Michelleajemian.weebly.com



Running head: CEDRIC AND FRANK, THEORY TO PRACTICE

From Theory to Practice:

The story of Cedric and Frank

Michelle Ajemian

College Student Learning and Development, E98.2069.001

Professor Hubbard

May 11, 2009

College is reasoned to be a time where students are able to explore and identify who they were, who they are and who they want to be all within their time in a higher education institution. Students are at varying levels in their cognitive and identity development depending on their experiences, attitudes and insights. Some students actively partake in wanting to find out who they are and who they want to be, others are indifferent to the process and only see learning occurring in the classroom, and some do not feel the need to explore the complex issues faced with cognitive and identity development. Cognitive and identity development theories exist for student affairs practitioners to help them guide their practice and to ultimately have learning be at the forefront of their mission while working with students. The question is, do student affairs practitioners put these theories into practice to inform their work or are the theories sitting on a bookshelf collecting dust and not being put to use within the confines of their job description? Theories can be overwhelming in the sense that they are complex and intricate, but at the root of each and every theory is getting to know students on a contextual and personal level. Getting to know the student involves asking them about their feelings, opinions and thoughts regarding complex issues like the failing economy and how it will affect their life or how they deal with hard decisions like going against their parents wishes by changing their major. At the root of all the theories is conversation and interacting with the students in a positive and productive manner to gain a sense of where they were, where they are and where they want to go. Student affairs practitioner cannot assume a student to be in a certain context, stage or level without asking vital questions.

Questions regarding cognitive and identity development cannot be asked to each and every student, thus interventions and programs need to be enacted for students to ask these questions of themselves. Each theory is not going to be relevant to every student with where they are in their development, but student affairs practitioners need to provide these activities, interventions, programs and organizations so students can actively pursue themselves to be active citizens, individuals and students at a higher education institution. Engaging theory to practice is an important component for a student affairs practitioner to enact in their everyday occurrences with students. Putting theory to practice, this assignment involved interviewing a student in the midst of obtaining a degree from a higher education institution and determining their development in regards to King and Kitchener’s reflective judgment model and Kohlberg’s theory on moral reasoning. In addition, A Hope in the Unseen by Ron Suskind was examined and the main character, Cedric, analyzed using Chickering’s Vectors of Identity Development, as well as special consideration given to his spiritual identity development. Programs and interventions were constructed to address the needs of the students involved in the hopes of bringing about another level of development in various areas. Critiques of the various theories and assumptions and biases will also be analyzed to provide further insight.

Summary of Interview

It was a cloudy, rainy day in early April when Frank agreed to be interviewed to participate in a research project for New York University’s College Student Learning and Development Master’s level course. Wearing a tight mint green t-shirt, black zip up jacket and skinny jeans, Frank looked obviously comfortable with the idea of sharing his opinions and feelings about particular subjects, as well as talk about his experience at his institution thus far. A very animated talker, Frank often used his hands to describe things he was feeling or responses to questions and often looked into the distance and did not make eye contact when he was processing a difficult question (personal communication, April 3, 2009).

Frank is in his second year at Pratt Institute, an art and design school in Brooklyn, New York and is studying illustration. Knowing that he wanted to be an artist from a very young age, his experience at Pratt Institute has been both an exploration and a reconfirmation of his love and passion for illustration. At Pratt Institute, first year students have to go through a series of classes called Foundations, before they focus on their major coursework. Going through Foundations and taking diverse classes, made Frank question his major. After talking to fellow students and friends, he became re-energized about his major and line of work. Frank enjoys the fact that illustration combines art and research and hopes to one day have a large amount of clientele to design for. During his time at Pratt Institute, Frank hopes to grow as an artist and as a person throughout his involvement not only in the classroom, but in New York City as well (personal communication, April 3, 2009).

Originally from Salem, Massachusetts Frank moved to a small suburb in Massachusetts when he was young and missed the diversity that was present in Salem. Diversity and getting out of his comfort zone were some of the reasons why Frank moved to New York City to pursue his art degree rather than staying close to home. It is evident that Frank values his friendships and receives a lot of support and guidance through his friendships. Frank came to New York City with two other friends from high school and they initially provided that support for him, but since then they have branched out and made their own connections on campus. Not being considered an overly involved student, Frank is a student employment worker in the Student Activities Office and hosts his own radio show at Pratt Institute with one of his friends. Frank likes to take advantage of the lectures that are relevant to his identity including talks about communication design and queer issues. Other than that, Frank likes to explore and become involved with different aspects of New York City, like going to art galleries openings in Chelsea or various fashion shows that are occurring in the city. Having a grasp of the New York City culture and happenings is very important to Frank, as he wants to create those connections within the art world (personal communication, April 3, 2009).

Analysis of Interview

After speaking with Frank and asking him preliminary questions to get to know him on an introductory level, the second part of the interview focused on questions that would give insight into where Frank stood developmentally in regards to King and Kitchener’s theory of Reflective Judgment and Kohlberg’s theory of Moral Reasoning. A summary of the theories will be provided, as well as analysis of where Frank is developmentally with both of these theories, in regards to how he answered the specific questions.

King and Kitchener’s Theory of Reflective Judgment

What should the country do to help with the economic crisis that is crippling the nation here and abroad? Is it possible for racial, ethic and religious discrimination to be eliminated? Should medical care be a right or a privilege in the United States? The questions presented above are ones that require extensive critical insight and would never produce a “black or white” answer, for if there were such a decisive solution available then these debilitating issues in our society would be solved. The examples given requires students to critically analyze their stance on a particular issue, as well as discuss difficult questions that may not have what is considered to be a correct answer. The Reflective Judgment Model developed by King and Kitchener (1994) strives to analyze how students reason decisions, which are complex, intricate and thought provoking.

It is important to know why there was a need for this particular theory in academia as the Reflective Judgment Model was developed due to criticisms of Perry’s Intellectual Scheme (1970). King and Kitchener recognized that cognitive development continued after the stages that Perry initially outlined and saw misgivings in the upper levels of the positions described. Inspired by research on reflective thinking by Dewey (1933) and the formation of analysis and interpretation also known as reasoning by Jean Piaget (1969) and Lawrence Kohlberg (1969), King and Kitchener sought to explain the varying levels of development concerning reflective judgment and how students come to make complex decisions (Love & Guthrie, 1999). The Reflective Judgment Model can be broken down into different levels and stages to accurately depict where the student is and where they are going in their cognitive development. Pre-reflective, quasi-reflective and reflective describe the various levels and they are accompanied by seven stages that provide further explanation to the theory (King & Kitchener, 1994). The different levels, pre-reflective, quasi-reflective and reflective, group the various stages together and strive to give a comprehensive view of the entire theory. For example, the pre-reflective level is composed of stages 1, 2 and 3 and in this level students look to authority for answers, rely on their personal views to make meaning of the world and see knowledge as absolutely certain and there are right and wrong answers (Love & Guthrie, 1999). In student’s educational careers it is the hopes of student affairs practitioners that students progress in their reflective thinking and the next level is quasi-reflective thinking. Combined, stages 4 and 5 make up the quasi-reflective level. This level is described as students are able to formulate an opinion according to an issue, but the students cannot defend their opinion in either a positive or negative way (Love & Guthrie). The Reflective Judgment Model is associated with uncertainty and in the quasi-reflective level the students accepts the uncertainties, but cannot understand how something uncertain, such as data or information, can be used to defend an argument (King, 2000). The level that echoes most doctoral student’s reflective judgment is the highest level – the reflective level. This level, composed of stages 6 and 7, can be described as a student who accepts knowledge as uncertain and recognizes that it is constantly changing and progressing. The student is not overwhelmed or challenged by the idea that knowledge is uncertain and understands the fact that data and information does not exist in a vacuum and context needs to be considered in every case (King). A critique of King and Kitchener’s Theory of Reflective Judgment does not have to do with the particular levels, pre reflective, quasi-reflective and reflective, as they are succinct and easy to translate. On the other hand, the particular stages that make up each level provide confusion, as it is hard to decipher one stage from the other. More research should be done to decipher distinct differences between each of the stages.

Analysis of King and Kitchener’s Reflective Judgment Model

After reviewing the questions asked to Frank regarding the Reflective Judgment Model, including what action should be taken in accordance with the war in Iraq and his feelings about the death penalty, it was determined that Frank would be considered to be in the lower stages of reflective thinking. When asked about more specifically about what the government should do with the situation in Iraq Frank responded:

I do think we don’t have a place to be there, it seems like there has been a growing stability and a growing democracy and take over by the Iraqi military. I guess the real conflict now is in Afghanistan. I still do not know why we are there exactly, other than to enforce stability. I do not know why it is our business to be there still. Other than it would be a bad reflection upon our country to leave it when it was still kind of in pieces. I just hope for the fastest withdrawal possible so we can stop spending money overseas and focus it here (personal communication, April 3, 2009).

King (2000) discusses how reflective thinkers recognize that there is uncertainty in any case and nothing can be considered to be black and white, but regardless of the uncertainty reflective thinkers can still formulate a stance on an issue. From Frank’s response he took a clear stance on the issue even though there is some uncertainty, but also reasoned why others would have a different position on the issue. Furthermore, Frank stated that he felt the past administration was stubborn and didn’t take other’s opinions into consideration when occupying Iraq. Frank felt that the Bush administration was just furthering their own mission of being in Iraq and it did not reflect the good of the country (personal communication, April 3, 2009). Reflective thinkers are able to formulate their opinion by considering the various sources out there and considering which is the most valid within the context of the situation (King). Time Magazine, CNN and CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 are some of the sources that Frank considered when putting together his opinion. But he also realizes that the media cannot always be trusted and they often have an agenda at times as well and there has to be a tone present among the media that you personally agree with (personal communication, April 3, 2009). In terms of expertise and knowledge, at the reflective level students are able to recognize that not all sources are credible or logical than others (Love & Guthrie, 1999). Franks says that he does consider some people’s opinion to be more valid compared to others as it depends on where that person is coming from and if they are coming from a place of good morale (personal communication, April 3, 2009). King and Shuford (1996) discuss how students who reason at the reflective level do not assume that someone will tell them what to think, rather they will form a stance on an issue by evaluating the information available and construct what they are thinking from there. When asking how Frank formulates his stance Frank says:

I guess I just try to reason with my moral. How it reflects on me personally. I do not look at like a party line kind of thing, where I do not disagree with the Democrats or Republicans specifically. I will just think about it just as a really like a problem and how to solve it. I just like list the pros and cons and I look at it like something rational and why are we still there? I guess I just put the clues together and try to form my own opinion off of that (personal communication, April 3, 2009).

It is obvious that Frank actively formulates and evaluates his stance and he is on the lower end of reflective thinking, because in his response he does not mention specific sources of how he formulated his stance, but recognized that a process must occur. The justification that Frank is considered to be a reflective thinker is further supported in his reasoning when discussing his stance on the death penalty. Frank does not believe in the death penalty and thinks that it is a shame that American executes as many people as they do. Frank also referenced that America is fifth in the world, after Syria, for executing people and he does not believe that this is a humane process. Furthermore he states, “I just think justice is better served in jail” (personal communication, April 3, 2009). According to the Reflective Judgment model, Frank was able to take a stance on the position and give specific reasons for why he felt the way he did (King, 2000). Frank formulated his stance based off the fact that he had to do a report on the subject for school and he is also reading Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood. The reading of the book proved to be particularly powerful as he talked about how reading In Cold Blood gave him a more humane and just looks at those who are considered for the death penalty. Another aspect of the Reflective Judgment Model requires people to evaluate knowledge claims based on how sound and consistent the argument is (King & Shuford, 1996). Frank was able to evaluate his stance on the issue and also reason why some people may be for the death penalty. Talking about how the death penalty results from the fact that it is a tax issue of keeping people in jails and maintaining them as well, but he still asserts his position that killing someone for a crime is letting them off easy (personal communication, April 3, 2009).

It may be hypothesized that Frank is classified in the lower end of the reflective level due to the type of program he is engaged in at Pratt Institute. Art students are constantly asked to reflect on their work and always striving to improve. More specifically, students and professors are constantly critiquing the students and it challenges them to become better artists. This type of education helps with reflective thinking as it constantly challenges the students to defend their reasoning and constantly improve what they are creating.

Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Reasoning

Should someone who is sixteen years old have an abortion or keep the baby? A student witnesses a fellow student and friend cheating on an exam, should they tell the professor? Lawrence Kohlberg’s (1976) Theory of Moral Reasoning and Development seeks to understand how students reason difficult situations, not necessarily the decision that the students’ make. For example, the common scenario that is presented to students to measure their moral reasoning is whether a husband should steal a drug that would save his dying wife’s life. Student’s moral reasoning is measured through a Defining Issues Test (DIT) which analyzes the student’s moral reasoning though applying Kohlberg’s specific stages (Tsujimoto & Nardi, 1978). Kohlberg asserted that moral reasoning was just one aspect of the overall concept of moral development. As mentioned before, moral reasoning does not seek to understand the ultimate decision the student made in regards to the moral dilemma they face, rather how they reasoned their decision to themselves. Kohlberg’s theory is very distinct in the fact that there are multiple stages that constantly build upon each other. For example, a student cannot go from stage 1 to stage 6, rather they must pass through each stage consecutively (Tsujimoto & Nardi, 1978). Kohlberg’s (1976) 6 stages can be further categorized into pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional moral reasoning. The pre-conventional level, composed of stages 1 and 2, is very individualistic in the sense that your reasoning is reflective of your needs only. This type of reasoning is found in children, as their point of view is not necessarily attuned to what is occurring outside of their own lives. Stages 3 and 4 describe the conventional level of thinking where the person moves from an individualistic view to one that considers society norms and expectation. The conventional level, often exemplified by adolescents, also takes the law into account and reasons what is right based on what the law deems as just. The post conventional level, comprised of stages 5 and 6, moves beyond self and society to a combination of self and society in the sense that this person values their own experience over what is considered a societal norm. For example, the person who reasons at this level realizes that the law is not black and white and they might do something that will inherently affect someone else (Kohlberg). A critique of Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning is that the theory can be described as being situational. Additionally, a person’s answers and reasons can change depending on their current or past situations. For example, if a person experiences a moral scenario that is similar to the one they are given in the interview it may inform their answer and reasoning behind the question. Another critique of Kohlberg’s moral reasoning does not have to do with the actual theory, but the application of it. It seems like it would be a hard process for students to actively engage in this theory. For example, it is hard to enact an activity or program that deals with moral reasoning that lets students be engaged with the process and progress in the particular level.

Analysis of Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Reasoning

According to how Frank answered a diverse array of moral scenarios, he would be aligned with the conventional level according to the theory of moral reasoning. Kohlberg (1976) discusses how the conventional level can be categorized as the general public’s point of view when reasoning moral issues. More specifically, the “social perspective” reflects a “member of society perspective” (Kohlberg, p. 551). This means that there is a genuine trepidation for the interests of others and society as a whole and the overall goal of this level is to reason what society would deem to be correct. When asking Frank about the moral scenario of if a student should cheat on an exam to maintain their grade point average so they can retain their scholarship his immediate response to the questions was that “I am going to be a good boy and say no he shouldn’t” cheat on the exam (personal communication, April 3, 2009). This implies that Frank is aware of how his answers reflects on him as a person in our society and the “right” answer is to say that he shouldn’t cheat on the exam. Kohlberg also states that those that reason at this level show a concern for doing the right thing and Frank’s response is indicative of the fact that he knows what is considered to be the “good” response. Frank’s reasoning reflects the general public’s point of view for when the basis of his argument is that higher education is a privilege and it is a privilege for the student to have a scholarship to attend a higher education institution. It is the general public’s consensus that not everyone is able to go to college so the student should treat going to college with the utmost respect. When asked what factors are guiding his thought process about his decision, Frank talked about how people at home aren’t getting the top notch art classes that he is and he wouldn’t want to take that for granted and not do anything with his art degree after he graduated (personal communication, April 3, 2009). Again in his reasoning, Frank refers to social norms that have been established, such as those who do not pursue their degree of study after they graduate are not considered to be successful. Another moral scenario that was presented to Frank was the Heinz dilemma. Frank had to decide whether Heinz should steal a drug to save his dying wife from a pharmacist that is profiting off the drug for a monetary benefit. Frank’s response to the scenario was that Heinz had a moral obligation to save someone he loved, especially if their death could be prevented. Ultimately, Frank would justify Heinz’s decision to steal the drug, even though stealing is wrong (personal communication, April 3, 2009). Crain (1985) states that those who reason at the conventional level consider interpersonal relationships in their rational and figure that people have an obligation to those that they love. Frank frequently referenced how Heinz loved his wife and thus the inference can be made that Franks reasoning reflects what is a norm among society, that if a husband loves his wife then he would steal the drug to save her life. In contrast, Crain writes that those in the conventional level see Heinz as being good for stealing the drug and the pharmacist as being bad for profiting off the drug and not making it available for the masses. This makes sense, as certain aspects can be viewed one dimensionally, either someone is good or they are bad. Frank’s response echoed the same feeling as when Frank was asked about what factors were guiding his thought process he said, “It is someone you love and death is on the table and the fact that it is unfair practice, probably. Just the overcharging of the drug and someone else’s profiting off of someone else’s sickness and it is the wrong thing to profit off of” (personal communication, April 3, 2009). Another example where Frank’s reasoning reflects the good for the society approach and what is considered to be socially right is when Frank discussed how stealing the drug would be the lesser of two evils. This suggests that Frank knows that stealing is wrong and shouldn’t be done, but he justifies this stance by almost suggesting that wrong has be done to make it right. The wrong of stealing will be for the greater good, as Heinz’s wife will live to see another day.

Summary of A Hope in the Unseen

A Hope in the Unseen chronicles the journey of Cedric Jennings from the rough inner city streets of Washington D.C. to the academically and socially challenging environment of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island. The readers are given an inside look into not only Cedric’s thoughts and feelings but those in his life including his mother, Barbara Jennings, absentee father, Cedric Gilliam and one of his close friends at Brown, Zayd Dohrn. Suskind (1998) takes a poignant look at how a young boy had a dream of going to an Ivy league school and he how he set out to accomplish that dream by going to Brown. Also chronicling the ups and the downs that Cedric faced, Suskind presents a true rawness of what it was like to feel like you don’t belong in two diverse areas, the inner city and the Ivy League. Cedric is not like your average student at Frank W. Ballou Senior High. Instead of getting involved with drugs and the rough streets of Washington D.C. like his peers, he is hanging out in the classroom with his teacher, Mr. Taylor focusing on getting straight A’s in all of his classes or getting accepted to a prestigious summer preparation program at MIT. Being described as stubborn, Cedric will not let anything come between himself and his goals. Cedric ends up going to MIT for the summer preparation program and has a difficult time adjusting to the rigorous courses and connecting with people from diverse backgrounds. Cedric’s experience at MIT leads him to apply to Brown University where he eventually double majors in education and mathematics. Following Cedric through his first year at Brown University, the readers are able to witness how he acculturates to a new environment, the volatile relationship with his roommate and how hard he must work to receive passing grades. Initially Cedric is driven by his faith, which has been ingrained in him through his mother’s own beliefs. As the book progresses, readers are able to see Cedric challenge his beliefs, construct new ones all while progressing through high school and college in two totally different environments.

Chickering’s Seven Vectors of Identity Development

As Suskind (1998) takes the readers through Cedric’s coming of age story in public and higher education in A Hope in the Unseen, there are many instances throughout the book where Chickering’s Seven Vectors of Identity Development can be identified and analyzed in accordance to Cedric’s own identity development. Before analysis can be completed, a full understanding of Chickering’s Seven Vectors of Identity Development needs to be described.

Summary of Chickering’s Seven Vectors of Identity Development

Knowing oneself emotionally, physically and socially is something that most people would identify as being an important component to their life. Some people strive to great lengths to know their true identity and education and exploration can be considered one pathway in gaining this access. Identity development is complicated in the fact that a person is never aware of how development came about. It may be a book, lecture, interactions with diverse people or a combination of many different facets of that person’s life that contributes to their identity development (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Chickering’s identity development theory, supported by the seven vectors including developing competence, managing emotions, moving through autonomy through interdependence, developing mature interpersonal relationships, establishing identity, developing purpose and developing integrity seeks to understand a college student’s development through many different facets that touch on intellect, emotions, relationships and self-understanding. Chickering constructed the seven vectors through his research including achievement tests, diary tracking, personality tests and informational interviews at small colleges that were conducted in 1959 through 1965 while working at Goddard College. The culmination of Chickering’s work resulted in the publication of Education and Identity in 1969, and was later revised with Linda Reisser in 1993 (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Through interaction with various aspects of the institution, students are able to progress through Chickering’s seven vectors. Progressing through the vectors at different rates, some students may move faster than others depending on their different situations. The first vector, developing competence focuses on developing intellectual, physical and interpersonal competence and the second vector, managing emotions, is having an awareness that emotions are going to occur in one’s life like anger, frustration, happiness and sadness and how the students manage these particular feelings. Transitioning from reliance on authority figures in a person’s life to realizing that a balance needs to occur of relying on oneself while gaining support from others summarizes the third vector, moving through autonomy toward interdependence. Developing mature interpersonal relationships involves constructing relationships beyond the superficial level. For example, appreciating someone for their differences and getting to know someone on an intimate level is descriptive of this vector. Combining the previous vectors accurately illustrates the fifth vector, establishing identity. In this case identity involves being comfortable in the cultural, historical, physical and social context. Developing purpose focuses on where the student wants to go in their life, not only vocationally but within the social realm as well. This involves assessing their present skills and setting attainable goals. The final vector, developing integrity focuses on formation of values and establishing congruence with a student’s particular values and how they live their life in accordance to those values (Chickering & Reisser, 1993).

A critique of Chickering’s seven vectors is that it is very broad and it is hard to summarize the complexity of identity development in seven different vectors. The vectors themselves are so complex that each of them could have been their own theory that contributed to the overall goal of establishing identity development. In a sense, it is hard to put this theory into practice, because there are so many components to it and within each vector there are different models and stages to follow. After reviewing the theory, it seems as if some of the vectors were clearer and concise compared to the other ones.

Analysis of Cedric using Chickering’s Seven Vectors- Moving Through Autonomy Toward Interdependence

As the name of the vector suggests, moving through autonomy toward interdependence involves the clear progression from dependence on others, to reliance on oneself to a happy medium of support from others and oneself. Within this vector there are different components that provide further clarification including emotional independence, instrumental independence, and interdependence (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Establishing emotional independence involves a separation from parental units or authority figures in people’s lives (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Cedric’s figurative and literal separation from Barbara occurred even before they reached Brown University during Barbara and Cedric’s road trip from Washington D.C. to Providence, Rhode Island. Not only was Cedric going to have state lines distancing him and his mother, he also made it clear to her that he would not be contacting her frequently. “I won’t be calling for a while either,” Cedric said. “You will too, you’ll be calling all the time,” Barbara replied. “Why would I want to call?” Cedric says, his eyebrows raised, “I’ll be busy” (Suskind, 1998, p. 161). This is an example of establishing emotional independence, but at the same time this is Cedric’s way of coping with the separation from his mother. Also before Cedric came to Brown he was quite independent as his mother worked late and Cedric had to fend for himself. The next component of establishing emotional independence involves progressing through dependence on a particular person for certain needs such as friendship and moving toward creating healthy relationships with a diverse amount of individuals and not clinging to one individual (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Zayd and Cedric’s friendship is indicative of this component of emotional independence. In the beginning of Cedric and Zayd’s friendship, Cedric relied on Zayd to provide that interpersonal contact. Cedric fostered a unique connection with Zayd and clung to him while phasing out the other people in the unit (Suskind). Even though Cedric clung to Zayd for a personal connection at Brown, Cedric needed someone that he could relate to before he ventured out into the Brown community and established friendships with students he perceived to have nothing in common with. As time progressed, Cedric was able to strike the balance between isolation and establishing relationships (Chickering & Reisser). Instead of being holed up in his rooms for days at a time, Cedric established a relationship with Chiniqua for example, an African American student in Cedric’s freshmen residence hall amongst others (Suskind). The readers were able to witness Cedric progress through the emotional independence component as a shy, guarded student to one that was more open to let certain people into his world. The next component within the guidelines of establishing autonomy through interdependence is instrumental independence. Instrumental independence acts succinctly with emotional independence and focuses on acting autonomously and being self-sufficient and having the ability to cope in different situations and places (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Initially at Brown, Cedric wasn’t particularly self-sufficient. For example, when Cedric lost his id card instead of going to the office and getting a new one, he nearly starved himself by eating Fritos all day. Cedric was passive to this situation and did not make the effort to ensure that he was prospering in his new environment. As time progressed, Cedric was a full fledged college student making important decisions for himself like taking classes pass/fail or changing his major to reflect his academic interests, education and math (Suskind, 1998). In a sense, Cedric displayed autonomous qualities in high school, as he often had to rely on himself and be self-sufficient at school and at home. Brown presented a challenge to Cedric, as he had to learn to be autonomous in a completely different environment. The ability to adapt to diverse environments is also indicative of instrumental independence. Cedric’s transition to Brown University is one that can be described as challenging him to the core of his beliefs, but it was interesting how Cedric handled going home for the first time and then returning back to Brown. Suskind writes, “Being here makes him feel settled and curiously disconnected-like he’s very much on his own but now more comfortable with it. Looking backing, the month at home was nothing like he’d expected” (p. 272). It was almost if Cedric needed to go home and flourish in his old life, to come back and reflect about his new life. Evidently, Cedric is able to function in both environments and going home gave him time to reflect about the choices he made during the past semester. The final component of this vector is interdependence. Before interdependence is achievable, independence must be established, as well as a feeling of being a part of a community. When Cedric first came to Brown he did not know how he fit into the “white world” that was established at Brown (Suskind, 1998, p. 275). A lot of Cedric’s struggles came from the fact that he did not where he belonged and how to relate to people who have had such different experiences than his own. Through Cedric’s relationships and experiences he soon began to realize that he could become apart of other people’s worlds if he chose to as Suskind writes:

He finds that being here doesn’t alter who he is, that he’s becoming sure enough of himself that he can get right up close, feel the pulse, smell the air, see what there is to see, and not lose himself. He can stay or leave. He can decide, because now he knows what’s here. The choices are all his (p. 33).

This exemplifies that Cedric is becoming comfortable with his identity, as well as accepting the other communities he belongs to. Moving toward interdependence requires a deeper level of thinking in terms of not only the individual but also people within the community. Chickering and Reisser (1993) writes, “Individuals moving toward interdependence learn lessons about reciprocity, compromise, sacrifice, consensus and commitment to the welfare of the larger community” (p. 140). Cedric’s move to interdependence can be characterized by his relationship with his roommate, Rob Burton. Coming from two different backgrounds, Cedric and Rob’s relationship can be categorized as volatile, but at the same time their relationship helped Cedric advance in his interdependence. Cedric learned the art of compromise when Rob and him had to formulate a music schedule of who had music rights when each of them was in the room. Cedric learned the act of reciprocity when Rob invited him to his birthday dinner and he learned the art of sacrifice by realizing that people have differently lifestyles than his own. Cedric also realized that what he does affects others. This is exemplified when Cedric feels bad that Rob and him leave Brown on bad terms, because of a situation where they let a dirty sink get out of control. Looking to make things right next year, Cedric pledges to reach out to Rob and get to know him on a non-roommate level (Suskind). Cedric’s diverse experiences at Brown coupled with the fact that he was in a new environment with no immanent parental figure to go to for immediate guidance helped Cedric progress along the vector moving through autonomy to interdependence. This is an important vector, because at the root of it is taking care of oneself in a self-sufficient manner, as well evolving to a place where one not only considers themselves, but also considers their context within the community they are apart of. At first Cedric was not self-sufficient in his new environment and saw himself as an outsider in regards to the Brown community. As time passed and Cedric progressed through the vector he was able to gain a greater understanding of who he was, where he came from and how he fit into the make up of Brown University.

Analysis of Cedric using Chickering’s Seven Vectors- Managing Emotions

Students have complex and intricate lives before they enter the college environment. Brining their baggage to a new setting and situation often causes problems for the students, as they are not only dealing with past emotions, but also developing new ones. Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) vector of managing emotions involves students becoming aware of their feelings and not letting them take over their existence. As Cedric becomes accustomed to his new environment at Brown, he goes through an array of emotions and handles scenarios differently within the context of managing emotions. Highlighting diverse emotions, Cedric progresses through the feelings of anger, fear of failure, and loneliness in different ways. The fear of failing is something that hit Cedric hard the moment he started classes at Brown. Knowing that he wasn’t prepared as some of the other students in class, Cedric decided to take all of his classes’ pass/fail to ensure that he would not fail out of college. Chickering and Reisser (1993) discuss how students need to release previous pressure they may face so that it may open them to more productive feelings. Cedric fear of failure stems from his past experience in high school and the treatment he faced there. The only thing that made him feel good about going to school each day was that he was working toward his goal of going to an Ivy League school. If he were to fail by not receiving passing grades, then those at home who did not support him in his dream would ridicule him (Suskind, 1998). An aspect of managing emotions is to become aware of these feelings and then master control over them. The ultimate goal of mastering emotions is to “add depth and texture to self expression” (Chickering & Reisser, p. 107). After going home for Christmas break and reflecting on his experience, Cedric realizes that it was not necessarily the fear of failure that caused him to take the classes pass/fail, rather he lost pride in himself and pride was what got him to Brown in the first place. After he makes this discovery, Cedric signs up for five classes, one more than most students take in the spring semester (Suskind). Recognizing his emotion, Cedric was determined to not let the fear of failure immobilize him in his quest to receive a degree from Brown. Chickering and Reisser (1993) identify anger as an emotion that can immobilize the student. If students cannot channel their anger in productive ways it can lead to anxiety, depression and guilt. Anger is an emotion that needs particular attention, because anger is not only emotional obtrusive, but can turn physically dangerous. The readers are aware of Cedric’s anger when he visits Slater Junior High School to watch and observe Mr. Fleming, an eighth grade teacher. Cedric writes very passionately in his journal:

He writes them off before they even get a chance. Sure, some of them have behavioral problems-what else could they have, growing up the way they live! – but Fleming treats them like they’re worthless, like he is looking right through them (Suskind, 1993, p. 284).

This is another instance where the past plays a role in the formation of people’s emotion. Cedric saw a lot of himself in the kids that he observed at Slater Junior High School and he was angered about how someone who was suppose to inspire and believe in the kids was tearing them down. To develop through the managing emotions vector, there needs to be an effort to control emotions in an effective way that does not immobilize the student. Chickering and Reisser talk about how their needs to be proper channels established so that students can deal with their emotions. Cedric dealt with his anger toward the treatment of the students in Mr. Fleming’s class by writing a poem that expressed his feelings about the class. Unfortunately the assignment was not to write about Cedric’s feelings while observing the class, but Cedric felt so passionately about his experience that he decided to write it anyways (Suskind). Cedric was able to channel his anger in a productive way that produced an artistic writing piece that shared a lot about how he felt as well as gave insight into his experience. Throughout A Hope in the Unseen, Cedric felt like he had no one to relate to when he arrived to Brown and that immediately made him feel rejected and lonely. Recognizing that there were other students of color, but no one could relate to his experience of growing up in the inner city of Washington D.C. Not feeling connected, Cedric spent most of his time in his room studying and did not interact with people in his unit. Cedric was aware that his feelings of loneliness were, because he felt different than the other people in his unit. Chickering and Reisser (1993) discuss that a key component of managing emotions is awareness and acceptance of the particular feeling that is occurring within the student. Cedric’s awareness of these differences caused him to look at people of his own race differently as well. Cedric says, “I didn’t come to Brown to be with only black people. I’ve already done that” (Suskind, 1993, p. 323). Cedric’s emotion of loneliness caused him to reflect and step outside of his comfort zone to establish relationships with people that were different from him. Cedric’s feelings of loneliness ultimately helped in his overall development by interacting with diverse individuals.

Identity Development- A Journey Toward Mature Adult Faith: A Model

Identity development is multifaceted and students can develop through their racial identity, whether they are African American, Asian American, Hispanic American or Caucasian. Students can also develop through their spiritual identity and how they regard faith and spirituality in their life. As time progresses, students are becoming more and more complex in their identity development and models need to be developed to accurately analyze where students are in regards to their various developmental patterns. Accompanied is a summary of a model created by Sharon Parks based on a journey toward mature adult faith, as well as analysis of the protagonist in the A Hope in the Unseen, Cedric Jennings, according to his spiritual development within this model.

Summary of a Journey Toward Mature Adult Faith: A Model

The model created by Parks (2005) focuses on setting a broad guideline of faith development as well as linking spiritual and cognitive development and how that affects community and the development of one’s faith. The model can be broken down to cognitive, dependence and community form. Within the cognitive form there is authority bound-dualistic, unqualified relativism, commitment in relativism and convictional commitment. The dependence form is inclusive of counter, inner and inter dependence and the community form is broken down to diffuse community, self-selected group and community open to others. The model developed by Parks seeks to understand people’s movement from dependence on authority to exploration to creating meaning within a community. Closely related to Perry’s form of cognitive development, cognitive form is indicative of how a person formulates meaning in their life, often turning to an external authority in constructing this meaning. As mentioned previously, there are different levels within the cognitive form. Someone who constructs their meaning based on authority’s thoughts and opinions would be considered to be in the authority bound-dualistic subset. In unqualified relativism, the person realizes that knowledge construction isn’t relative and commitment in relativism is the act of constructing knowledge that is relative to one’s own life. Convictional commitment is something that happens later in life and is in a sense a combination of unqualified relativism and commitment in relativism on a deeper level (Parks, 2005). The second form, dependence, examines how a person feels when composing meaning and requires people to construct their own self-authorship compared to relying on authorities. In the dependence level people are able to give a variety of reasons for why they feel the way they do, but their argument is reliant on an authority figure. When someone questions authority and starts to questions things for themselves they have entered the counter-dependence level. Inner-dependence is able to recognize the validity of authority, but also sees oneself as a self-authority. When one has reached the interdependence level they are aware of one’s own strengths and weaknesses and no longer looks exclusively to authority or self, but a combination of both (Parks, 2005). Community forms represents how a person makes connections with other people in relation to composing meaning in their life. Conventional community, one aspect of community form, can be described as membership in a group where one has significant ties, like one’ family. Diffuse community occurs when one starts to look at the definition of community differently and examines their own social order. A self-selected group occurs when people choose whom they would like to associate with and there are usually common values and beliefs held between the group members. The final level, community open to others, discusses how members of this group openly challenge and disagree with a person’s form of meaning making in a productive manner (Parks, 2005). The Park’s model is viewed as a way to decipher one’s journey through their spiritual faith. In terms of application, before students come to college they view cognitive, dependence and community form separate and not related to each other. During college, there is a slight convergence of these forms, but it isn’t until well after college that people are able to witness a connection between the different forms (Parks, 2005). The Park’s model tackles the very controversial subject of spiritual development, but this model is not without critiques. The model is supposed to represent a person’s faith journey, in the broadest sense, but it does not address how membership in a particular religion can affect your faith development. Understandably, someone’s faith journey does not have to include religion and religious practices, but it is important to address how different religions might make a difference in someone’s development of faith, in accordance to the Park model. It would be interesting to do further research on people of different religions and where they fit within this particular model. Also Parks never revealed her biases in regards to spiritual development and this could have better informed where she was coming from in regards to the formation of this model.

Analysis of Cedric using Park’s model

Cedric’s spiritual journey was constructed and enacted before he entered Brown University. In Cedric’s eyes, it was his faith and trusting in a higher being that allowed him to live out his dreams of going to an Ivy League university. In the beginning of A Hope in the Unseen, Cedric may not observe his faith development to be a journey, because it was something that was ingrained in him at a very young age by his mother. As Cedric progresses through his journey in higher education, he begins to question his faith development in a way that affects the formation of his life. When Cedric addressed the crowd at his graduation speech, readers were given insight into his authority bound and dualistic cognitive form in relation to the Parks model. The authority bound and dualistic level stresses complete trust in an action, concept or idea and cannot stand outside this to provide critical commentary (Parks, 2005). During his graduation speech Cedric said, “THERE IS NOTHING ME AND MY GOD CAN’T HANDLE” (Suskind, 1993, p. 137). This quote exemplifies the fact that Cedric puts his full trust and confidence in a higher being and relies on that higher being in times of trial and tribulation. Parks writes, “In this form of knowing, even the truth of the self is composed by the authority of others” (p. 140). Cedric forms the construction of himself in relation to God and does not see his identity without a component of God being present. Another aspect of Cedric’s cognitive form in his reliance on authority rests with his mother. His mother was always the one pressuring Cedric to go to church and to have unbinding faith in God and Cedric never strayed from her requests. In a sense, Cedric needed something to believe in and an authority figure to listen to, because it made his uncontrollable life more manageable.

The above quote is also indicative of Cedric’s form of dependence. In the dependence level Parks (2005) says, “Feelings of assurance, rightness, hope, fear, loyalty, disdain or alarm can be determined by Authority” (p. 144). It is evident that Cedric puts a lot of emotions including assurance, trust and hope in his relationship with God, especially situations where Cedric does not have control, like the future. In terms of how Cedric makes meaning in relation to the context of his life, the community form, would be expressive of conventional community. Within this group, people tend to interact with people holding the same values, beliefs and thinking (Parks). There is no one in Cedric’s life that challenges him to defend why he puts his utmost faith and trust in God and why he believes the things he does, because he is surrounded by other people who hold the same beliefs. Although people with the same beliefs surround Cedric, even when a slight challenge is present, Cedric shuts down emotionally and resorts to putting blind faith in what the authority said. For example, Cedric’s friend, LaTisha challenges what Bishop Long says and this makes Cedric very angry and he says that LaTisha did not listen at all. Instead of hearing LaTisha and her critiques of the sermon, Cedric did not want to hear anything negative about what Bishop Long said (Suskind, 1993). As Cedric left his conventional community to attend Brown, his journey of faith evolved to include other levels of the Parks model As Cedric comes home from his first year at Brown and reflects on what he believes to be true, certain levels within cognition, dependence and community have changed. Questioning of Cedric’s faith and his identity is occurring throughout his year at Brown and this comes to an accumulation when his teacher and mentor Mr. Taylor comes to visit. Going into usual practice, Mr. Taylor recites an inspiring Bible verse and he expects Cedric to provide an inspirational commentary, but Cedric merely talks to fill the silence. Cedric then begins to tell Mr. Taylor that before coming to Brown he had blind faith and how the unseen was a place where he would be welcomed and accepted for who he is. Cedric sees himself getting to that place eventually, but realizes that he has to accept himself, before others will be able to accept him. Also in an instrumental act, Cedric leaves the Bible Magazine behind that Mr. Taylor bought for him for someone else to have (Suskind, 1993). Both Cedric’s talk with Mr. Taylor and leaving the Bible Magazine behind represents the fact that Cedric is searching and questioning the faith in his life. Cedric has not given up on his faith; rather he realizes that other things are out there. Within the cognition form, Cedric shows signs of commitment in relativism because he is searching for meaning by exploring his self and has taken a “self conscious responsibility for his own knowing” (Parks, 2005, p. 142). In accordance with form of dependence Cedric shows signs of inner-dependence as he does not discredit authority in terms of creating meaning in his life, but strikes an equal balance between authority and self (Parks).

When Cedric returns home a conversation with Bishop Long is indicative of the community form in accordance with Park’s model. Cedric talks to Bishop Long about how he still believes in God, but feels like he has outgrown his place in the church and that he is ready to venture out (Suskind, 1993). Cedric wants to illicit change in his community and is moving to a self-selected community where the group is like-minded in many ways, but may have differences in regards to their social identities (Parks, 2005). Through his experiences at Brown, Cedric was able to surround himself with a diverse community in terms of race, class and religion. Now that Cedric has returned he does not want to be pigeonholed into the religious community that he has been in his entire life. A Hope in the Unseen follows Cedric through his first year as an undergraduate student at Brown University. Only given insight into his first year of his faith exploration, it would be interesting to analyze how Cedric’s faith has evolved post college, into adulthood to see if his journey correlates with Park’s model.

Program

To demonstrate that proper learning of the theories has occurred, a program that uses the application of theory will be created for both Cedric and Frank who attended the fictional higher education institution called Arts and Sciences College. A requirement of Arts and Sciences College, which is to be fulfilled during the first semester of the student’s freshman year, is to be enrolled in an eight-week first year experience class. The students choose the section of the first year experience class that correlates with their interests. Cedric and Frank chose the art in education section. The students meet once a week with a faculty or staff member that relates to their courses section. The overall goal of the first year experience class is to aid in the student’s transition to Arts and Sciences College. The first year experience class objectively aims to do this by helping the students make personal connections with their classmates, know the specific resources on campus, acquire essential skills like time management and study skills and begin the process of understanding their identity. The specific aspect that will be highlighted is the program that looks at identity development titled Taking a Look at Yourself.

Taking a Look at Yourself

This program, which focuses on identity development and the diversity apparent within each individual, will take place the seventh week of the first year experience class to ensure that a safe space has been maintained and students feel comfortable to talk about intimate subjects such as identity and diversity. Taking into account theory in the creation of the Taking a Look at Yourself program was essential to the brainstorming, creation and implementation of this program. The program specifically focuses on two of Chickering’s Seven Vectors: developing competence and establishing identity. The overall objective of the Taking a Look at Yourself program is to have Cedric and Frank realize what their identities mean within the social context and how that affects power and privilege within society for themselves personally. Specific goals of the program are to be able to recognize the difference between personal and social identity, reflect about their experiences in relation to their social identities, gain awareness of the diversity that exists with people and express themselves in an artistic and creative way. Taking a Look at Yourself is a two-fold program that requires Cedric and Frank to analyze their identities, as well as reflect upon their life in an artistic way that they can share with the class. The first part involves Cedric and Frank and the other students in the first year experience class to fill out both a personal identity wheel and a social identity wheel (adapted from “Voices of Discovery,” Intergroup Relations Center, Arizona Sate University). The personal identity wheel asks students to fill out questions in regards to aspects of themselves such as their favorite food, hobbies, personality traits and political affiliation. The social identity wheel asks students to fill out information that is more relevant to social constructions and aspects where power and privilege can take place. For example, some of the questions include race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, religious or spiritual affiliation and whether they are disabled or able bodied. The purpose of these different identity wheels is not only to have the students think about their own identity, but how some aspects they have control over, such as their hobbies and political affiliation and other aspects, such as race and sexual orientation, they have no control over. Once the students have completed the identity wheels, then the instructor will facilitate a conversation with the group about the process of filling out the identity wheels. The facilitator will focus on how it felt for the students to fill out the identity wheel and if it was a struggle for anyone to fill out particular aspects of their personal or social identity. Other conversations that the instructor will facilitate is if there are certain aspects of the student’s identity that they want to explore more of and if there are any aspects of their identity that make them feel uncomfortable. The facilitator will also discuss with the students how the media informs their definition of their personal and social identity and how becoming aware of their own identity can make them more aware about diversity and social justice. Once the students have reflected about their personal and social identities, the next part of the program requires the use of their artistic skills. In the eighth week of the first year experience class the students are asked to create a project of some sort that reflects their personal and social identities. The project can be an artwork, performance piece, poem, rap, song or anything that the student feels will express their personal and social identity in an artistic way. Students will display their work to the class and give a short presentation about how their personal and social identity informed the creation of their artistic work. Once the projects have been presented, the instructor will facilitate another conversation with the students about how it felt to present their artistic piece to a group of their peers, how the artistic piece has further informed their personal and social identity and what it meant to the students to create this piece.

The Taking a Look at Yourself program will be assessed using the pre and posttest method. Before the students engage in the personal and social identity wheels they will be asked certain questions like I am aware of the differences between my personal and social identity and I know how my social identity affects diversity and social justice issues. After the students engage in the program, they will fill out the same question and assessment will occur to see if learning has taken place.

As mentioned previously, the Taking a Look at Yourself program within the first year experience class draws upon Chickering’s seven vectors: developing competence and establishing identity. Developing competence focuses on three types of competence including intellectual, physical and manual skills and interpersonal competence (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). The program helps with development in this vector due to the various components of the program including self-reflection, group dialogue and creating a tangible product. Intellectually, this program asks the students to assess and analyze their identities, as well as use their critical thinking skills to discuss how their personal and social identities inform diversity and social justice issues. By creating a physical artistic project, like a painting, poem or musical piece, the students are developing their physical and manual skills by creating and designing a physical project. The students are engaging in interpersonal competence by communicating with the group about what their identities mean to them and how this project accurately reflects that. Also through the group discussion, students are talking about their point of views, as well as listening to the other student’s personal thoughts and views on intimate subjects (Chickering & Reisser). Developing competence should be at the root of every program, because this vector speaks to the overall mission of higher education. The second vector that this program draws upon in its creation and implementation is establishing identity. Chickering and Reisser (1993) identify establishing identity as:

Comfort with body and appearance, comfort with gender and sexual orientation, sense of self in a social, historical, and cultural context, clarification of self-concept through roles and life-style, sense of self in response to feedback from valued others, self-acceptance and self esteem and personal stability and integration (p. 49).

The Taking a Look at Yourself program specifically focuses on the concepts of knowing oneself in the social, historical and cultural framework, establishing identity based on feedback and being comfortable with one’s gender and sexual orientation. The program does this by asking the student’s questions that are easy in nature, but probably are not questions that they think about on an everyday basis and how it affects their identity development. It is the hopes that once particular of aspects of identity are established then it will impact other areas of development such as self-acceptance and self esteem (Chickering & Reisser). This program will specifically impact Cedric and Frank as identity development is something that deeply impacts them and it utilizes their artistic talents as well. Cedric struggled with his identity development when he first came to Brown and did not know where he fit in with the other students. The hopes of this program would be that Cedric would appreciate his diversity in terms of his social identity and realize that he has something different to offer Brown. Also Cedric would realize that there might be aspects of his identity that he doesn’t think about a lot that he may have in common with other students, such as his age, the fact that he is able bodied and perhaps his political affiliation. If this was established, Cedric might not think about how different he is compared to the other students and realize that there are commonalities. Frank also talked about how Pratt has helped him become more comfortable in his own skin, especially in terms of his sexual orientation. This program would only further Frank’s identity development and help him think about his personal and social identities in an educational manner.

Assumptions and Biases

It is important to consider people’s biases when conducting a paper that analyzes theory in regards to people’s particular situations. One’s biases can inform a certain point of view and provide either a fair or unfair analysis of the subject. Overall it is important to be knowledgeable about apparent biases so that it may inform one’s practice. After analyzing my interaction with the student I interviewed, reading about Cedric in A Hope in the Unseen and applying the theories to both my student and Cedric my biases include my student involvement, spiritual development, working with a distinct student population and my social identity.

During my undergraduate education I was involved within many different aspects of university life. Looking back on my experience, this is where I learned a lot about myself as a student, leader and person. My involvement helped me develop cognitively, as well as aided in the construction of my social identity. Both of the students that I analyzed for this paper, Frank and Cedric, were not involved in the student life aspect at the institution they attend. I often wondered why these students weren’t in clubs or why they didn’t frequently attend campus events? At times, I didn’t feel like I could relate to them or their experience, because it was so different than mine. Even though I couldn’t relate to these students, it may have provided a positive in my analysis of them, as I was able to broaden my perceptive of the different types of students at an institution. Not all students are the highly involved student that I was and that I work with now. Some students find their connection off campus and others need a little more motivation to put down the books and explore life outside of their room. Within my paper I explore the spiritual development of Cedric in regards to his journey of faith that he encountered in his first year at Brown University. It is important that my own spiritual journey is addressed as my experience informs the analysis I engaged with in Cedric’s particular experience. Religion, in particular Christianity, was an important component of my childhood upbringing. I attended Sunday school frequently, went to vacation bible school during the summer and attended a private Christian elementary school until the third grade. Being a Christian was a way of life for me and I never questioned it until my parents got divorced. Once my parents got divorced, I questioned my religion and eventually stopped going to church. Now I am at a place in my life where I consider myself to be spiritual and I believe in a higher power, but I do not consider myself to be a practicing Christian. My spiritual development is something that I need to work on in my life and redefine my definition of faith and what being spiritual means. My professional work within higher education has occurred at a particular type of institution, an art and design school. Working with students that go to an art and design school are extremely different than students who go to a liberal arts or research institution. Art and design students are very creative and often do not think within the box in terms of events and activities. As a student affairs professional I have seen my style change and progress depending on the certain type of students I interact with and I have become attuned to the unique needs and wants of art and design students. This could potentially be seen as a bias, for when creating a program for Cedric and Frank, my mind is more apt to creating a program that will affect Frank more, as he is the population that I have been working with for the past year.

At times while reading A Hope in the Unseen I found myself feeling disconnected from Cedric and his experiences, because I could not personally relate to them. My undergraduate experience was not indicative of being a first-generation student of color from a low socioeconomic class going to an Ivy League school. I could not relate to the fact that Cedric had no one to guide him through the process of picking classes or the fact that he did not have any money to go out to dinner with his friends. My social identity is that of a white, female from a middle socioeconomic class where my parents went to college and encouraged me to pursue higher education. This bias is important to note, as it may have been harder for me to fully engage in Cedric’s experience when I did not completely understand where he was coming from.

Conclusion

Putting theory to practice is an important concept that professionals working within the higher education field need to understand and enact in their everyday life with students, staff, faculty and administrators. This assignment accurately puts theory to practice within the confines of interviewing Frank and assessing where he is in accordance with cognitive development theories and analyzing Cedric in terms of identity development theories. Theory is not something that is usually addressed at staff meetings or while having lunch with co-workers, because the day-to-day activities of a professional within this field are demanding and time consuming. Although theory isn’t always discussed, it should inform the practice of student affairs professionals and be considered when planning new programs such as creating a learning community for math and science to improve their competence level within Chickering’s Seven Vectors or starting a Center for Spiritual Life so that students can actively discuss where they are in their faith journey. By putting theory to practice, this assignment helped comprehension of the theories and in turn will help with their application. It is different when one passively reads about particular theories compared to summarizing, analyzing and applying these theories to different students and situations. Ultimately this paper helped crystallize the importance of these theories and why student affairs practitioners should have a clear and concise understanding of them.

References

Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identify (2nd ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Crain, W.C. (1985) Theories of Development. Prentice-Hall. pp. 118-136.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the

educative process. Lexington, Mass.: Heath.

Love, P.L. & Guthrie, V.L. (1999). Understanding and applying cognitive development theory.

New Directions for Student Services. Vol 88. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

King (2000). Learning to make reflective judgments. In M.B. Magolda (Ed.), Teaching to

promote intellectual and personal maturity: Incorporating students’ worldviews and identities into the learning process (15-26). Vol 82. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

King & Kitchener. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting

intellectual growth and critical think in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stages and sequence: The cognitive-development approach to socialization.

In D.A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. Skokie, Ill.: Rand

McNally.

Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-development approach.

ASHE Reader, pp. 549-568.

Parks, S. (2005) The journey toward mature adult faith: A model. ASHE reader, pp. 139-152.

Perry, W.G., Jr. (1970). Intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme.

Austin, Tex.: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Piaget, J.R. (1969). Science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Viking

Penguin.

Suskind, R. (1998). A hope in the unseen: An American odyssey from the inner city to the Ivy League. New York: Broadway.

Tsujimoto, R.N., & Nardi, P.M. (1978). A comparison of Kohlberg’s and Hogan’s theories of

moral development. Social Psychology, 41(3), 235-245.

Voices of Discovery. (2007). Intergroup Relations Center, Arizona State University

Appendix A

Interview Protocal

Hello my name is Michelle Ajemian and I am a Masters Student in the Higher Education and Student Personal Administration program at NYU. I also work at Pratt Institute in Brooklyn and I work with student leaders to plan events on campus. Thank you for taking the time to talk about your experience and you are going to help me a great deal with my class assignment. I will be tape-recording our session so that I can reference what is said about your thoughts and feelings, but you will retain complete confidentiality. If at any times you feel uncomfortable you do not have to answer the question. Thank you again for your participation.

I am going to ask you some introductory questions to get to know a little more about you…

1. Tell me about yourself… (Major, Year, Hometown, What you like to do in your spare time?)

2. Why did you decide to attend Pratt Institute compared to the other institutions that you applied to?

a. What influenced you to choose to attend Pratt?

b. How did you justify your choice to attend Pratt?

c. How do you know that this decision was best for you?

d. Are you confident in your decision to attend Pratt?

3. How did you decide or choose your major and academic interests? What do you plan to do with your major?

a. What influenced you to choose this major?

b. How did you justify your major choice?

c. How do you know this decision was best for you?

d. Are you confident in your decision?

4. Tell me about what you are involved with at Pratt Institute? If you are not involved on campus, what do you do in your spare time and why did you choose not to be involved?

5. What are some things you like and dislike about Pratt Institute?

I am now going to ask you so more specific questions about your experience…

6. Before coming to college what did you think your experience would be like? How has your experience been thus far and how has it differed than what you thought it would be (Baxter Magolda & King, ACPA Handout, 2008)?

7. If you had to narrow it down, what would you say has been your best and worst college experience thus far? What have you learned from this (Baxter Magolda & King, ACPA Handout, 2008)?

8. How was your transition to Pratt Institute from high school? What area was the hardest to transition to (i.e. classes, friends, living situations)?

9. Who has had the most impact on you at Pratt Institute thus far?

10. What support systems do you have in place and how have they supported you during your time at Pratt Institute (Baxter Magolda & King, ACPA Handout, 2008)?

11. What is your definition of diversity?

a. How would you describe the diversity at Pratt Institute and how have you personally interacted with it?

12. If you had to describe yourself before college and now being in college, how would your description change and how would it stay the same (Baxter Magolda & King, ACPA Handout, 2008)?

a. What accounts for your change if there is one?

I am going to give you some scenarios and let me know what you think about each of them…

13. What action do you feel should be taken in accordance to the War In Iraq? Why?

a. What information sources have you used to construct your opinion?

b. How is it that experts could disagree on this issue?

c. How do you evaluate expertise in this situation?

d. Can one opinion be more valid than another?

14. John is a freshman at a private liberal arts school majoring in sociology. One of John’s required classes that he must take to complete his general education requirements are statistics. Unfortunately, John is not good at statistics and must receive at least a B in the class to maintain his scholarship at his institution. If John looses his scholarship then he cannot afford to go to school there anymore. One of John’s friends has a copy of the Statistics final and is willing to give it to John to help him study and get a B in the class. Should John take the copy of the Statistics final from his friend?

a. What factors are guiding your thought process?

b. How do you justify your decision?

15. A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors’ thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: No, so Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not? (Kohlberg)

16. Many states have the death penalty, but some people say we should stop using it and put people in jail instead.

a. What do you think about this?

b. What information sources have you used to construct your opinion?

c. How is it that experts could disagree on this issue?

d. How do you evaluate expertise?

e. Can one opinion be more valid than another? How?

17. Brittany has learned that she is pregnant and knows that she wants to get an abortion. Her boyfriend Jeff does not believe in abortion and will talk Brittany out of getting one if she tells him. Should Brittany tell Jeff about the baby?

a. What factors are guiding your thought process?

b. How do you justify your decision?

Back up Moral Dilemma Questions/Reflective Judgment Questions

References

Baxter Magolda, M. & King, P.M. (2008). Reflection question for student interviews. Presented at American College Personnel Association, Boston, MA.

Appendix B

April 3, 2009

Transcription for College Student Development

-Tell me about yourself, where you are from and what you like to do in your spare time

I am from Massachusetts and I am originally from Salem, Massachusetts like the witch town and then I moved out east with my family in the first grade. And since then I have always been enamored with art and I have pretty much known that I have wanted to do what I am doing now like at a very young age, since like middle school I was like I am getting out of here. My best friend came to Pratt a year before me, so I saw how much she loved Brooklyn and I decided that I have to be in New York also. I lived in Griffin Massachusetts, which is a really tiny suburb and I really did not like it very much.

-Why didn’t you like it?

Because it was just like, compared to Salem, it was away from the cultural center of Boston and it was a really big sports town, like the few people that I did find things in common with I bonded with really well so I hold on to those friends really well. They were just people with similar interests.

-Why did you decide to attend Pratt compared to the other institutions that you might have applied at?

-The other ones I was looking at were in Boston and I kind of figured that a lot of people that I was going to high school with were going to these schools and there just wasn’t a lot of diversity around them. And like I had notions of how grand New York would be and how awesome it would be to live there. I just didn’t want to be surrounded by a similar environment like Boston and now I think Boston is boring actually. That’s just me.

-And how do you know that Pratt was the best decision for you?

I think because I have like had to go in a more narrow direction. I guess like just being away from home has helped me grow so much more and a lot faster because I have needed to, you know like New York is just kind of like a kick in the ass and you got to get your shit straight. Before you know you have to figure yourself out quicker, mature quicker, you have to know what you want quicker so I feel that that has been beneficial to me.

-Are you confident in your decision of coming to Pratt?

Yeah, yeah totally like I don’t regret not going to my other schools.

-You talked a little bit about illustration, how did you decide your major and what do you plan to do with your major?

When I was still in high school I remember I did an assignment for, it was to create a new Muppet. And so I like took an eggplant and made it into a Muppet and the teacher was like “Oh my god, you are going to be an illustrator” and you know I did not think much of it then, but I was going to be in fine arts. But that got me thinking that and actually I found out that there was no illustrator work in Boston, so that’s why I wanted to be somewhere that I would get assignments from magazines and do them as illustrations. New York is like the publishing capitol of America, so I knew that would be the best place for me to be for illustration.

-So you always knew that you wanted to do art?

Yeah, my sister and me are the artistic ones in the family and my mom had us enrolled in some form of art classes since we were seven.

-What do your parents think about being an art major or going to arts school?

They are supportive of it, like they themselves aren’t artists they are the type of parents that will be impressed with whatever you bring to the table, because they do not understand any of the art. So they are very supportive of it, they know that I take it really seriously.

-Is there anytime you questioned your major at all?

Totally, like freshman year I wanted to switch to fashion, then photography, then graphic design, but I stuck with my idea of illustration.

-Why did you stick with it?

Because I realized that that is where I was most comfortable. It wasn’t like staying safe it was where I knew I wanted to grow.

-You’re confident in your decision now to be in illustration?

I was not so much first semester, but now I am getting more comfortable with it. Just like learning a lot more.

-What would you ultimately like to do with that, what would your dream job be?

My dream job would just be to have an awesome cliental. Having people phoning me constantly just because like overtime to develop a distinct style and people recognize and respect it and have people come to be me and be like “Oh he would be perfect for that.” The master illustrator who can conquer any project like really quickly. I love that illustration is all about research, like you will always have to be researching and learning and different cultures and process. I don’t know that is what makes a great design is the research behind it. I like that

-So tell me what you are involved with at Pratt, if you aren’t involved on campus what do you do with your spare time and why do you choose not to be involved?

Just at Pratt I am a student employees worker, but I also do a radio show on Mondays. I do that with my best friend. We have a really fun time doing that. I try to attend lectures that I think are relevant, if there are any queer lectures or communications designs lectures I always try to attend those. I like getting involved off campus more.

-What do you do off campus?

I always like to go see different artists or galleries in Chelsea or Soho. I just like making connections outside of the campus. I like to go to different people’s shows, like last night I went to a friend from Pratt’s fashion show, but it was in the city. My best friend was modeling in it so that and I just like to always have the 411 on the culture and just go around and try, you know I hit up like Topshop. What else in the city? Also like music artists, who I have befriended in the past year I always like to go out and see them too.

-So you see more opportunities outside of Pratt than getting involved?

Yeah I do. It’s like difficult because you have to be on top of it, but it is rewarding, you know to go out to these places and the people that you have met before and make contacts from there.

-So tell me some things you like about Pratt and some things you dislike about Pratt?

I love Pratt’s location; I think everybody would say that and the neighborhood. I love my program personally, because even though I am in illustration I am forced to take graphic design and advertising and photography classes with the other graphic design and advertising majors. So it is kind of a melting pot of majors right now studying all sorts of subjects. Ultimately it helps you narrow your focus and what you do want. That is doing a great job for me, personally with my major. I just like the students here, they all have a really driven attitude I found and they are going out and accomplishing their dreams and that has just been something that I have never been exposed to from a small town and it is really inspiring. There are some people who are like “Yeah I am going to get six figures by the time I am thirty,” and I never really thought about doing that. Not that that is a goal I just admire people who go out and do their own fashion lines and get their artwork in galleries. That is inspiring. I like being around that sort of mentality.

-What do you not like about Pratt?

I don’t know it is hard to say, because I just surround myself with things I do like so it is hard to say what I don’t like. I’m trying to think. Well just definitely in terms of their organization of I guess like finding your way, I know it is a very dependent thing to do but I guess like meeting with advisors, running around campus can be stressful. And like I know that the website is busted and confusing when you try to register and that is the complaint I have with the school in general. Other than that, I am having a ball.

-Now I am going to ask you more specific questions about your experience at Pratt. Before coming to college what did you think your experience would be like?

I am trying to think what my expectations were at Pratt. I guess like since I came with two other friends from high school I almost like expected to like cling to them a little bit more but we branched out.

-Do you still stay in contact with them?

Yeah I do.

-Do you run in the same circles?

With one of them I do. The other one has her circle now, which is good, but I am trying to think of my expectations

-Has your experience differed than what you thought it would be?

Yeah I think so, like I probably would have like I don’t know where I was coming off when I graduated from high school. I am just trying to think of Foundation year, which contrasted with my view of what I thought it would be. I guess, I like expected everyone to be actually a lot more grounded when I got here in Foundation year and have them know what they wanted. But I was surprised that people were just taking Foundation year and going along with it, which was also a positive thing, but I thought the kids would just know what they wanted. You kind of had to sift through those that you agreed with and didn’t and you know when I arrived I would just be like “oh these are my best friends,” but it took some time. I guess it took more time to get in a comfortable place than I thought it would be.

-So if you had to narrow it down, what do you think has been your best and worst college experience thus far?

I am trying to think, like the best thing about it is just like I guess on campus is just having a network of friends for where you actually work together and keep an eye on each other and building that sort of relationship up together. Where you have, you know a lot of things in common and you just call each other up like and say what is the deal with this assignment and lets work on this together. I got that experience a lot and found a lot of kids I can do that with. As for my worst experience,

-It can just be New York in general.

A New York experience, I am trying to think, worst experience. Well that wasn’t college but I guess trying to like be like financially stable has been like one of my worst experiences. Through trial and error of finding my limits and what I can and cannot get away with, with spending money. That has been like my, kind of like a downer with things I can and cannot do.

-Have you learned from these experiences?

Yeah I have learned to better myself from the student employee’s paycheck every other week and try not to ask my parents for money to become more dependent from them. Independent I mean.

-So how was your transition to Pratt and New York City from high school? Was there an area that you found hard to transition in or what area?

It was relatively easy, because I did have my two friends from high school to meet people that I normally wouldn’t have, because they would go meet like a,b and c and I would never have talked to them but since they knew them I was like okay cool. But who knows who I would have fallen into if I did not have my high school friends. They have kept me in check and I have kept them in check, so I am glad to have them there. And its been fairly, I think it has been the easiest to transition into relationships and friendships and a little more difficult to transition to the role and the classroom and just finding what I want.

-What do you mean by that?

With finding just like what I want through my major. I feel like I got a little lost Foundation year, because I was just like debating over and over because I was just talking to upperclassmen and I couldn’t find like just illustrators that I admired, you know like, I want to be them. Now that I am there, doing illustration.

-How did you get there, to that point?

I am trying to think, like it happened well from the start of freshman year like I was just like I am going to stick with foundation and go into illustration. Because that is what I said I was going to do and I want to stick with it and try for a semester before if I go to another major. And now that I started that major I am really satisfied with it. So like just the classes, network of students and the professors.

-Why did you question it? Just because of Foundation?

I think, because like illustration is not the most obvious example of like what you can achieve early on. It takes time to build up your skills and a repertoire of clients and things like that. Where as you know my friends in fashion and photography you know, like their evidence of successes and what they are doing, their development is like so visible and obvious. Because they like have their Foundation, or fashion has their own Foundation, and you know I was like I was just really admiring that. Now that I am researching illustrating more and looking at them more as like rock stars it has been like oh I want to be there.

-Who has had the most impact on you at Pratt thus far?

I would have to say my friend Nicole, who I met my first week here. We both went on a Conney Island trip together during the Orientation week and since then she has been a constant source of inspiration for the drive in New York City and she has so much drive and will to go out and try things. Just like meet new people and you know she has given me a new bold, fearless approach. She has just inspired me a lot with what she has accomplished and what we have accomplished together.

-What support systems do you have in place and how have they supported you during your time at Pratt?

I do have my friends from high school first and foremost which I can fall back on. Then I have my friends I have made here, who I can also fall back on too. I met a good, grounded group of friends here. Then I have my friends inside of class and my friends outside of class.

-Your friends outside of class go to Pratt?

Yeah they do, they just don’t happen to be in my major. Then I do have my friends in class and we just keep in check with each other about what we are doing. And yeah I have found a lot of good groups to fall in with and keep in check

-Did your family support you and or do you feel anyone outside of Pratt, do you get that support from them?

I have to say like my aunt is the one who probably supports like supports me the most in my family, because like she is the one who keeps in check with me the most and we are like just really, really close me and my aunt. We are always just calling each other to see what we’re doing and keep each other on track and like she has me do projects for her like because she lives in Boston. When I go back to Boston she is like “Yeah I want you to do this, this and this for me,” and I am like there is a Sheppard Fairy exhibit lets go see that. She is just more in check with arts in general. We bond and we support each other.

-So what is your definition of diversity?

Let’s see, just people with different and opposing views. From different backgrounds and different places who can disagree with each other. It doesn’t matter if they are people from different areas, but if they have different strengths and interests.

-How would you describe the diversity at Pratt and how you interact with it?

I have met a lot of different people with a lot of different views and it has helped open myself, especially living with other people that has been the most obvious example of diversity. Which is like things that they did when they were growing up and customs they were used to. So I mean it has helped me further the cause that my reason is not always right. I always have to take different people into consideration before I judge. It has helped me step back and think a little longer, being around different people.

-And do you think diversity is important as artist? Or how does that relate to you as an artist?

Yeah definitely, because I mean for constant source of inspiration you need diversity. You need to be meeting different people to inspire you. Yeah generally I don’t like to click with people who are like exactly like me. I like friends who do not necessarily like want to chill around me 24/7. I like friends who go out and do their own thing, when I see them we just talk about our own experiences. I think like diversity here breeds independence and like everybody has like their own things going on when they bring it to each other it just creates a neat atmosphere of diversity.

-If you had to describe yourself before coming to Pratt and now being at Pratt how would your description change or would it stay the same? Or how do you see your self before and now?

Before I came to Pratt I think I was a lot more naive with my expectations of others do things for me. Now I know that if I want something it is entirely up to me to get it, because I can’t blame anyone else for the things I do not get. Also just like with my sexuality to, it has been a lot more comfortable since coming to New York from a small town. That has grown a lot too, which has benefited from me staying here over the summer. I worked at like Diesel and I was just around a lot of different people and that helped inspire me to grow too. I think I have grown here in these two years a lot.

-Is there anything in particular that accounts for your change from then to now?

I think just like when I have a set back I think, “Why did I have that?” or “How can I prevent that?” For instance, like something wrong with my schedule at the beginning for this semester and I couldn’t register for anything until the day after which was a big wake up call, because I could have prevented it, if I had been more on top of my stuff earlier. I realized I really screwed myself over and I shouldn’t have. Just little things like that.

-Okay I am going to give you some scenarios and let me know what you think of them? What action do you think should be taken in accordance with the war in Iraq?

Well I can’t give you the most honest answer, because I have not been on top of it. Americans in general are just kind of over it. I do think we don’t have a place to be there it seems like there has been a growing stability and a growing democracy and take over by the Iraqi military. I guess the real conflict now is in Afghanistan. I still do not know why we are there exactly, other than to enforce stability. I do not know why it is our business to be there still. Other than it would be a bad reflection upon our country to leave it when it was still kind of in pieces, because what we did to it before. I just hope for the fastest withdrawal possible so we can stop spending our money overseas and focus it here.

-What information sources have you used to construct your opinion?

I get Time magazine every week and that fills me in a lot. I also, CNN is my homepage. Every now and then I will sneak an Anderson Cooper 360.

-How is it that experts could disagree on this issue?

By saying that they want to stay in Iraq?

-Yeah some say they want to stay and other say they want to go. How do you reason that?

I say enough is enough, we have been there and when will we get out? Cheney himself said “So what” when he heard opposing opinions. That demonstrates to me their stubbornness to accomplish their own personal mission with that past administration and I do not think that is a good reason to be over there. I am happy we’ve made our counter on terrorism very apparent and we have done more harm than damage for what they did to us. I do not think it is just to be there.

-How do you evaluate expertise in this situation? You read your sources and how do you know if something is valid or not?

I guess I just try to reason with my moral. How it reflects on me personally. I do not look at like a party line kind of thing, where I do not disagree with the democrats or republicans specifically. I will just think about it just as a really like a problem and how to solve it. I just think like list the pros and cons and I look at it like something rational and why are we still there? I guess I just put the clues together and try to form my own opinion off of that.

-Do you believe everything you read or see in the media?

No, I don’t because you hear so much about corruption and the media as well. But I guess you have to choose a certain tone that you agree with, like Anderson Cooper. People probably hate him and think he is full of it and that everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie, but he seems to come from a place of genuine honesty and that is what I relate to.

-Can one opinion be more valid than another?

In my mind, yes. You know it depends where you are coming from and if one opinion is like for you know like good morale than I think it is more valid.

-John is a freshman at a private liberal arts school majoring in sociology. One of John’s required classes that he must take to complete his general education requirements are statistics. Unfortunately, John is not good at statistics and must receive at least a B in the class to maintain his scholarship at his institution. If John looses his scholarship then he cannot afford to go to school there anymore. One of John’s friends has a copy of the Statistics final and is willing to give it to John to help him study and get a B in the class. Should John take the copy of the Statistics final from his friend?

Honestly, I am going to be a good boy and say he no he shouldn’t, because I think college is such a privilege and scholarships are such a privilege that they are there for a reason so he should support them honestly.

-What factors are guiding your thought process?

The fact that I just like know a lot of people aren’t getting what I am getting and that a lot of people aren’t where I am right now, because I am at Pratt. Even back home at Massachusetts kids who like aren’t as much like diverse communities like New York or aren’t getting top notch art courses. You know like, people who did not do anything after they graduated from art school, I don’t want that to be me so I don’t want so like I don’t want to take that for granted.

-How do you justify your decision?

Just by I guess like along with the lines that I just talked about which is not taking what you have for granted, really showing you appreciate what you have and by doing so honestly. Keeping what you have already, if you have a scholarship the university sees that you have potential and keeping that.

-A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors’ thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: No, so Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not? (Kohlberg)

This one is more of a moral dilemma. Actually I sympathize with Heinz with doing that. I am sure there are other ways of doing it, but if someone you love is dying and you know you can prevent it and the health care system is in shambles in this country I would justify his decision, even though it is technically wrong. I just have my different, it is all situational and I side with that situation

-What factors are guiding your thought process?

It is someone you love and death is on the table and the fact that it is unfair practice probably. Just the overcharging of the drug and someone else profiting off of someone else’s sickness and it is the wrong thing to profit off of.

-How do you justify your decision to yourself?

It’s I guess like a moral thing to not let someone die versus breaking in and stealing something. That seems like the lesser of the two evils, obviously.

-Many states have the death penalty, but some people say we should stop using it and put people in jail instead.

I don’t believe in the death penalty and I believe that it is an embarrassment to America that we execute as many people as we do. We are like fifth in the world after Syria, or something like that and other third world countries. I think it is just not humane no matter what they did to other people or how crazy they are. I just think justice is better served in jail.

-What information sources have you used to construct your opinion?

I did have to a do a report on it in high school, but other than that, even right now I am reading Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood and I haven’t got to the finish, but I know in the end that the character that he is spotlighting gets hanged. It is a true story and it is kind strange for that to be the resolution for the character you are following throughout the whole story. And you know it gives a more human quality to a person beyond just a killer. I don’t sympathize with them, but at the same time I just think that they should just be in jail for the rest of their lives.

-So why is it that you think that some people think we should have the death penalty and some think we shouldn’t?

Part of it is a tax issue, keeping people in jail and maintaining jails and things like that. But I think a lot of people do think that it is more just to kill them, honestly. And they think they get off easy being in jail the rest of their lives. Which maybe some do, maybe they are nice just but they are probably not if they kill someone. I think that it is a worse punishment to be in jail for how many ever years, if you do instead of the death penalty. Definitely, because personally to me that seems like a worse punishment than death, death seems to be getting off easy.

-How do you evaluate expertise in this situation of people deciding should or should not?

I hear about it. Hard to say, because a lot of people try to get out of it by pleading insanity or something like that. And then the judge can shut it down and say, “No you are a killer.”

-When you are coming to your argument of should or should not is there anything done in particular that swayed you one-way or the other?

Like I could easily say they are all from the South, of course they want it. I guess like, I just think like, I just can’t fathom why they would want that when evaluating their expertise. I am not sure of the question.

-Brittany has learned that she is pregnant and knows that she wants to get an abortion. Her boyfriend Jeff does not believe in abortion and will talk Brittany out of getting one if she tells him. Should Brittany tell Jeff about the baby?

I do. Definitely I think he has a right to know about the baby. But at the same time, she should get the abortion if she really wants it. If there is only one or the other, keeping it a secret or having an abortion, then I would tell her to, I guess I take it back, I would tell her to have the abortion. If he would prevent her from having it indefinitely, I would tell her to have it, because it is her body, her baby, make up her mind she doesn’t have to have it.

-What factors are guiding your thought process?

No matter where you are in life if you do not want to have a child, a child can like hold you back when you could do things for yourself. That is one factor. If it is unplanned, it is unplanned and it is not a good point in your life. So there is that and also maybe that is not the man for her and she does not want to be tied down to him and that would obligate her more. It would also create a bad family situation for the child if she wasn’t happy with having the child in the first place. So all those decisions I guess.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download