Running head: THEORY PAPER #1 1

Theory Paper #1

Alexandra Brookhart

SDAD 5400: Student Development Theory, Research, and Practice

THEORY PAPER #1 2

Analysis

Astin’s theory of involvement, Renn’s ecological theory of mixed race identity

development, and Pope, Reynold, and Mueller’s multicultural competence in student affairs will

be analyzed, critiqued, and reflected upon. Astin’s theory of involvement is a classic theory that

lays the framework for the field of student affairs. Students must invest energy and put forth the

effort in order to truly learn and develop, not just be exposed to information. This theory

expresses that the more students are engagement, the more they benefit, and that student learning

occurs outside the walls of academics (Astin, 1999). Not to say that the learning that occurs in

the classroom does not contribute to student development, but to say that student involvement in

co-curricular activities outside of the classroom also positively impact student development.

Renn’s ecological theory of mixed race identity development aims to depict identity

development and experiences of mixed race students. This theory takes the person, interactive

processes, context on the college environment, and time into account in order to determine how

individuals develop and what experiences they will have as a result (Renn, 2004). Renn explains

the five fluid identity patterns of mixed race individuals. All of these components are important

to understand in order to best serve students who identify as mixed race.

Multicultural competence in student affairs by Pope et. al. brings about the spectrum of

multicultural awareness, knowledge, and skills. Multicultural awareness showcases the

importance of being willing to reflect and challenge oneself to address and remove any biases.

Multicultural knowledge focuses on furthering what one knows about theories and cultures in

order to effectively put theory to practice. Multicultural skills refer to the ability break down

theories and personal beliefs in order to take on new perspectives and make informed decisions
THEORY PAPER #1 3

(Pope, Reynolds, & Mueller, 2004). Multicultural competence should be intertwined in all

aspects of student development.

Synthesis

One of the intersections across all three of these theories is time. All of the theories

believe time is an importance factor in regard to student development. Time is uniquely

considered in each theory, but their commonality lies in the fact that all believe that the time has

a direct impact on students. Time is defined and used in a few different contexts. Time refers not

only to days, months, years, etc. of time that goes by in a period, but also to students’ time of

hours, days, etc. and the effort exerted within that frame. Time is seen as positive. The more time

students are involved, the better; how students view culture, race, and own roles is greatly

influenced by time; and multicultural competence, although seen as fluid, deepens over time in a

suitable environment.

All three theories are more concerned with the behavior processes that enable student

development, rather than focusing on developmental outcomes. They all explore how students

develop in their own regards. Whether it be how students are the active participants in their own

learning, own identity development, or own multicultural competence, these theories all center

the how, rather than the what.

A common weakness across these theories is their lack of consideration of institutional

values. In order for the three of these theories to be effectively utilized in a college setting would

require the mission of the institution to align with the values of the theories. Students who

identify as being of mixed race cannot successfully develop their own identity if they are in an

oppressive environment; students cannot be involved if opportunities are not present; and

students cannot increase multicultural competence if it is not valued by the institution. In order to
THEORY PAPER #1 4

mitigate shortcomings, there needs to be some spaces on campus that allow for these to shine

though, even if the larger institutional space does not necessarily reflect that.

Reflection

I would place myself at slightly different places in all of these theories. I believe I am

most competent in Astin’s theory of involvement. Working in student engagement and activities,

I recognize the fact that students’ time and energy are finite and aim to gain a deep

understanding of all the students I work with in order to understand them and their capacity. I

also recognize the effects of campus culture as well as the physical spaces of campus. The

University of Washington Bothell is a commuter campus with 50% first-generation students, and

a diverse study body. I should take this knowledge into consideration in order to put theory to

practice through creating an elections process that provides all those that want to be involved

with the resources and spaces to develop an identification with campus and student government.

In terms of multicultural competence, I rate myself at different levels for awareness,

knowledge, and skills. I would place myself fairly high in awareness, my knowledge is rather

average but continues to grow every day, and my skills are average, but improving. In order to

effectively put this theory into practice, I first need to work to improve upon all three elements,

especially my skills so I can effectively work with students.

Where I place myself in Renn’s ecological theory is more personal than the other

theories, although, of course, this is reflected in my professional life as well. As a biracial

woman, I currently place myself in the monoracial identity pattern (Renn, 2004), and would

consider myself competent, still with room for improvement. Since I personally identify with this

theory, it makes understanding it somewhat easier, however, this understanding stems from my
THEORY PAPER #1 5

personal point of view and need to expand my view to include all multiracial identities, beyond

Black and White.

There are several considerations for student development professionals who want to be

inclusive and further social justice through these theories. In regard to Astin’s theory,

professionals need to consider that fact that many students today have a plethora of obligations

outside of campus life. Many students have jobs, families, and hold identities that may deter

them from being able to put forth the same amount of time and effort into their involvements as

their classmates and peers. In relation to Pope et al. and Renn’s theories, professionals should

take into account the fact that development is fluid, not linear, and all students go at their own

pace.

In terms of translating theory to practice, I think functional area plays a large part in what

would be the appropriate approach. From my standpoint of student engagement and activities, I

believe my co-workers and myself should take an individualized, holistic approach when

working with our student employees and considering these theories in regard to the larger student

population our programs will affect. This can be done though intentional planning and

assessment to inform us if we are meeting our goals.

THEORY PAPER #1 6

References

Astin, A.W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal

of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529.

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

Theory, research and practice (3rd edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Pope, R.L., Reynolds, A.L., & Mueller, J.A. (2004). Multicultural competence in student affairs.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.