views, while sometimes conflicting, both have much to offer in assessment, and should not be viewed exclusively </li></ul></ul>