Running head: REFLECTIONS ON READINGS

Reflections on Readings Past

Haniyyah Bashir
University at Buffalo
ELP 523: Student Affairs Capstone
March 9, 2016

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS
Baxter-Magolda, M. B. (2009). The activity of meaning making: A holistic perspective on
college student development. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 621-639.
The article argues that higher education and specifically student affairs need a holistic,
theoretical perspective to promote the learning and development of the whole student. The article
is organized by segments: Academic Traditions and the Theoretical Clusters; Key Constructs,
conceptualizations, and research that frame a holistic theoretical perspective on college student
development; A Holistic Perspective; Future Directions and Possibilities. Key contributor
Knefelkamp, Widick, and Parker are mentioned for their research on five sections: psychosocial
theories, cognitive developmental theories, maturity models, typology models, and personenvironment interaction models. Research has been conducted within the areas to create theory
in the context of gender, race, ethnicity, age, ableism, and sexual orientation typically resulted in
silos rather than showing intersectionality.
The ways the theorists suggest to construct a holistic theoretical perspective includes
focusing on intersections rather than separate constructs, nesting new ideas generated from
particular student populations in larger context, critiquing and extending existing theory rather
than ignoring it, blending particulars and existing overarching idea, intersecting learning and
development, conducting contemporary research in ways that explore these tensions and
intersections are necessary. Within the article, the theorist mentioned for cognitive development
include: Piaget; Perry; King and Kitchener; Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, and Tarule; Baxter
Magolda; Kohlberg; Gilligan; Perry and Belenky et. al. The theorists that were mentioned for
their psychosocial development philosophy include: Erikson; Chickering & Chickering &
Reisser; Josselson. For meaning-making, Kegans metapsychology theory is discussed. In terms
of integrative concepts, the list include: Abes, Jones, and McEwens Model of Multiple
Dimensions of Identity and Bronfenbrenners Ecology Model. Underlying thread of all the
holistic research is a common theme of having an inside voice to coordinate external influences
and manage ones life.
two great yearnings: the yearning for exercise of ones own distinct agency (ones own power
to make a difference) and the yearning for belonging, connection, inclusion, relationship, and
intimacythis balancing of agency and communionis an ongoing quest for young adults are
they compose their own realities in connection with important others in their lives in multiple
contexts. (Baxter-Magolda, 2009, p. 626)
Sometimes as a future entry level student affairs professional, I can get so lost in the
theories and lose sight of the individual student that is right in front of me. This quote reminds
me to focus on that students yearnings. In applying theories to practice, I want to acknowledge
students individual histories and characteristics, their educational environments, and how they
make meaning of their educational experiences. When reading and reflecting on this article, I
thought about the Student Development Transit System Map that circulates in our field. It is
important for us to understand the history of the models and theories to know where we came
from, where we are, and where we need to be.
This article critiques the theories and shows the areas that need refinement to enhance our
understanding of our diverse population of American college students. In comprehensive exam
application, I would use this article to argue that the focus needs to be on the meaning-making
experiences of the college students and intersectionality. Ultimately, through Baxter-Magoldas
research, the development of student development theories is apparent and can also be used as a
point of reference to further explore the mentioned theories.

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Ecological
approaches to college student development. In Student development in college:
Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 156-175). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
In this chapter, the authors focus on the ecological approaches to help readers
comprehend human development, the approaches to understanding the connections between
people and their environments that promote growth and development, and how people influence
environments and how some environments support peoples development more than others. This
chapter is divided into sections: Human Ecology; Developmental Ecology; Campus Ecology;
Implications and Future Directions. Within each section, they discuss specific theories as they
relate to the topic.
Human ecology theory is a way of examining the interaction and interdependence of
humans with the environment specifically college students and campus life. Overall, this theory
implies that the social-cultural context of our ecosystem is shaped by family income, cultural
backgrounds, and commitments to academics, athletics, and work as well as the natural physical
environment. The developmental ecology section covers the interaction between individuals and
their developmental context, but it focuses attention on the individuals rather than the embedded
cultures. Highlights in this section include Bronfenbrenners Theory of PPCT (Process, Person,
Context, Time) and Astins Involvement Theory. Campus ecology theory studies the relationship
between the student and the campus environment, incorporates the influence of environments on
students and students on environments, as well as focusing on the transactional relationship
between students and their environment. Highlights from this chapter includes: Barkers
behavior-setting theory, Walshs subculture approach, Hollands personality types, Sterns need X
press = culture theory, Moos social ecological approach, Pervins transaction approach, and
Strange and Banning.
Student affairs educators can use ecological models to understand how campus
environments can be shaped to promote optimal growth and development. (Evans et. al, 2010,
p. 159)
This quote not only gives an overview of how you can apply the theories in responding to
our case studies for our comprehensive exam, but it also is useful in applying theory to our
practice as professionals. In intervention situations when working with individual students, I can
see myself exploring their developmental environments through personal historical backgrounds
and current ecologies. It can be helpful in understanding how peer cultures might be influenced
to improve in the student life offices, academic affairs, residential life, learning environments,
and more. For campus advancement, the mentioned theories are useful in improving the model
for designing campus environments.
In thinking about the ecology theories, I look at the way many campuses designate a
central space or union for the students to come together and socialize. If that space does not
exist, then it may be difficult to instill campus community life. These theories support the belief
that the way a space is designate adds or take away from students experience, development, and
growth. In this instance, it might be time for renovation and construction to make improvements.
It can also be important to keep in mind as an admissions representative when talking to students
about institutional fit. In thinking about our current generation, certain considerations include the
variety of ways that students learn such as face-to-face, distance, online. Ultimately, the
presence of technology and social media creates a new area for ecological examination.

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS
Hardiman, R.., & Jackson, B. W. (1997). Conceptual foundations for social justice
courses. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, &P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social
justice (pp. 16-29). New York: Routledge.
In the article, Hardiman & Jackson give an overview of social oppression, privilege,
power pointing out: the social oppression matrix looking at the context, psychosocial processes,
and the application; roles in the system of oppression; relationships within and between the roles
in the system of oppression; target and agent interaction: vertical and horizontal relationship;
social identity development theory by stage 1: nave/no social consciousness, stage 2:
acceptance, stage 3: resistance, stage 4: redefinition, and stage 5: internalization. Post-civil rights
era, student development theorists created the identity development models in course on race,
cultural bias, and counseling from a racial perspective. Overall, they focus on understanding,
recognizing, and describing the generic characteristics of oppression; understanding the
structures of self-perpetuation, the roles people play in the system of oppression, and how these
roles interact.
Social oppression exists when one social group, whether they know it or not, exploits
another social group for its own benefit; an interlocking system that involves ideological control
as well as supremacy and control of the social institutions and resources of the society, resulting
in a condition of privilege for the agent group and abuse of target. Agent has the power to define
cultural norms. Differential and unequal treatment are institutionalized and systematic.
Oppressed play host to the oppressor. Target groups culture is misrepresented; Agent groups
culture is imposed. This reading gives a pictorial representation of the social oppression matrix
that shows how social oppression is maintained and operationalized, as well as, the social
identify development theory that defines common characteristics to the identity development
process for members of all target and agent groups. Hardiman & Jackson also give a breakdown
of the pervasive and systemic hierarchies that hold in place the unequal status relative to each
other. Agents label targets as Deviant, Evil. Target label agents as normal, proper.
U.S. Target Identities: People of color, Women, Gay men/Lesbians/Bisexuals,
Jews/Muslims/Other, Disabled Persons, Poor/Working Class, Young/ElderlyU.S. Agent
Identities: Whites, Men, Heterosexuals, Christians, Able persons, Owning and Middle Class,
Middle/Adult(Hardiman & Jackson, 1997, p. 20)
Throughout the article, it was very confusing at first for me to understand which stages of
the social identity theory applied to which group of people specifically. Therefore, this quote is
one that I would use as my key and guide as it lays out the social structures in the U.S. for the
oppressed and the oppressor. As a student affairs practitioner, it guides many of my conversations
about social injustices. Regardless of the position, department, or institution, I strongly believe
that the social identity development theory applies to our practice working with students who
consciously or subconsciously encounters experiences in society. It allows you to self-reflect on
and check your privileges in those sometimes difficult and uncomfortable dialogues.
As laws are changing, our generation is becoming more aware of the injustices. On
college campuses, there has been a rise in student activism on many social issues including racial
injustice, gender identification, sexual orientation, mental health, and more. Many argue that it
has come to a halt, but I believe this will continue as we enter into the professional world.
Students are demanding changes to the campus culture, administration, and policies. This article
is a starting point and can be used to understand the challenges that our students are facing.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Ecological

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS
approaches to college student development. In Student development in college:
Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 156-175). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
In this chapter, the authors focus on the ecological approaches to help readers
comprehend human development, the approaches to understanding the connections between
people and their environments that promote growth and development, and how people influence
environments and how some environments support peoples development more than others. This
chapter is divided into sections: Human Ecology; Developmental Ecology; Campus Ecology;
Implications and Future Directions. Within each section, they discuss specific theories as they
relate to the topic.
Human ecology theory is a way of examining the interaction and interdependence of
humans with the environment specifically college students and campus life. Overall, this theory
implies that the social-cultural context of our ecosystem is shaped by family income, cultural
backgrounds, and commitments to academics, athletics, and work as well as the natural physical
environment. The developmental ecology section covers the interaction between individuals and
their developmental context, but it focuses attention on the individuals rather than the embedded
cultures. Highlights in this section include Bronfenbrenners Theory of PPCT (Process, Person,
Context, Time) and Astins Involvement Theory. Campus ecology theory studies the relationship
between the student and the campus environment, incorporates the influence of environments on
students and students on environments, as well as focusing on the transactional relationship
between students and their environment. Highlights from this chapter includes: Barkers
behavior-setting theory, Walshs subculture approach, Hollands personality types, Sterns need X
press = culture theory, Moos social ecological approach, Pervins transaction approach, and
Strange and Banning.
Student affairs educators can use ecological models to understand how campus
environments can be shaped to promote optimal growth and development. (Evans et. al, 2010,
p. 159)
This quote not only gives an overview of how you can apply the theories in responding to
our case studies for our comprehensive exam, but it also is useful in applying theory to our
practice as professionals. In intervention situations when working with individual students, I can
see myself exploring their developmental environments through personal historical backgrounds
and current ecologies. It can be helpful in understanding how peer cultures might be influenced
to improve in the student life offices, academic affairs, residential life, learning environments,
and more. For campus advancement, the mentioned theories are useful in improving the model
for designing campus environments.
In thinking about the ecology theories, I look at the way many campuses designate a
central space or union for the students to come together and socialize. If that space does not
exist, then it may be difficult to instill campus community life. These theories support the belief
that the way a space is designate adds or take away from students experience, development, and
growth. In this instance, it might be time for renovation and construction to make improvements.
It can also be important to keep in mind as an admissions representative when talking to students
about institutional fit. In thinking about our current generation, certain considerations include the
variety of ways that students learn such as face-to-face, distance, online. Ultimately, the
presence of technology and social media creates a new area for ecological examination.
Pew Research Center. (2010, February 24). Millennials: Confident. connected. open to

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS
change. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/02/24/millennials
confident-connected-open-to-change/
This Pew Research Center report on Millennials focuses on the identity of the generation
of people who were born after 1980. It outlines approximately 50 million Millennials who were
in between the ages of 18-29 in 2010. Throughout the entire report, they give a detailed
assessment of the demographics, political and social values, lifestyles and life priorities, digital
technology and social media habits, and economic and educational aspirations. In addition, there
is a comparison analysis with the other living generations including Generation X (1965-1980),
Baby Boomers (1946-1964), and Silents (1928-1945). In certain areas of the trend data, they
look at the older generations for who they are are now and who they were when they were
younger. This research depicts that Millennials differ in attitudes, morals, behaviors, and
lifestyles from other generations and within a generation.
One of the main points of the research that is important to mention is that Millennials
respondents say that technology use, music/pop culture, liberal/tolerant, smarter, and clothes are
the top 5 things that makes this generation unique. The older generations similarly cite work
ethic as one of their unique characteristics, but Millennials do not. Majority of the Millennial
participants agreed that work ethic, moral values, and respect for others were traits that are more
common amongst the older generation. Although considered self-confident, the research
participants have little interest in ethical control. This generation is more accepting of modern
families, racial groups, religious differences or interest, and other hot topic issues. Collectively,
Millennials identified themselves as the group that gets along well with others especially with
elders.
Millennials are on course to become the most educated generation in American history, a trend
driven largely by the demands of a modern knowledge-based economy, but most likely
accelerated in recent years by the millions of 20-somethings enrolling in graduate schools,
colleges or community colleges in part because they cant find a job.
(Pew Research Center, 2010)
As a student affairs professional, this quote resonated with me because many students
that I work with chose to attend college to attain a job/career and this research is showing that the
job market does not want Millennials. As a career adviser, I can see how discouraging this
information can be when I have to tell students that they are not guaranteed a job after they
graduate. This report is very useful for student affairs professionals to be aware of the views and
issues that this generation face, as well as, the views and issues of the other generations in the
offices that we will work with. Out of all of the literature about Millennials that Ive read in the
past semesters, this provided the most positive outlook.
Because Millennials are the generation that is the most exposed to technology and social
media, many times they are forced into the role of always being the only person who is
competent in those skills. I appreciate the incorporation of the Technology competency into the
NASPA and ACPA Professional Competences to push all professionals to advance their
technological skills if it is required to fulfill their job responsibility. Student Affairs professionals
have to acknowledge the awareness, knowledge, and skills of the importance of technology in
the work that is done for the diverse learners in our community. This source is useful for
comprehensive exam preparation because it focuses on the personalities and identities of the
students we are responsible for developing on campus.
Schuh, J. H., & Associates. (2009). Assessment as an essential dimension of contemporary

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS
student affairs practice. In Assessment methods for student affairs (pp. 1-22). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
In this chapter, they recognize and examine reasons that contribute to why accountability
in student affairs has become a crucial dimension of current student affairs practice. They also
describe how assessment is connected to other organizational structures and functions in student
affairs. They give suggestions about how to get started in conducting assessment projects and
identify a number of different kinds of assessment projects. Lastly, they mention a few examples
of institutions that are starting ongoing assessment plans. This chapter discusses the push for
accountability on college campus because it is linked to student learning, retention, political
pressure, accreditation, cost, and benchmarking. Assessment activities are the foundations in
program planning and program development in student affairs especially when examining the
strategic plan and organizational effectiveness. College campuses participate in strategic
planning exercises that include a review of their mission statements and goals, and then adopt
actions that are designed to achieve their goals. Systemic approach is mentioned as a technique
to gather information for determining the effectiveness of student affairs units, initiatives,
programs, and procedures.
This chapter guides the readers how to get started with assessment on their college
campus using the different types of methods that can be followed: measuring participation; needs
assessment; satisfaction assessment; outcomes; cost effectiveness; other assessments. Pascarella
& Terenzini approach to program assessing suggests that a division should start modestly and
attempt to conduct a few assessment projects rather than undertake a study of massive
proportions. Another technique is measuring participation that should be completely annually to
keep track of who uses the various services and participates in the programs by the units of the
division, and who do not. A needs assessment is useful bi-annually to fit the notion of trying to
stay abreast of the needs of the student body. They also provide a list of framing questions that
need to be answered and considered before moving into other aspects of assessments. They
provide examples of assessment in student affairs.
higher education was being asked to demonstrate that students were learning what
institutions said they were learning. Since student affairs units have asserted for decades that
students learn from the experiences provided in out-of-class expedienciesthey, too, have to
produce evidence to sustain their claims. (Schuh et. al, 2009, p. 3-4)
This quote made me look at student affairs in a new light because I noticed that Student
Affairs professionals always have to prove their worth, their skills, and effectiveness to the
faculty, students, and administrators. Everything thats done has to be justified in theory that
supports our practice, as well as, assessment to confirm that the goals of the campus are being
achieved. This is applicable for comprehensive exam preparation because it can support any
changes that need to be made on campus. For example, if the students decide to protest all of the
student life programming, I see that as an opportunity to incorporate strategic planning and needs
assessment. We need to get to the bottom of the issue to make sure we are addressing the
students concerns. In real world application and practice, assessment is a tool that each student
affairs office uses regardless of their department. Ive learn the major key with assessment is to
use the feedback to incorporate positive and effective changes.
References

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS
Baxter-Magolda, M. B. (2009). The activity of meaning making: A holistic perspective on
college student development. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 621-639.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Ecological
approaches to college student development. In Student development in college:
Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 156-175). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
Hardiman, R.., & Jackson, B. W. (1997). Conceptual foundations for social justice courses. In M.
Adams, L. A. Bell, &P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (pp. 1629). New York: Routledge.
Pew Research Center. (2010, February 24). Millennials: Confident. connected. open to change.
Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/02/24/millennials-confidentconnected-open-to-change/
Schuh, J. H., & Associates. (2009). Assessment as an essential dimension of contemporary
student affairs practice. In Assessment methods for student affairs (pp. 1-22). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

REFLECTIONS ON READINGS