Running Head: THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 1

Theory to Practice: Transitions

Loyola University Chicago

Alex LLanso
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 2

THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS

College is all about transitions. In my time in college and grad school, my experience has

been made (or not) due to transitions. I moved across the country to go to school in Seattle, then

transferred back to Massachusetts. Now I’ve moved to Chicago to attend grad school and work

specifically with international students. When beginning to reflect on how to best apply theory to

future practice, I felt thinking about transitions would be relevant wherever I ultimately end up

working in higher education. Through examining the challenge of transition, considering various

student development theories, and practically applying them to various student groups a better

understanding of student development theory and its importance to practice can be gained.

When thinking about transitions it is important to understand why they are so challenging

for students. When going to college, transferring or coming to a new country to go to college,

students are forced to enter a new environment. This new environment comes with a new culture,

new people, new norms and new academic expectations. With first-year students specifically,

this is often the first time that they are leaving home if they are living on campus. In addition to

this, first-year international students have this adjustment doubled by being in a new

environment that is also in a new country. While transfer students have experience at college, a

high percentage of them are transferring from a two year-college to a four-year college.

Regardless of where students are transferring from, they are being placed into a new

environment that they are not familiar with. This lack of familiarity with nearly the whole

environment can lead to great challenges. If students are not supported correctly during this

adjustment period, then they may struggle socially, academically and/or psychologically which

can lead to future problems and the possibility of not matriculating at the university. As student
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 3

affairs professionals, we need to support all students and the best way to do that is understanding

the process of this adjustment, and finding ways to support students in the ways that they need.

The Theory

While considering practical interventions for international students, transfer students and

first-year students is important, they need to be understood from a lens of theory. To do this,

different theories need to be considered, and then synthesized in the lens of self-authorship to

develop a personal philosophy on student affairs and transition.

Schlossberg’s Transition Theory

When thinking of transitions, the first thing to consider is Schlossberg’s (2006) transition

theory. This theory first discusses transition and then discusses four major factors that play into

an individual’s ability to deal with transition. When speaking on transition in Patton, Renn,

Guido and Quaye’s (2016) book Student Development in College, Schlossberg (2006) states that,

“transition may lead to growth, but decline is also a possible outcome” (as cited in Patton, Renn,

Guido and Quaye, 2016 p. 38). This possibility of uncertain outcomes for students in transition

speaks to the importance of supporting students in times of transition. To do this, Schlossberg

(2006) suggests four major factors, which are, situation, self, support ant strategies. (as cited in

Patton, Renn, Guido and Quaye, 2016) The situation takes into consideration what the

environment of the transition is. This can include a variety of different factors but ultimately

allows students to better understand their new environment and how it is composed. The next

factor to consider is the self, which considers the student in relation to their situation. Next,

support considers what resources are available to the student. This largely is where student

affairs professionals come in and these support systems can help play into how the other factors

are dealt with and understood. The final factor, strategies, is the plan that is developed to deal
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 4

with the challenges that transition. When considering these four factors, they can be understood

as individual things that all intertwine to make up the complexity that is dealing with transition.

While the support stage is its own factor, it greatly plays into the understanding of the situation

and self, as well as the strategies developed. Alternatively, the self is at the center of the issue

and will always impact the other factors considered.

Schlossberg’s (2006) theory holds great value, but is not without flaw. Giving

prescriptive factors or stages puts students and their way of dealing with transition into a box of

how their problems are dealt with. While Schlossberg (2006) does an admirable job of making

the factors broad, they still fail to take into consideration the range of all students. Additionally,

the theories lack of intentional consideration for diversity limits the theories’ ultimate scope.

Considering these limitations, Schlossberg (2006) is worth using as a piece of self-authorship,

but cannot be the whole story when applying theory to practice.

Chickering’s Seven Vectors

Chickering and Reisser (1993) looked more specifically at student development in

general and developed seven vectors in which students move through while developing in

college. The first vector is developing competence, where students learn how to navigate the

structures of a given environment. This leads to the process of learning how to manage emotions

in a productive way where it can be challenged towards a goal, rather than halting progress. After

learning how to manage emotions students then move through autonomy towards

interdependence, where they learn to function on their own, as well as within groups. This is

followed by the development of mature interpersonal relationships. After students learn to

develop these relationships they begin to establish their own identity which is followed by the

development of purpose. Finally, students learn to develop integrity which is characterized.

(Chickering and Reisser, 1993) When considering these seven vectors, Chickering and Reisser

(1993) provides a clear step-by-step matrix in which students develop during their time at

college. Each of the steps holds importance and represents key developmental steps that students

should undergo while in college. They also provide a global view of student development and the

needs of students.

The challenge with the seven vectors, however, is that it assumes linear development.

This is problematic in two ways. The first, is that not all students will experience development in

order. Looking at the vectors, it is reasonable to assume that students may establish identity

before developing mature interpersonal relationships. The other assumption is that when

assuming linear development, it assumes that there is one track. For example, international

students experience two types of development and growth at the same time. They adjust to a new

academic and social setting that is a university, but also must go through the acculturation

process. It is possible that they may be at different vectors for these two different situations that

they are navigating. Like Schlossberg (2006), alone, Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) theory of

development is not able to stand alone when developing ways to practically help students

struggling with transitions.

Sanford’s Challenge and Support

The final large theory that I will cover before diving into the practical implications on

specific student groups is Sanford’s (1962) theory of challenge and support which is presented

by Patton et al. This theory has two main components. The first considers the cycles of

differentiation and integration, which is characterized by the process a student goes through

when developing their identity as a unique individual, as well as their identity within groups.

(Sanford, 1962) The second component of Sanford’s (1962) theory is the balance of challenge
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 6

and support. This is the difficult situation that many student affairs professionals are put in,

where they must find a way to balance supporting a student enough when they are struggling,

while also finding constructive ways to challenge them to support themselves.

The largest challenge with Sanford’s (1962) research is how broad it is. Understanding

identity and challenge/support are two very worthwhile developmental factors, but the general

lack of direction provided in his research leads to a larger gray area regarding how it can be

applied practically. In addition to this, the research is relatively outdated and did not consider a

diverse sample size, meaning its applications can also be more limited.

Self-Authorship

After considering these three main theories, the final challenge before looking more

specifically at individual student groups is synthesizing these three theories, by using self-

authorship. Theory is great and can be applied individually, but as discussed, every theory comes

with inherent limitations. In addition to this, regurgitating theories when thinking of specific

situations, regurgitating specific theories or steps within theories is impractical. Instead, a hybrid

should be generated that can be applied to various situations. In addition to this, when examining

specific situations, specific research on those situations can be implemented into this general

frame of self-authorship.

Marcia Baxter Magolda (1998) has done extensive research on this topic and provides a

fantastic road-map in striving towards self-authorship. When examining the development of self-

authorship in young adults, she highlights some themes that were commonly found in her

research. One of the key ones discussed was the idea of trusting yourself. (Baxter Magolda,

1998). This is an incredibly important first step towards self-authorship. As a future professional,

students will look to me for guidance and support. Being confident in decisions and directions
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 7

taken is a must. This is then complimented by acting on your environment effectively, which is

characterized by an “ability to establish and to maintain one’s values, beliefs and priorities,

combined with the ability to interpret the realities of the external environment” (Baxter Magolda,

1998, p. 150). Without understanding your environment, it is not possible to effectively make a

difference on the campus and the students and staff who make it up. The final key component is

maintaining your own identity. (Baxter Magolda, 1998) Without a keen understanding of your

own identity and being authentic to who you are, it is not possible to develop a way of thought

that is true to your values and allows you to help others.

Considering these key components, Sanford (1962), Chickering and Reisser (1993) and

Schlossberg (2006) can be effectively intertwined in a way that allows for a more holistic look at

student development and applied to various situations. Generally, I feel that Sanford’s (1962)

idea of challenge and support is foundational to the way I will suggest addressing different

challenges students face. Ultimately, as professionals we want to help students help themselves.

While this is the goal, knowing when to challenge a student and when to give support is

instrumental to any interaction. I then suggest considering Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) seven

vectors, with each individual vector being understood in the context of Schlossberg (2006).

While regurgitating developmental stages in future practice is unrealistic, understanding that

different developmental stages happen in a context of transition and they require an

understanding of the situation and self while being supported to develop strategies to complete

the development allows for a more directed path through these vectors, while supporting students

in a more directed way through each stage. While the combination of these theories provides a

solid framework to consider the practical implications of applying them to various student
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 8

groups, it is also important to recognize that it is incomplete and needs to be supplemented by

additional research that provides a more informative when considering specific populations.

Practice

Before discussing transfer students, international students and first-year students it is

important to recognize the limitations of thinking about how theory can be applied to practice.

Often, theory paints large brush strokes over a complete group. Every student needs to be the

individual that they are. An international student from Canada is going to have drastically

different needs than an international student form India. A first-year student who is a commuter

is going to need different support than a first-year student who moved from across the country to

attend a college. A transfer student form a community college has different needs than a transfer

student from a residential four-year college does. Ultimately, this practical thought is merely

meant to guide future practice, not serve as a prescription for working with specific student

groups.

International Students

As discussed previously, working with international students can pose many challenges.

They must transition not only to a new university but also must adjust to living in a new country.

Currently, I work as the Assistant Resident Director in the International House at Loyola. The

combination of Schlossberg (2006) and Chickering and Reisser (1993) allows for these two

different adjustments to happen concurrently. Working at a university, there can be international

students from all over the world, but a large majority of these students are coming from Asia due

to the region’s large economic growth. When working with Asian students specifically many

face cultural expectations when arriving to the US due to their ethnicity. Strayhorn (2014)

considered the notion of the “model minority” in the lives of gay Korean men. The idea of the
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 9

model minority is centered around the idea that those with Asian descent are seen as the “good”

minority because it is expected that they are smart, hard-working and are able to fall in line with

traditional cultural values while finding success. This notion is challenged by the participants in

Strayhorn’s study since being gay does not always fit into what is culturally expected. Strayhorn

(2014) suggests that universities “provide workshops that educate all students” (Strayhorn, 2014

p. 593) on the topic of anti-gay or anti-Asian racism. This suggestion to create interventions for

all students points to practice, but what specific workshops could be developed?

Through considering the model minority, as well as other theories discussed thus far in

this paper, I feel that the first step in creating effective workshops is having a competent staff

that knows how to work with students from all backgrounds and understands how to challenge

pre-conceived notions such as the model minority. Before student interventions can be made,

staff needs to know how to address students who are struggling due to unrealistic cultural

expectations, as well as how to challenge those students who are contributing to these

expectations. In addition to this, staff themselves need to be aware of this and be trained to

understand this problem and how to not continue to contribute to it. Once this is done, then

interventions can be developed to help students in their development.

The practical workshops that I would suggest would be something like a dialogue on race

where it is continuous programing where students can discuss identity and their development. By

having a trained facilitator present, the conversation can be directed each week to be centered

around different vectors (in a non-direct way) while considering Schlossberg’s (2006)

transitional model to guide the conversation within these vectors. In addition to this, students will

be able to work out ways in which they can challenge themselves while also receiving support

within the group that they are growing with. While this dialogue should be centered on identity
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 10

development the facilitator can lead conversations to help introduce topics that diverse students,

including international students are facing. When considering this, discussion can be had on how

to get support when struggling, but also how to challenge yourself when facing adversity in this

time of transition.

First-Year Students

First year students are the group on campus that arguably receives the most support. The

transition to college in general is incredibly difficult, and through providing good first-year

support, retention rates increase, which incentivizes universities to specifically cater to the needs

of first year students. The problem with this however, is that the needs of first-year students can

vary greatly. Some students may be coming from a boarding school or have done dual-

enrollment so they are used to a college atmosphere. Others may be first-generation college

students who have little if any exposure to living away from home or the academic environment

of a college campus. For the purpose of thinking of how to apply student development theory to

first-year students struggling with transition I will look at two specific practical implications and

their validity when trying to support and challenge students who are in need of some guidance

during their first year.

The first practical application of theory is intertwining the use of spiritual development

into student development theory as a whole, and providing first-year students with the

opportunity to attend a retreat. Love (2002) wrote about the desire for spiritual development that

many college students have. He begins with differentiating religion from spirituality, which is

important since many universities are secular. While religious institutions can lean heavily on

retreats for this development, many secular institutions do not rely on a similar model. Love

(2002) states, that since desire for spiritual growth exists across people, not religions, that
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 11

professionals need to work on ways to work with students on this specific topic. (Love, 2002).

One way to do this is by creating a retreat. Love (2002) makes the key recognition that when

developing spiritual programing that it is important to “differentiate spiritual development from

religious practice” (Love, 2002 p. 116). This allows students who do not identity as religious but

desire to grow spiritually to feel welcome to the retreat and the environment it takes place in.

When developing a retreat, it is a perfect opportunity to enact Sanford’s (1962) theory of

challenge and support. For the bulk of the retreat, students are supported. They can meet new

people, share authentic conversation and reflect on their lives. As the retreat grows to a close, it

provides the leaders and directors of the retreat with the opportunity to leave the retreatants with

a challenge. One retreat that I attended in college did this very simply with the final theme of

“live the fourth.” The director of the retreat got up and spoke to the group and challenged us all

to try and live every day, like the day after a retreat; to live as a more authentic and caring

version of ourselves. I would suggest that all retreats, particularly first-year retreats adopt this

rallying cry to not only provide a weekend of support for students, but to also leave them with

direction, a challenge and a goal.

In addition to utilizing spiritual growth, I also feel that another trend that exists in the first

year that can be challenged through the utilization of student development theory is breaking

down masculine expectations that contribute to the “bro-culture.” Edwards and Jones (2009)

studied the idea of “putting your man face on”, a phenomenon where men feel a necessity to act

as a hyper masculine version of themselves to feel a sense of belonging. Participants reported

that they experienced “expectations included being competitive, in control of emotions or

unemotional, aggressive, responsible, the breadwinner, in a position of authority, rational, strong,

successful, tough, and breaking the rules” (Edwards and Jones, 2009 p. 215). These reports show
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 12

the rigid expectations that are put onto men. When transitioning, Chickering and Reisser (1993)

and Schlossberg (2006) both allude to the importance of a keen understanding of the self, or

identity. The “man face” that Edwards and Jones (2009) discuss, serves as a very rigid barrier

when attempting to develop a sense of identity. As student affairs professionals, we must

challenge this notion through intentional programing and modeling of this behavior. This is

something that I feel begins at the staff level. By having male role models who are authentic with

students, they serve as a reminder that it is okay to be emotional or non-aggressive. In addition to

this, I feel it is also important to have peers who model these behaviors. A practical solution to

the problem of the “man face” would be to also involve students in the process. By allowing

upper-classmen males to serve as small group leaders, first-year males will be able to see that it

is possible to thrive in this environment by being an authentic version of yourself. I would

suggest developing small groups that do a mix of intentional programing, as well as small group

dialogue. This will help first-year males learn that they don’t need to always have on the “man

face” and it will also help connect them with peers. In a time of transition, as Chickering and

Reisser (1993) suggests, establishing strong interpersonal relationships is incredibly important

and a model of programing and small group dialogue based on being authentic can help ease

student transition, as well as lead to greater authenticity on campus.

Transfer Students

The challenge with transfer students is that they come from many different backgrounds

and have many different needs. Some are coming from a four-year college where they lived on

campus and simply need to adjust to a new campus culture and others were at community

colleges where they may have lived in an apartment or at home. The challenging thing in

addition to this, is that transfer students often have similar needs to first-year students. They may
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 13

need a campus map, or don’t understand how the academic structure of the university works, yet

they also have in one way or another, “done” college before. Considering these challenges, I

think that transfer students need more targeted interventions to help their transition process, in

order to best fit their needs, while also learning what help they need, and what they don’t. From

an administrative standpoint, one practical application is that transfer students should not all be

placed in the same housing together. While pairing transfer students in roommate pairs may be

advantageous, ultimately, grouping large amounts of transfer students together only makes the

transition process more difficult. As Chickering and Reisser (1993) and Schlossberg (2006)

discuss, the first thing that must happen upon entering a new environment is understanding the

situation, and developing competence. By placing transfer students with non-transfer students,

they automatically have a resource that they can reach out to understand the new campus and

develop the competency to succeed on the new campus. In addition to this, the creation of a

program that pairs transfer students with non-transfer students in an advisor/buddy role is a good

practice. Many universities do this for international students, to help their transition to the

campus, but I would advise the use of this for transfer students as well. By providing transfer

students with the right access to resources, they are afforded the resources to understand their

new situation, while also not feeling like they are being overly supported since they already have

previous experience at the college level.

In addition to providing transfer students with this access, I believe the theoretical

framework that is most valuable for helping ease their transition is working with these students

on self-authorship. As discussed previously, one of the largest challenges that transfer students

face is learning their new environment and understanding how they fit into it. Through utilizing

self-authorship when working with transfer students, better programs and interventions can be
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 14

created. Baxter Magolda (2008) examined what she stated are the three elements of self-

authorship. She says the three key elements are trusting the internal voice, building an internal

foundation and securing internal commitments. (Baxter Magolda, 2008) When taking these into

consideration, the self is incredibly important and having a strong understanding of identity plays

an integral role in developing self-authorship. While these elements could, and often do happen

organically, a practical intervention that student affairs professionals could make is the creation

of a required seminar that students take in their first semester after transferring. Many colleges

require first-year students to take a seminar course to ease their transition, but transfer students

are often exempt from this due to differences of need and less demand. Considering this, I feel it

would be fitting to develop a class for transfer students to learn about their new environment, and

reflect on how they fit into it. By putting in this intentional work, the organic process or

transitioning to a new college can be sped up, and lead to greater student success earlier, which is

incredibly important for transfer students since their time at the university is more limited than

those who are there for four or more years.

The Challenge

Meeting the needs of first-year students, international students and transfer students is a

daunting task. However, through the consideration of various theoretical frameworks, direction

can be gained on how to better create interventions to ease the transition process. This transition

process is something that all students go through and struggle with. In addition to this, all student

affairs professionals do this as well. A year from now, I will transition from being a graduate

student and Assistant Resident director, to a student affairs professional. I do not know what my

future role will entail and what populations my position will be targeting. However, ultimately

every student affairs professional should be ready to help any student. This is where a keen
THEORY TO PRACTICE: TRANSITIONS 15

understanding of theory and its applications are important. In this paper, I examined many

different theories, both broad and specific. Through this, I could suggest some practical

interventions that can be made for different groups of students. These suggestions and my

understanding of student development theory provide me with a solid foundation to continue to

build my own self-authorship and continue to grow as a person and as a student affairs

professional. This will be a challenge, but continuing to develop myself and my personal

philosophy on helping students is essential to being an effective leader on college campuses.

References

Baxter Magolda, M. (1998). Developing Self-Authorship in Young Adult Life. Journal of

College Student Development, 39(2), 143-156.

Baxter Magolda, M. (2008). Three Elements of Self-Authorship. Journal of College

Student Development, 49(4), 269-284. doi:10.1353/csd.0.0016

Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993) The seven vectors. Education and Identity (2nd Ed pp.

34-52). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

Edwards, K. E., & Jones, S. R. (2009). “Putting My Man Face On”: A Grounded Theory of

College Men’s Gender Identity Development. Journal of College Student Development,

50(2), 210-228. doi:10.1353/csd.0.0063

Love, P. G. (2002) Comparing a spiritual development and cognitive development. Journal of

College Student Development, 43, 356-373.

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Q. (2016). Student Development in College: Theory,

Research, and Practice, 3rd Edition. John Wiley & Sons

Strayhorn, T. L. (2014). Beyond the Model Minority Myth: Interrogating the Lived Experiences

of Korean American Gay Men in College. Journal of College Student Development,

55(6), 586-594. doi:10.1353/csd.2014.0059