Digital Development Concert!!!

Welcome to my online digital development concert!

"What is a digital developmental concert?" you may ask. Well, it is an online concert (meaning it's posted online and you can watch it whenever you want), and it's been recorded digitally! (I know, right? Way to marry technology with student development!)

This idea has morphed quite a bit since I got the idea to do something musical. At first, I thought that maybe I'd write a song about one of the theories...but that never came to fruition. Then, I thought, Hey! I'll do songs geared for the developing college woman using theories focused on women (ie. Josselson, Gilligan, Belenkey, etc.) But then I thought about it more and thought, you know while more females may more closely identify with this song, males can (and should) have something to gain from these songs as well!

Each song is posted separately with some commentary on why I picked it and how I think it's related to college student development. Perhaps some of the ways I will tie these specific songs to student development will be tenuous at best I hope y'all will appreciate the effort that me and my calloused fingers have put into this.

WARNING: While I do fancy myself a hippie, indie, folk singer wannabe (think Joni Mitchell & Joan Baez), and I am far from the American Idol pop/rock singer of today! There are a few botched chords here and there but...well...just go along with it!

I Hope You Dance (Original: Lee Ann Womack)

Okay, so I'm pretty sure this song is about breaking up, but, I know that parents find the lyrics appropriate and sentimental when they reflect on their children growing up. Lyrics like, "I hope you never fear those mountains in the distance, never settle for the path of least resistance" conjure up images in my mind of the messages that parents send their children off to college with. -It's about growth and challenging yourself.



Breakaway (Original: Kelly Clarkson)

This song carries a somewhat similar meaning as the previous song, but this one is from the first-person perspective. Both this song and I Hope You Dance make me thinking of Chickering and Reisser's vector of "moving through autonomy towards interdependence."



You Were Meant for Me (Original: Jewel)

At first, I wasn't going to include this song. It doesn't exactly have a "positive message" to send out and it's kind of whiny. However, college is a time where students are learning to manage emotions and develop mature interpersonal relationships (more vectors!) and thus, many students will probably like this song because they'll be able to identify with it.
"Dreams last for so long, even after you're gone. I know you love me and soon you'll see you were meant for me and I was meant for you" - just not wanting to let go of a relationship that's over.



Luka (Original: Suzanne Vega)

I read somewhere that this song is about a child that is abused at home. I thought of this song from a couple perspectives. First of all, I saw this from the perspective that you actually know this child which got me thinking of Kohlberg's stages of moral development. What do you do? What can you do? And then I got to thinking about the fact that there are many students in colleges and universities across the nation that were abused as children by their families or even now by their significant others. Going through experiences such as abuse, depression, and other psychological issues can hinder development, which is one of the reasons it's important for colleges and universities to have counseling centers to help support students that may need some extra help dealing with issues from their childhood so they can develop into healthy adults!



What Do You Hear in These Sounds (Original: Dar Williams)

Oh, Dar. How can you not love Dar? This kind of continues the trend of the previous song. "What Do You Hear In These Sounds" is about a woman in therapy. Dar has been very public with the fact that she was depressed in college and that, had she not seen a therapist, she didn't think she would still be alive today. There's a part in this song where she talks about having walls and basically, being afraid of her own voice and herself. She makes the Berlin wall analogous to her own psychological walls at one point, which I thought was brilliant:
"I wake up and I ask myself what state I'm in and I say, well, I'm lucky because I am like East Berlin. I had this wall and what I knew of the free world was that I could see their fireworks and I could hear their radio. And I thought that if we met I would only start confessing, they would know that I was scared, they would know that I was guessing. But the wall came down and there they stood before me and they're stumbling and they're mumbling and they're calling out just like me." --Powerful stuff. This song also got me thinking about Josselson's identity development for women as well (perhaps from moratorium to achievement???)



He Thinks He’ll Keep Her (Original: Mary Chapin Carpenter)

Okay, so I love this song and I loved it in college, so I just had to put this one in. It follows the life of a woman through her marriage, having children, getting divorced, and entering the workforce at 36 years old for minimum wage. Hrm. Perhaps the fear of this happening is why the average age of marriage keeps going up, and is why women from my generation are getting their education and working towards self-sufficiency. I'm not sure if this song should be a "lesson" necessarily, but I love it.



As Cool as I Am (Original: Dar Williams)

Yes, more high-quality Dar! This song is completely brilliant. The lyrics that in the chorus that repeats are "I will not be afraid of women." This song follows the relationship of a woman that is with a man that just keeps on looking at and talking about women and saying things like, "I hope you're not threatened" by the fact that he does this. The man has essentially managed to both make the woman feel worse about herself, AND make her jealous of other women! At the end of the song, the woman leaves the man to "go outside and join the others - I am the others." YES!



I am Woman (Original: Helen Reddy)

Thanks to my mother, I was practically raised on this song. This is definitely the "women's anthem" of the 70's! So empowering, and so full of pride! (Think identity development here!) While the song definitely feels full of that "I am woman" pride, the end of it makes me think the perspective is really beyond one of immersion. My favorite line is in the last verse, "but I'm still an embryo with a long, long way to go until I make my brother understand." <-- Sing it, sister! It's not enough to merely empower women - it's the perspective of the all the men out there that we need to change! (Agent group -- Hardiman & Jackson anyone???)



Everything I Need (Original: Melissa Ferrick)

This song was very popular at my college - and why not? Empowering women towards self-authorship! You've got what you need - yes, there will be hard times, and it won't always be easy - but you've got what you need within you.



Closer to Fine (Original: The Indigo Girls)

First of all, I love this song. Second of all, it's complex and simple at the same time! Relating this song to our readings, I think this song shows a very high level of cognitive thought processing. Basically, the song is talking about all the complexities of life and how you can search high and low for answers (going to college, reading the bible, the fountain of life, children, going to a bar), but there is no one answer! "There's more than one answer to this question pointing me in a crooked line." -It's not about finding the right answer, it's about making sense of the many different answers there are and making sense of it for yourself.

Generational Studies

So it's been too long since I've posted - but don't worry, my brain hasn't gone stale! So much is going on right now...where to start...

Well, I did talk a bit about Kolb's theory in my last post. It's a shame I didn't talk more about typology theory, like the always fun MBTI. Talking about it in class still hasn't helped me settle my J and P battle. That's okay. It was fun that Kiana and I demonstrated to the class some differences between her S and my N. :)

As each week of class passes by we're seeing more and more of the complexities of development and what the implications are for colleges and universities. This week's readings on generational studies added even more food for thought!

In some ways I think the generational readings explain more about how students behave and think, the values they have, and the issues they face than some of the other theories we've read in class. (Though be forewarned that I was a sociology major and my take might be a little biased since I do tend to see the world as a series of interacting social systems....)

Generation = social & historical context! All these readings got my mind ticking so let me share with you some main points from the readings as well as my two cents here and there.....

In Go to College, Howe & Strauss discusses some characteristics of the "Millennials" including their focus on teamwork, achievement, modesty, and good conduct. There was much talk about historical context in relation to different generations (i.e. World War II, the assassination of JFK, 911, etc.) as well as the differences between generations. Serving the Millennial Generation by Coomes and DeBard added even more to this, describing the Millennials as ambitious, sheltered, optimistic, and pressured to perform. I think this article provides a good amount of background that would help not only student affairs practitioners and professors but also anyone at all in the world that works with Millennials. This article made me thinking about how politicians could use their knowledge of different generations to craft their messages differently depending on whether they're addressing a group of college students or the senior population!

Go figure that right after I get to thinking about how to use knowledge of generations for political campaigns, here comes Generation Me by Jean M. Twenge (by the way, DrM was right, you should seriously read this one if you haven't) which even discusses marketing towards this generation! I thought this article had a great discussion about the whole self-esteem movement and how it can lead to anxiety and depression once GenMe hits adulthood. I completely agree with some of her recommendations including the following:
-Ditch the self-esteem movement to encourage students to deal with criticism and learn empathy and self control
-Avoid overthinking (who am I to talk though, right???)
I semi-agree with a couple of her other points which are:
-Ditch the love yourself before you love others movement
-Not everyone should go to college so improve options and the stigma against those that choose not to
The reason why I only semi-agree with these are because yes, while we do learn about ourselves from our relationships with others, I think we still need to have a certain level of awareness. (How many of you know someone who just keeps dating the exact same type of person and have their relationships end the same way every time? It sounds like perhaps someone in this predicament could stand some more personal time than continually dating...just saying...)
As for the not everyone should go to college argument, yes, I agree with that - and yes, I support efforts to improve opportunities for young people to learn other career skills (i.e. carpentry, electricity, etc.). I just want to make sure that I preface this to say that not everyone has the same access to or opportunity for education. I think it would be best to give students the best education possible in their younger years so they can find what their strengths are - and you know, if that leads to becoming a skilled laborer, that's great. I just don't think it's right that these career paths seem to fall along socioeconomic divisions. Okay. I'm getting off my soapbox now. *steps down*

Students and Their Parents by Karen J. Forbes was definitely interesting and it gave us a nice history of in loco parentis and how (perhaps) parent/student relationships while at college may be particularly reflective of the generations that the parents come from! The parent/student relationship while in college is definitely a difficult one to navigate and I'm sure as time goes by, this will only get more and more complex!!!

Interdisciplinary Thoughts

So, Kiana’s comment got me thinking more and more about the importance of interdisciplinary awareness. I think it would be safe to say that there is no such thing as a particular field of study or major that is entirely a stand-alone discipline.

 

Each field of study has a history and many (if not all) have underlying philosophies. Most require the ability to have a good grasp of a language. Some fields are naturally more “interdisciplinary” than others, such as international relations, or environmental studies. Then there are other fields like journalism that almost demand some base of knowledge in another field (you better understand politics if that’s your beat, same goes for other areas like sports and arts.) Overall however, I think we often forget how all these different fields of study are connected, and that the ties between them all are important.

 

I heard somewhere that the average American changes their career roughly 3-5 times in their lifetime and that this number is expected to increase in the future. Yes, that’s “career” change, not “job” change. This kind of makes me wonder why anyone would want specific training in something incredibly specific? What if your knowledge base is in something that could become obsolete in 10 years (i.e. a computer programming language)?

 

Here are a few things to consider:

-Think about the different areas within our own field of study (or career) and the ways they are connected.

-Think about other fields of study and how they are connected to our own focus.

-Stay “on top” of the trends in your field! Will you need to gain new skills to keep up with the growing knowledge base?

 

So…now to tie this in to our class readings… J

 

Kolb (experiential learning theory) observed that fields of study tend to have a prevalent way of thinking (which is then passed on to everyone within that field or major). On one hand, I agree that it’s important to have the necessary skills within your area of study and continue to develop those skills…on the other hand, imagine what can be gained if you’re able to expand from your point of view! This is where I will put in my plug for the liberal arts education. If I’m not mistaken, the idea behind the liberal arts curriculum is to help students develop analytical skills that can be applied to any knowledge base, as opposed to being immersed in just one area of study. Yes, you have your “major” (and actually, my college required that you minor in something else as well…to further promote the idea of interdisciplinary learning), but the core of the curriculum is one is one that encourages you to analyze these ties and these different ways of thinking.

 

As I continue this blog, I’m seeing a big trend in my thoughts and discussion regarding the influence of technology on society. Technology influences everyone. I’m getting increasingly interested in technology as it relates to a mode of thinking. The Seattle Post is now strictly an online newspaper, and given the current economic crisis, more and more papers may have to turn to the online mode. We can find out about almost any topic with a few keystrokes and a click. Yes, this all feeds into our consumerist, “I want to know NOW!” mindset, but what other things are being influenced? I was talking to a friend a couple weeks ago about online dating – I encouraged her to give it a try – why not? Many of them require you to take some type of personality inventory of sorts to “match” you with someone else – maybe it does a better job for you than you could by meeting people at a bar, you know?

 

Anyhow, I digress. This is where I was going…back in 8^th grade I wrote my papers by hand, and then typed it on some sort of type-writer or word processor. Then once I got to college, I would write a little by hand, then type it out. Then I’d print the page out, read it and edit it, then write more by hand, then type it in, etc. At this point, I was still writing it out by hand, but typing it out in sections, editing as I went. Since I started graduate school, I’ve found that I’m capable of writing and editing papers almost entirely online. Instead of thinking with pencil in my hand, I now think with my fingers resting on my keyboard, my eyes on a bright screen. Unfortunately, I don’t know much about what this change means! –But it’s certainly got me thinking. It almost makes me feel even more reliant on my computer. (Remember those days before everyone had a cell phone? Wow.)

 

That’s all for now!

 

Class Last Week --> This Week's Readings

CLASS LAST WEEK

In class, we applied Baxter Magolda’s epistemological reflection model to the academic classroom perspective. We talked about what students at different stages of development would prefer regarding teaching and learning styles. –I had a flashback to some of my undergraduate classes. I remember how I was in a psychology stats class in my sophomore or junior year. I aced the exams, but was appalled that we had homework assignments. I remember thinking to myself, “Homework is for high schoolers! I am a college student and I write papers and do projects!” Unfortunately for me, homework was required as part of the grading rubric and even though I aced all the exams, I ended up with a B in the class solely because I didn’t do my homework.

I particularly enjoyed our discussion about critical thinking – as skill acquisition vs. development as well as the way it’s defined. Critical thinking do seem to be buzz words (especially in education) and people often mean different things when they use the term. When I read Kitchener and King’s reflective judgment model, they discussed reflective judgment in relation to epistemology and critical thinking. As I read, I remember thinking that I had assumptions about what “critical thinking” was – I had just assumed there was an epistemological component to critical thinking.

Discussions like these are important. When doing research it’s always important to provide the operational definitions of your research. (Have you ever seen a debate where two people are arguing about something where each has defined the central topic of debate differently and they end up arguing about the definition and not the topic?) Anyhow, main point is that it’s important to understand that different concepts are defined differently by different people - so make sure to define them in your own research and when others use these terms, ask them to give you their operational definition as well.

THIS WEEK'S READINGS

This week’s readings were on moral development. The article in our reader was about the “just community” set up at Simmons College. I think experiences like these are great ways to provide lessons in moral development for students.

My college was pretty “open” regarding policies (in the dorms as well as in general) and we had an honor code and an honor system that (I think) helped to promote moral development as well. Now, I don’t think you can just go into a college and say, “Here is our honor code!” and have it work – it’s not that simple. It needs to be respected and upheld by those in the community. We were given so much leeway due to the honor code (self-scheduled finals without proctors was one of the best things - you could go and pick up your exam almost whenever you wanted to during finals period and take your final in almost any academic classroom and return it when you’re done). I think the flexibility of the rules on campus helped students to make their own decisions and learn their own lessons.

Another great thing about the honor code is that depending on the situation you were in and depending how you looked at your problem, no matter what you did, you would be in violation of the honor code as behaving responsibly can take on different meanings!

Our text readings were on Kohlberg and Gilligan’s theories of moral development. Here’s the gist of it:
Kohlberg came up with a 6-stage theory of moral development based predominantly on ideals of justice and was from a very autonomous perspective. Gilligan criticized Kohlberg’s theory as she saw it as androcentric and lacking a female voice. Gilligan’s model is based on the ethic of care from a more interdependent perspective. I think both perspectives are important to have in mind, regardless of who you’re working with and that perhaps these different perspectives of morality complement each other more than they conflict.

I particularly liked the discussion of the criticisms of Gilligan’s work because it touches a bit on the differences in feminist perspectives (which Baxter Magolda mentioned briefly in her book as well). When I was in high school, I had assumed there was one meaning of “feminist” but – as with everything else – I learned of the differences within the larger community.

Education, Technology & Globalization

Shame on me for not commenting on Obama's address to Congress in which he included education as one of his top priorities (yay!) Here's the direct transcript from his 2/24/09 speech...well...just the part about education:

The third challenge we must address is the urgent need to expand the promise of education in America.

In a global economy where the most valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a good education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity - it is a pre-requisite.

Right now, three-quarters of the fastest-growing occupations require more than a high school diploma. And yet, just over half of our citizens have that level of education. We have one of the highest high school dropout rates of any industrialised nation. And half of the students who begin college never finish.

This is a prescription for economic decline, because we know the countries that out-teach us today will out-compete us tomorrow. That is why it will be the goal of this administration to ensure that every child has access to a complete and competitive education - from the day they are born to the day they begin a career.

Already, we have made an historic investment in education through the economic recovery plan. We have dramatically expanded early childhood education and will continue to improve its quality, because we know that the most formative learning comes in those first years of life. We have made college affordable for nearly seven million more students. And we have provided the resources necessary to prevent painful cuts and teacher layoffs that would set back our children's progress.

But we know that our schools don't just need more resources. They need more reform. That is why this budget creates new incentives for teacher performance; pathways for advancement, and rewards for success. We'll invest in innovative programmes that are already helping schools meet high standards and close achievement gaps. And we will expand our commitment to charter schools.

It is our responsibility as lawmakers and educators to make this system work. But it is the responsibility of every citizen to participate in it. And so tonight, I ask every American to commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training. This can be community college or a four-year school; vocational training or an apprenticeship. But whatever the training may be, every American will need to get more than a high school diploma. And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It's not just quitting on yourself, it's quitting on your country - and this country needs and values the talents of every American. That is why we will provide the support necessary for you to complete college and meet a new goal: by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.

I know that the price of tuition is higher than ever, which is why if you are willing to volunteer in your neighbourhood or give back to your community or serve your country, we will make sure that you can afford a higher education. And to encourage a renewed spirit of national service for this and future generations, I ask this Congress to send me the bipartisan legislation that bears the name of senator Orrin Hatch as well as an American who has never stopped asking what he can do for his country - senator Edward Kennedy.

These education policies will open the doors of opportunity for our children. But it is up to us to ensure they walk through them. In the end, there is no program or policy that can substitute for a mother or father who will attend those parent/teacher conferences, or help with homework after dinner or turn off the TV, put away the video games and read to their child. I speak to you not just as a president, but as a father when I say that responsibility for our children's education must begin at home.

It is quite a goal but we must start somewhere - and thank you, Mr. President, for point out that it's not just resources, it's reform. Yes, money is great and I'm sure those dollars will be received with gratitude, but if you want change, you can't just throw money at it.

I also wanted to tie a few other things in with the importance of education as a priority. I was recently at a meeting where P-20 initiatives are being discussed (mostly in regard to federal funding). Anyhow, one of the priorities is a better way to track students along their educational paths to try to find out what works and what doesn't. Imagine all the data! (And that's an excited "!")

What about education in the context of an increasingly "global" world? In class today we discussed an article "Wake Up and Smell the Epistemology" and talked about it in relation to positions/stages of Perry's theory. I think the author's perspective is interesting - that due to what he sees as the influence of technology, students are coming into college at a higher (albeit apathetic) level of cognitive development. This quote from a student in the article summed this point up nicely:

It is imperative that someone studying this generation realize that we have the world at our fingertips — and the world has been at our fingertips for our entire lives. I think this access to information seriously undermines this generation's view of authority, especially traditional scholastic authority.

So let's see...so far I've talked about education as a national imperative (regarding both resources and reform) and cognitive levels of students in the "information age." I wanted to bring one more idea into this blog, which is globalization. The world has always been complex within and among disciplines, but when you broaden the scope to include the whole world, and not just the U.S., somewhere, we must account for the rapid pace of globalization include economic, political, financial, and yes, even educational.

I got this link from a friend and I highly recommend taking a look at it - it really puts the technological revolution on a global scale and ties education into it quite nicely: Did you know?

I think when we take a step back and look at the future of education in the realm of a global community, there are many things we need to address. We are ill prepared for the future. A couple of the most salient issues would have to be the current economic crisis as well as climate change. I think other issues include apathy and lack of direction. Do people (including students) really not care? Or do people not care because they feel at a loss of knowing what they can do?

Maybe students are apathetic about what they learn in the classroom - but are they entirely apathetic? Or does it have to do with relevance? How is this relevant to the student - and how is it relevant to the future of society in a technological age of global growth? Furthermore, how can academics become relevant if the teachers cannot relate the relevance of their teachings to our global society? How can educational institutions prepare students for careers in a new globalized and technologically advanced future when the teachers themselves aren't equipped to guide their students in this direction?

I don't have the answers, obviously, but I think there are too many people with closed minds out there that inhibit the possibilities....and much like the Clydesdale article suggests, I don't think the ones with the most closed minds are the students. (!) I love it when I hear teachers, administrators, and professionals I know say things like, "I'm learning so much from my students" or "I love what my students are teaching me!" Yes, thank you!

It's not about "I'm right" or "I know it all" or even "I know much that I would like to share" - it's a step further. The convergence of minds, the idea of synergy, that the most can be achieved when everyone is involved...that when everyone (let's say, in a classroom) works together not just for mutual benefit, but for even more...the sum of what the teacher knows and what the students have to offer is greater than what the students can learn from the teacher alone (or what the teacher can learn from their students alone).

Now, I don't know how we can find out how best to address the current and emergent issues in our society (and around the world), but I know one thing: we are all in this together, and there's no way we can survive without a combination of individual and social responsibility and reliance. Hrm. Does that make sense? That we need to hold ourselves accountable and each-other accocuntable. That we need to keep our minds open, not just for ourselves, but for what can be an even greater benefit.

Now the big question is - how can we achieve this?

Sexual Identity Readings

Our readings for this week were on Cass’ and D’Augelli’s homosexual identity development models. When I first read through the models, I thought they were both somewhat similar in process, however, the differences lie in their framework. Cass’ model presents homosexual identity as a relationship between psychological and social factors where the individual is seeking congruence as a means to achieve their identity. D’Augelli’s model itself is incredibly succinct, but the framework in which he places his model is extensive. His model is rooted in a lifetime developmental process framework where identity is a social construct that evolves throughout the lifetime where at some points one’s sexual identity may be salient/crystallized than at other points. His model takes into account personal aspects, interactive intimacies, and sociohistorical context. I think D’Augelli did a better job at placing his model within a framework, while Cass explained her model in extensive detail just kind of throwing in an, “oh, by the way, this is subject to change depending on society.”

I’m currently reading a book called “The New Gay Teenager” by Ritch C. Savin-Williams that offers an interesting perspective on gay adolescents. From his perspective, homosexuality is an invention that today’s teenagers don’t necessarily see as relevant to them. He foresees a “postgay” future where (perhaps) sexuality is irrelevant. Some of the more interesting points the book has brought out for me thus far are the following:
1)Gay culture (and hetero culture) is the result of society.
2)Gay adolescent research has (for a long time) focused on those that were available to study – troubled teens – and how to help them. Research often completely ignored bisexual students or students that were “other” not to mention students that were not out, thus only studying one facet of the gay youth. (Not to mention that the grant money was for research to support these youth and not anything otherwise.)
3)The outcome of gay research depends on the operational definition of “homosexuality” to which we should really question “What does it mean to be gay?” Is it an inner orientation? Is it sexual behavior? Is it someone saying they are gay? What about a virgin that thinks they are gay? Or someone who labels themselves as heterosexual but sleeps with their gender? What if no sex is involved but there is an intense relationship otherwise?

As someone that identifies as a lesbian, I think this research is fascinating and it made me look at my life not just from a personal perspective, but from a historical perspective. Maybe the only reason I consider myself to be a lesbian is because society has made me a lesbian. When I was little, I saw a show on TV (maybe on Oprah or 60 Minutes) where there were gay people on TV and it seemed to me to be something that was not desirable. What if I had seen a different show – one where there were lesbian couples with children and families – maybe things would have been different. I was experiencing my most intense inner incongruence during the time of Ellen’s original sitcom. When she came out and her show was cancelled and there was media backlash, I took it personally. What if, instead, I had seen Ellen on TV with her current talk show – knowing that she’s a lesbian, but seeing its irrelevance to the show?

It took a long time for me to “come out” and it took me a long time because I was scared and I wasn’t sure. How do you know? I hadn’t even dated anyone at the time – how could I come out if I didn’t have “proof”? What if none of that mattered? What if you just had feelings for who you had feelings for? Maybe it isn’t truly a big deal – it’s all in society’s perception and in our perception. For me, it took a long time to say I was a lesbian. I started out saying I was queer. Then I stuck with “gay” for awhile. As I got older, I kind of settled into “lesbian.” When I finally said, “I am a lesbian” it was more than a declaration of who I am, but an identity with a minority group. It was acceptance of my gay history, a gay “family” of people out there that I don’t know. People that fought for my rights that have made my life easier, I see them as my “ancestors.” Here is an excerpt from an old blog of mine:

Anyhow, this pride was RI’s 30th Pride celebration. At one point, a man came up on the stage to talk about the first pride back in 1976 (the original pride folk from back then are referred to as "76ers"). His speech was brief, but it was extremely moving. He stood onstage and looked at the vast expanse of people who showed up for pride noting how many people there had children and how many people in the audience weren’t even ALIVE in 1976. I don’t remember exactly how he phrased it, but he spoke of how different it was back then, what it meant to be gay back then, as well as the rise of AIDS. He closed his speech with a message to all the younger folks in the audience saying "If we have in any way made your lives easier, than all the difficult times, and all the struggles have been worth it." -What a wonderful message, and what a great legacy. He referred to himself and the 76ers as our "ancestors" and that is truly what they are. That, for me, was what pride was all about. I felt the "Pride" - that I am a "child" of an ongoing gay revolution with ancestors who have paved the way and have responsibility to give back to this community who has made my life easier.

I don't think my lesbian identity was ever the most salient identity for me, but as I've gotten older, it has become less salient. Maybe Savin-Williams is right - maybe someday there will be no differentiation between "heterosexuals" and "homosexuals." Then something comes up like this whole civil-union ordeal and I feel like maybe that time will never come.

It doesn't matter what your opinion is. A civil-union is not "equal" to marriage - and there are people that don't even want to let people be recognized in civil-unions. This is not equality, all we want is equality. This isn't a "gay" issue or a "religious" issue. It's a human rights issue, and by not allowing some people to marry, by allowing or even not allowing civil-unions, the rights of gays are taken away.

Ethnicity & Humor

Okay, so I've been thinking about this one for a bit. Let me start by posting this video. It's from the musical "Avenue Q" -- sort of Sesame Street for adults (many of the characters are puppets). Unfortunately, I couldn't find a high quality version so I've posted this one. The song is from the soundtrack and an art student drew the pictures:



Okay. Now, I think that the song might have simplified things too much. I mean just admitting you're a racist doesn't make it okay for you to walk around telling jokes that are offensive to people. =But is there some truth in in "if we all could just admit that we are racist a little bit, and everyone stopped being so PC, maybe we could live in harmony"? This is where I want to segue this into local "ethnic" humor in Hawaii.

Here are a some examples.

Rap Reiplinger's "Chanting"
(Rap Reiplinger is a local comedian who passed away in the early 80's. I believe he was really popular in the late 70's and early 80's though his comedy lives on in recordings that have been released posthumously. I grew up with this stuff.)


This one is old stuff by Rap Rapleinger, Andy Bumatai and Mel Cabang from the 80's.


Here's some more recent stuff - Frank DeLima (I think this was originally recorded in the 90's):


So is local humor in Hawaii a form of racism? Are we contributing to prejudice? Or perhaps diffusing it? Are we masking bigotry?

Or is it part of our culture? -Something that grew out of a necessity.
Does this mean we're more "evolved"? - Certainly we wouldn't be able to take our humor to the mainland.
Is any type of ethnic differentiation a type of discrimination?

Frank DeLima discussed some of his thoughts on this in an interview in 2002 (http://www.hawaii411.com/articles/frank.asp). He said that humor in Hawaii has been around since the plantation days - where different people saw each others' idiosyncrasies in themselves and others and were able to laugh at it saying, "That's what kept them from being at each other's throats." At the same time, he notes that there still are some things you can't joke about.

He also discusses three different types of people that tell jokes: the professionals (that tell their jokes in venues where the people that see them pay to see them), "joke tellers" (that share jokes they hear that they think are funny but might be doing it inappropriately - like at work) and the one that hates (one who tells jokes to hurt an ethnic group because they think they are better and they don't like them because they are different). --Hmm. So if you're not doing it out of meanness, is it justified?

Local humor is part of local culture, though one could argue that perhaps as local dynamics change (i.e less "pidgin") then the humor may be less appropriate (reflected nicely on here: http://www.honoluluweekly.com/archives/coverstory%202001/05-30-01%20Humor/05-30-01%20Humor.html). As Hawaii becomes less isolated, more "Americanized," and less "local" perhaps the humor becomes less appropriate. Hawaii is changing.

So the question is - has Hawaii evolved? Or are we behind the times? Or perhaps, it's simply a generational thing.

What do you think?

Asian American Racial Identity

I read the two articles in our reader on Asian American racial identity last night. The first article was by Alvin N. Alvarez and the second was by Corinne Maekawa Kodama, Marylu K. McEwen, Christopher T.H. Liang and Sunny Lee.

The article by Alvarez basically takes Helms' model and applies it to Asian American students. After reading the article, I took a bunch of notes that I will present to you here:

The article seemed only to try to validate that yes, Asian American students have needs relating to their Asian American identities that are important and need consideration. The article touches on some issues that are common (i.e. cultural variables) but fails to take these into account through the remainder of the article. I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bath water but it really was just taking Helms' model as a blanket and throwing it over Asian Americans. This could (arguably) be done for any race as long as the model can be generalized that much. Granted, even putting all Asians together is complicated as is defining exactly what Asian American is. Different groups of Asians will have different challenges because of the in-group diversity.
--Overall, I wasn't a fan of this article - it really was just taking Helms' model and putting it in an Asian American context. In my opinion, this just wasn't sufficient. (Its heart was in the right place, though - arguing for the needs of Asian American students.)

The second Asian American reading (by Kodama et al) was a much more satisfying read. They basically dismantle Chickering and Reisser's vectors and reconstruct their psychosocial model taking into account both the Asian value system from family and community and the Western values from the U.S. They discuss the strong Asian link between identity and purpose, which is closely related to academic achievement. There is also discussion about sort of a "reverse" cycle of moving from interdependence to independence for Asian American students, as well as the complexity of the idea of integrity, which must be defined for the self as well as for the family. Overall, I thought this model did a great job at examining cultural variables that Asian American students typically experience. Now, it's true that not all Asian American students will fit this model. This model is really most applicable to students whose families carry a traditional Asian value system. Asian American students that were raised with typical American values whose parents don't speak their native language at home will likely not fit into this model.
--Two thumbs up from me for this one. The only caution is that it is primarily applicable to students whose family carries an Asian values system.

Long Time No Update

Okay, so I'm a little behind in posting for this week. Between writing my paper and doing readings for class, I haven't managed to post. My mind feels it will explode with so many different thoughts and ideas that readings from the past two weeks have brought to the surface.

Since my last post, I've read Chapter 5 (Racial and Ethnic Identity Development) and Chapter 6 (Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Identity Development) from our Evans, Forney, & Guido DiBrito text. I ended up writing my paper on Cass' model of homosexual identity development (but will hold off discussion on this until we get there in class). I had to actually read through Anthony D'Augelli's and Vivienne Cass' models in our reader in order to actually "get" their theories - what was provided in the text wasn't enough for me to fully grasp them. This disturbed me somewhat and now I'm questioning whether I know enough about Cross, Helms, and Phinney's models of racial and ethnic identity development.

I'm making my way through the course reader as well. The Hardiman/Jackson chapter was great, particularly in the depth and clarity with which they were able to present their model.

For the remainder of our readings this week we can pick two of six articles to read. I don't want to miss out so my goal is to read (or at least skim through) them all.

-I started with Peggy McIntosh' "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." The last sentence is missing from our reader. You can find the full article here: (http://mmcisaac.faculty.asu.edu/emc598ge/Unpacking.html).
She uses her awareness of male privilege to discuss her white privilege - an interesting reflection.
-If you haven't picked your two readings yet, may I highly recommend Judy Rohrer's "Haole Girl: Identity and White Privilege in Hawai'i." It is a great review of available literature up to the time of the article, and she offers a reflection of herself as well. It offers a discussion of the word "haole" itself as well and I found the quotes from the Advertiser's "Haole: Is it a Dirty Word?" that she references to be entirely amusing! You'll have to read it for yourself!
-I skipped over the two Asian identity articles (I'll read those last).
-Cortes' article on intermarriage -> multiracial identity completely spoke to me. I will eventually reflect on this later. But just a quick note - our country is becoming SO diverse, this is something that must become a priority and the concepts she discusses will become increasingly relevant in the coming years.
-I thought Vasti Torres' article on Latino identity was interesting as well. While it's not entirely the same, I'm able to see parallels between the experiences of Latino students and first generation or immigrant students in Hawaii that have a difficult time leaving their family to pursue higher education on the mainland. While Hawaii does have UH, we've still got a low completion rate and a population of students that come from families with a more "collectivist" cultural background. This is something I've witnessed with my friends, and with prospective students I interview locally for Mount Holyoke College: students have a difficult time reconciling leaving their families that have sacrificed so much for them. There may be a pressure to work in the family business, take care of an ailing family member or younger siblings, not to mention that some families feel threatened by the idea of their child leaving the islands to pursue a higher education, "Oh, so you're too good for UH, are you? Well UH was good enough for me. You're going to UH."

Anyhow, that's just an update. I will post more once I make sense of all my scribbles in the margins of these articles.....

P.S. I left my Chickering and Reisser text within reach of my dog. Needless to say, it is now missing part of its spine. :(

Schlossberg's Transition Theory

Schlossberg's theory is on transitions. This theory seems to be the most readily applicable of what we've read so far as it can be easily comprehended and modified for individuals and groups based on their situation. Our book warns us not to create a false dichotomy between "adult" vs "college student" development as theories may be helpful when working for both groups. -This theory is definitely one of them.

In importance or classification of an event (or non-event) as a transition depends on the significance of it to the person who is experiencing it and how they define it.

The main tenants of transition theory are:

-Type, Context and Impact
----->Types (Anticipated, unanticipated, nonevents)
----->Context (context in which the transition is taking place)
----->Impact (the extent to which the transition influences or alters one's life.)
-Transition Process (defined by Schlossberg as "moving in," "moving through," and "moving out.")
-The 4 S's to aid in coping with transition:
----->Situation
----->Self
----->Support
----->Strategies

This theory has been widely researched and applied and seems to have the most glowing "critique" thus far of what we read.

One of the thoughts in my head about transition (especially with the couple of references to athletes in the book) is with Olympic athletes. Imagine preparing your whole life for this big event with all the media, drama, anticipation, excitement and adrenaline. Then perhaps you medal, perhaps you don't...how do you transition back to your "normal" life? This has always fascinated me.

So...perhaps the recent picture of Michael Phelps that's been around in the media these past few days...maybe he's just coping with transition (in an unhealthy way). He's no longer in college, he's made Olympic history, now what?

On Josselson

Josselson's Theory of Identity Development in Women (Just the Gist):

Josselson based her theory on the work of James Marcia who based his work on the 5th stage of Erikson's identity development over the life-span "identity vs. identity diffusion." Marcia saw this identity vs. identity diffusion as an interplay between crisis and commitment, particularly with regard to politics, religion, occupational choice and sexual decisions. Marcia came up with four stages upon which Josselson built her theory: Diffusion, Foreclosure, Moratorium, and Achievement.

Foreclosure - These women as the type that know what they want and pursue it almost with blinders on with their eyes straight on the goal. According to Josselson, these women commit to their parents' standards without question or crisis.
Achievement - These women break from their childhood identities and form their own. According to Josselson, these women "create identity in their own way after considering who they were in the past and who they want to become in the future" (Evans, Forney & Guido-DiBrito, 1998, p. 58). These women experience an identity crisis but are able to commit to who they are.
Moratorium - These women are in a stage where they are in conflict and are searching for their answers. While it is possible to stay in moratorium, it is possible to regress or to move on to identity achievement.
Diffusion - Josseslson found this group to be quite varied, with four subgroups ranging from those lacking healthy psychological functioning to "drifters" that go through life with neither crisis nor commitment.

Our texts warns us to use caution when applying the results of Josselson's study to students today as much of the research was conducted long ago.

These are what I think are the most important things to take away from the reading:
1) Colleges need to have a type of "safety net" to catch students when they fail in making commitments and "caring environment" to help return them back to health.
2) Professionals should reflect on their own development in order to help the students they serve. (I kind of see this as the "developmental" equivalent having a "philosophy" for your line of work - it's another level of awareness.)

A couple questions if anyone feels like answering...
Josselson found that women:
1) see themselves for who they are and not the decisions they make
2) merge connectedness with autonomy
3) at the most developed stage are able to maintain closeness with those she is individuating from (called "rapprochement")

I'm curious what you think about the above in relation to your gender. Agree? Disagree?

A Learning Experience - From the Vector Perspective

Looking back on my college years, one particular event sticks out in my mind as a major developmental experience. I will discuss this experience and reference Chickering and Reisser’s vectors along the way.

In my first year of college, I was involved in different groups and organizations, but my closest friends were five women that lived in my dorm. We were all first year students that bonded quickly and strongly - so much in fact, that I did not experience any homesickness in my first year away. We all decided to move as a group into a dorm together for our sophomore year.

During my sophomore year I noticed that one of my friends was having problems, was withdrawing socially and was partaking in some self-destructive behavior. In retrospect, I should have spoken to my SA (student advisor), HP (hall president), res life director, dean, or someone at the health center – anyone in an “authority” position that could help. Instead, my other concerned friends and I gathered together to talk about her problems. I knew some things about this friend that my other friends did not know and I disclosed them, thinking I was doing the right thing. Suffice it to say that my friends went and talked to her when I wasn’t around, told her everything I had said, and everything blew up in my face. This was a rough lesson in my development of interpersonal competence (vector one) “knowing when and how to communicate what to whom” (Chickering & Reisser, 1993, p. 75).

While I admittedly had done something very wrong, my friends treated me poorly through the whole ordeal. I was ashamed that I could hurt someone I cared about so deeply that I accepted my friends’ behavior towards me thinking that I deserved to be treated that way and saw myself as a “bad friend.” Instead of realizing I was a good person that had behaved badly, I saw myself as a bad person which Peterson, Schwartz, and Seligman (1981 as cited in Chickering & Reisser, 1993) noted as related to symptoms of depression. While I continued to go to class and stay involved in extracurricular activities, I was far less social and felt several negative emotions related to depression (sadness, worthlessness and an expectation of punishment) and a few physical problems as well (loss of appetite and lethargy).

With time, I became aware of both my feelings and my faulty logic. Having read somewhere that exercise increases endorphins, I started going to the gym. I also realized that I had other friends outside this close-knit circle of friends that cared about me and began to spend increasing amounts of time with them. Without the obligations I’d had to my “clique,” I spent more time on my studies, formed study groups with classmates and spent more time practicing my violin. This amalgam of experiences helped me improve my intellectual, physical and manual competence (vector one) and was also a lesson in managing my emotions (vector two) of depression and guilt.

It wasn’t until more time had passed that I realized the “clique” of friends I was part of wasn’t a healthy relationship. In my college experience up until that point, I had managed to move from dependence to autonomy from my parents (vector three), but instead of moving towards interdependence, I instead became dependent (codependent?) on this group of friends. They became my family and we clung to each other in a needy way. Some of my friends hadn’t developed friendships outside the group, and several of them not only planned their schedules around each other, but also registered for the same classes. Reading this passage from Chickering and Reisser’s fourth vector reminded me of this experience:

“Schedules are arranged to permit maximum closeness. Other friends fade into the background. Sometimes classes and homework go by the wayside. Students may also fuse with a group, spend all their time hanging out together, and even take on characteristics of the group, forgetting that they exist as separate beings.” (p. 162)

It was in my break from this group that I was able to truly move from dependence to autonomy, (the first step in vector three) and begin my journey of developing healthy intimate friendships (vector four).

While I knew there was nothing I could do to reverse my past wrongdoings, I knew I could control my future actions. Half way through my sophomore year, the girl who was my first-year roommate (and very close friend) returned to campus after a semester away. We were lucky – there was an open room that we could both move into. While the room was in the same dorm as my former “clique” I was at least on a different floor. I didn’t fill her in on what had happened with our friends, just that I was spending more of my time on my studies and on extracurricular activities. I decided that instead of trying to cling tightly to her friendship and fill her head with negative stories and speak ill of my former friends (who were still her friends), I would just let things be. For me, I think this marked the beginning of establishing my own value system and it was definitely the first situation where I made a conscious effort to uphold a value that I had established for myself. I see this as related to Chickering & Reisser’s seventh vector, developing integrity, where I was moving away from acting in my own self-interests towards more socially aware and responsible behavior.

While this experience was painful to deal with, I experienced more growth from it than had it not happened. It helped me become a better, more honest, and trustworthy friend, and helped me define and uphold my ideals of friendship. By my senior year, I had many good friends and acquaintances, as well as a handful of very close friends. We did not feel the need to live on the same floor (or even in the same dorm) and were involved in our own things – different extracurricular activities, work, and different academic studies. Instead of living, sleeping, eating, breathing and spending every waking hour possible together, we all did our own thing but made time for and shared our lives with each other. In the context of my undergraduate college experience, I was able to move to an interdependent relationship with my friends (vector three) and was able to balance my time among myself, my friends, and my romantic relationship (vector four).

To end this exercise, I want to emphasize that the development continues. Just because one touches on several of Chickering and Reisser’s vectors in college doesn’t mean they have developed “competence” in all those vectors in all aspects of life. For example, being able to manage one type of emotion does not necessary mean one can manage all emotions, and just because one is able to develop healthy intimate friendships doesn’t mean one is able to develop healthy intimate romantic relationships. I chose to share this experience because while it was only one of many experiences I had in college (I haven’t even talked about identity yet!), but it provided me the broadest context on which to view my development from the vector perspective.

Chickering & Reisser's Vectors: Initial Thoughts

Whew! So I just finished reading about all the vectors last night but I wanted to post something about the readings before class. As I mentioned in my post after reading Ch. 1, I made a list of what I saw as my "biggest" college developmental gains, experiences and challenges, as well as my thoughts about my undergraduate college's role in supporting student development and continued reading Ch. 2-8 with this in mind. I will post these thoughts in forthcoming blog (probably tomorrow), but right now I want to give my overall view of Chickering & Reisser's vectors.

1) The vectors were extremely general with great overlap. I often felt that as I read through the book, the exact same thing had been mentioned when discussing a previous vector. I had many moments of "Didn't I just read this?" Granted, many of the vectors are interrelated and complex and lines must be drawn somewhere to define the vectors. My reason for saying the vectors were general and had great overlap was that I was reading through the chapters with my college experiences in mind and one particular experience I had was almost (but not quite) an all-vector encompassing experience. -Is this possible? Is this right? (I promise to clarify this in a future blog).

2) The actual "process" of movement among, within, and between vectors isn't discussed. The authors go through (at great length) examples that occur within vectors, nothing was carried through. I think that in addition to reading this book that has information and experiences split into vectors, it might be interesting to "follow" a single student's college experience to see what the interplay is between the vectors - what vectors are experienced when and how.

3) Role of college environment (institution type, etc.) - The more I thought about the vectors and my experience, the more I thought about how students' experiences may differ depending on the type of institution they attended. For example, I see my college as fostering development and identity exploration and perhaps not quite as focused on helping us find a job after college whereas, an institution like Johnson & Wales (self-proclaimed as “America’s Career University”) aren’t as focused on student development as they are on internships and job-linking. Stan and I discussed this – what’s better, knowing yourself and not having a job, or having a job and not knowing who you are? (Personally, I think it’s all relative. I’d like to think that one who has a strong sense of self and direction will be capable of finding meaningful employment and that one who is gainfully employed will be able to continue down their path of self-discovery.)

4) College as a context. I think it’s important to remember that college is a context for development. My interpretation of these vectors is that college is kind of the “first-pass” through at least some of the vectors. Let me explain. I think many people have some of the building blocks for these vectors before college. Then they go to college where they face a new experience and must adjust to change in many ways and on many levels. Students come out of high school and their relationships with friends and families (Chickering and Reisser mention the role of the parents several times) with preconceived notions and ideas of who they are and what they value. In college, they break these down and are able to reconstruct and re-build in several areas. However, I also think students will exit college and enter the “real world” which will once again give them cause for re-evaluation and re-examination. After all, though one may be more developed as a result of college, aren't their college experiences still preconceived notions but just now based on a new experience? Adjusting to change – whether it is moving to a new city, a new relationship, a new job, or some type of crisis may all incite further deconstruction, further rebuilding, and further growth. This led me to thoughts such as, “Must it be college?” What if someone graduates from high school, enlists in the military and goes off to bootcamp? I’m sure the experience is different from college, but I don’t think it can be denied that people will grow (in one way or another) from their experience in the military.

5) I’ll buy it. While I find the vectors to be almost too general in some aspects, I think it serves a good purpose and I can see its utility and how application of this knowledge by colleges and universities can help to promote healthy and holistic development. In fact, I think this is the way Chickering and Reisser’s vectors were intended to be used. I do not think they wanted their model to be the DSM-IV of college student development upon which you are to “diagnose” development on a scale. I think they wanted it to serve as a guide for institutions and administrators to use and show examples of how complex student development is, and that there is something that can be done to guide students down their own developmental pathways. In this aspect, I think it is and can be quite effective.

Chickering & Reisser, Ch. 1 --- Why?

So, Stan and I got to chatting about our reading and we were thinking about exactly why DrM wanted us to focus on Ch. 1 so much. It was a very dense read with so much going on – a ton of history, different theories and theorists – it was difficult to digest. Many of the theories are so similar and since they often build upon one another, they kind of blend together. I think there’s even a blend of cognitive and psychosocial definitions as well (i.e. cognitive isn’t ONLY cognitive and psychosocial can be inclusive of cognition). I think really, the importance of Ch. 1 is that it provides the foundation, the framework, and the context upon which they build their vectors.

I thought the preface of the book was excellent. They told you exactly where they were coming from, what they believed, and what the goal of their theory was and wasn’t. I’m glad they stressed that there is no right model for every student – that you cannot apply every aspect of every theory to every student. On a larger level, they also said “the strength of higher education lies in its wide-ranging institutional diversity” (p. xvi-xxvii) that there is not a goal to prescribe one model for all institutions as the be-all, end-all, and cure-all.

I spent way too much time reading Ch. 1 because my brain has a tendency to wander through thoughts and I couldn’t help thinking of my undergraduate college experience at Mount Holyoke College and think about the ways MHC did and didn’t foster different types of development – the ways I found it superior, and the areas that could have been improved. After reading Ch. 1, I made a list of what I felt were my greatest developmental challenges, gains and experiences in each year of college. Hopefully I’ll be able to expand on this in the context of different theories as I go through this semester.

Reflection: Inauguration and Evans Ch 1-2 Reading

Okay, so this might be a stretch from student development theory, but Obama’s inauguration speech got me thinking about the parallels between creating engaged college students and creating responsible citizens of our nation. Perhaps questions such as “How do you motivate a country?” are not so different from questions like “How do you increase student involvement?” Perhaps their answers can be found using similar means.

When talking with friends and hearing interviews on the radio (regarding Obama’s election and inauguration), I consistently hear people saying things like, “I feel proud to be an American” - that they feel a part of something. How did so many people come to feel part of something they hadn’t been part of for years? How did you come to this sense of pride? Before I discuss some reasons why I think many people now feel this way, I want to pose these questions: Why did we not feel this way before? Why were we not proud to be Americans?

I think there may be several answers to this question, but I will point to the administration at the time. Our nation’s leaders were making decisions and turning those decisions into actions that we found to be not only disgraceful, but at times, embarrassing. Whether we point to our absence at U.N. meetings, our role in the war abroad, the grammatically incorrect sentences uttered by our president, or the spoon-fed “terror,” we were embarrassed. It took time for all of this to sink in because it was fun to mock our president, and the scare tactics worked for awhile - but we did wake up. Unfortunately, as a nation, we were helpless. What could we do? On a national level, we were unchallenged after years of being herded – like sheep – by our nation’s leaders.

So how exactly did we rediscover this lost pride in our country? When I listened to Obama’s inauguration speech, I think what struck me most was that he challenged us and charged us with the notion that we, too, are responsible for this country. We were given a role, we were told that we were needed, that we matter. My friends have talked about actually feeling “the world’s eyes upon us.” We are beginning to take back our nation again as we feel a sense of hope in our nation world-wide. Other countries believe in us – now we can once again believe in ourselves.

Here, I am comparing and contrasting the style of our previous administration to Obama’s style (as seen thus far through the election and inauguration) in the terms of the student developmental theories put forth by Nevitt Sanford and Nancy Schlossberg. Sanford theorized that college students needed to have a combination of support and challenge to assist them in their growth and development. As a nation, I don’t think we’ve felt any type of support or challenge over the past 8 years, mainly because we didn’t feel that we were part of anything. Our voices weren’t heard, and when they were heard, they did not matter. This left us feeling powerless, lacking any type of power, and perhaps led to our apathy on a national level. Obama has given us a challenge of responsibility. Do we know yet how to fully engage in this responsibility? Does the new administration have ideas on how they will support us yet? I do not know the answers to these questions, but I think there is a difference because a seed of mattering and challenge has been planted – that we do have a role to play.

We are a nation in transition: from one president to another, from one administration to another, from one set of ideals to another. Schlossberg’s theory of marginality and mattering posits that marginality is a feeling of uneasiness that we do not fit in (usually at the point of transition) and mattering, a sense of belonging, helps us move out of marginality and helps us transition in a healthy way. Schlossberg’s aspects of mattering include: attention, importance, dependence, appreciation, and ego extension. While I am neither saying that our marginality is entirely the fault of the previous administration, nor am I saying that Obama has or will provide for us all these aspects of mattering, I argue that many people did feel marginalized under our previous administration. I also think that the message Obama is sending out is one that is inclusive, telling us that we are part of something, that we are indeed a “we,” and may be helping to return our collective identity as a nation and perhaps even our individual identities as American citizens.

I don’t know if the student developmental theories put forth by Sanford and Schlossberg can necessarily be prescribed as a national panacea to citizens full of mixed emotions – hope for change coupled with the vulnerability of fear that we cannot make this happen, skepticism, cynicism, and doubt – but I think it’s a good place to start. It is easy to be a skeptical citizen. It is easy to play the role of the sheep and point the blame at the shepherd when we aren’t where we should be. It is more difficult to take on the challenge and be willing to face a collective failure. It is my hope that this new administration will enable us to become more engaged through a combination of support and challenge and with a constant and consistent inspirational message that we matter and we have a responsibility to our society.

-Perhaps the steps towards engaging a nation aren't so different from the steps toward engaging a student body.