Running head: CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL &

ETHICAL DEVELOPMENT 1

Theory Paper #2

Cultural Wealth, Meaning Making, and Intellectual & Ethical Development

Nancy Huang

Seattle University
CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL & ETHICAL
DEVELOPMENT 2

Introduction

College is a transition process. Whether a student enters college from high school or

transfers from one institution to another, every student experiences transition. For many students,

challenges arise when they navigate the university or college system and when they confront

their beliefs and assumptions. As student affairs professionals, it is crucial to keep in mind the

type of students who attend the institution and recognize the diversity of experiences they bring

to college. When addressing students’ transition to college, it is important to consider various

student development theories and models as they help inform the practice. Theories such as

Yosso’s (2005) Community Cultural Wealth Theory, Parks’s (1986) Theory of Faith

Development, and Perry’s (1968) Intellectual and Ethical Development Theory provide a

foundation to understanding students and the challenges they face, which prepares student affairs

practitioners in supporting students through their transition and development in college.

Analysis

According to Yosso's (2005) community cultural wealth theory, students with minoritized

social identities enter college with cultural capital that allows them to strive for academic and

social success. As practitioners, it is important understand how cultural wealth influences

students' achievement and ability to navigate college. While Yosso's cultural wealth theory

explores the different types of capitals underrepresented students bring into their college

experience, Parks's (1986) theory of faith development demonstrates how higher education

influences students' development of purpose, vocation, and belonging in the greater society. By

having an understanding of faith and its impact on meaning making, student affairs professionals

can create programs and resources that encourage a healthy development of purpose. As Parks's

theory addresses the importance of faith in student development, Perry's (1968) intellectual and
CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL & ETHICAL
DEVELOPMENT 3

ethical development theory presents the process of meaning making for students. When students

enter college, they are exposed to different perspectives and views that transform their dualistic

thinking. Therefore, it is essential for practitioners to apply Perry's model by asking questions

and challenging students to think critically in order to foster their intellectual and ethical

development.

Synthesis

When working with students, it is important to understand how these theories play out in

their college experience. Student affairs practitioners can utilize Yosso’s community cultural

wealth theory, Parks’s model of faith development, and Perry’s intellectual and ethical

development model as frameworks in advising students, developing lessons and training, and

assessing learning outcomes in programming. Using these theories, it is crucial to recognize that

they are all interconnected and have mutual effects on students. Therefore, as practitioners, we

need to acknowledge how these theories explain student development to further our

understanding of student issues and experience.

Students from underrepresented communities enter college with unique experiences and

assets that benefit their academic and social success. They bring various forms of capital into

their college experience that helps them maneuver and stay in the institution, allowing them to

"acknowledge individual agency within institutional constraints" (Yosso, 2005, p. 80). As

cultural wealth provides students the motivation to achieve, their exposure to new ideas and

perspectives encourages their faith and intellectual development. Both Parks and Perry's models

have reciprocal outcomes that lead students to develop their purpose in life beyond their college

career. Students’ extracurricular involvements such as collegiate clubs, leadership roles, and

community service enable their faith and meaning making development. Their involvement
CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL & ETHICAL
DEVELOPMENT 4

allows them to develop relationships with their peers along with recognizing that “not all

opinions are equally valid” (Patton et al., 2016). This encourages students to make their own

decisions and form opinions based on what they believe is right or wrong.

In order to foster the holistic development of students, practitioners need to understand

that students, particularly those from communities of color have cultural and social wealth to

help them navigate through the system. Additionally, their unique experiences motivate them to

invest time outside the classroom. Thus, it is important to recognize how their involvements

impact their development. By having a strong understanding of how the three theories create

reciprocal outcomes, practitioners can develop resources and opportunities to promote students’

faith and intellectual development.

All three of the theories encourage students’ development of their intellectual skills and

ethics. The models promote the use of skills and assets that students bring into college. Students’

difficulty of navigating college may encourage them to utilize their cultural and social capital to

discover ways to effectively maneuver through the institution. Cultural capital is defined as “the

sense of group consciousness and collective identity” to serve the “advancement of an entire

group” (Franklin, 2002 as cited in Yosso, 2005, p. 81). For underrepresented students, in order to

succeed in college, they need to rely on their cultural capital to help them find a network of

support to alleviate the challenges they may face. This helps students find their community and

give them a “familiar and dependable network of people and places to explore themselves and

their values” (Patton et al., 2016). Establishing a sense of community enables students to think

for themselves while receiving support from their peers, which leads to the appreciation of

differing views and opinions.

For practitioners, knowing how the three models work interchangeably allows them to
CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL & ETHICAL
DEVELOPMENT 5

support students and encourage a healthy development. Students may enter college with

perspectives and biases that have been influenced by their trusted authority figures. It is

important for practitioners to understand why students have certain views in order to better

address their needs. Therefore, it is essential that practitioners familiarize the three theories to

provide students opportunities to learn about others and themselves.

Yosso, Parks, and Perry’s theories all address and foster the intellectual development of

students. While the models demonstrate how students make meaning and achieve their goals,

they are designed for different groups and may not have the same effects. For Yosso, cultural

wealth applies to individuals with racially marginalized identities, Parks’s specifically for white

individuals, and Perry’s for college students. Despite the theories targeted for specific groups,

they are applicable to a larger audience. Since identities are intersectional, these theories are

appropriate for the development of all students holding privileged and marginalized identities.

For instance, research demonstrates that Parks’s theory ignores “the role of ethnicity in the faith

development process” (Patton et al., 2016); thus, it is important for practitioners to recognize

cultural biases within these theories. Despite the theories failing to address the development of

individuals from culturally diverse background, these theories can still be applied to all students

as they transition into college and become exposed to new perspectives and ideas.

Reflection

As I reflect on my own development from undergraduate to graduate, I realize the

amount of impact my transition to college and on-campus experiences had on my current view of

the world. I identify as a first-generation student and Asian American woman; and when I

entered college, I had difficulties navigating my university. Reflecting on my undergraduate

experience, I realized how my aspirational capital influenced my desire to find ways to achieve
CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL & ETHICAL
DEVELOPMENT 6

my hopes and dreams. I utilized my own social capital as a motivation to discover the resources

and support to help me succeed academically and socially. In doing so, I was able to become

involved at my university, which provided me a community and space to be introduced to new

ideas and perspectives.

Prior to college, I consider myself as a dualistic thinker. Most of my views were

influenced by the trusted authority figures in my life such as parents and teachers (Patton et al.,

2016). My experience with Alternative Break at my undergraduate institution provided me with a

different outlook on life. I was exposed to new ideas that challenged my assumptions and biases.

Alternative Break gave me the opportunity to think critically while having the support from my

peers to explore different views. This gradually allowed me to develop into a more relativistic

thinker, gaining a strong appreciation for differences. As a relativistic thinker, I encourage

myself to listen to others and not take every opinion at face value. This enables me to draw my

own conclusion and decision.

As a graduate student and new practitioner, I think the three theories are applicable in

many functional areas. When hiring student staff, it is important to take into consideration the

cultural and social capital that students will bring into their position. Since student leaders are

dedicated to serving their fellow peers, both Parks and Perry’s theories can be applied to their

work. As professionals, we need to train our student leaders to be supporters and mentors to help

their peers to “develop a willingness to consider different perspectives and interact with others

not like themselves” (Patton et al., 2016). Training and staffing can be implemented through

team building, privilege walk, and individual activities that promote self-reflection. Furthermore,

the three theories can be put into practice and it is crucial that as practitioners, we utilize these

models in our work with students to encourage their faith, intellectual, and ethical development.
CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL & ETHICAL
DEVELOPMENT 7

Conclusion

It is important to note that Yosso’s community cultural wealth theory, Parks’s model of

faith development, and Perry’s intellectual and ethical development model serve as frameworks

for our work in student affairs. Utilizing these theories can help practitioners better understand

the challenges that students face. Thus, acknowledging and comprehending student issues and

experience furthers the understanding of our roles as student affairs practitioners and how we can

better serve our students.

CULTURAL WEALTH, MEANING MAKING, AND INTELLECTUAL & ETHICAL
DEVELOPMENT 8

References

Franklin, V. P. (2002) Introduction: cultural capital and African-American education, The

Journal of African-American History, 87, 175–181.

Parks, S. D. (1986). The critical years: Young adults and the search for meaning, faith, and

commitment. New York: HarperCollins.

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quayle, S. J. (2016). Student development in

college (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Perry, W. F., Jr. (1968). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A

scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Yosso, T. (2005, March). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of

community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-91.

doi:10.1080/1361332052000341006