Who are your students?
Outline



Student development theory
Millennial, post-millennial, etc.
GU students specifically
Student Development theory
Nancy Schlossberg’s Theory of Mattering and
Marginality (1989)
When people begin a new experience they can feel
uneasy about their ability and what their role is or
should be in that experience.
Marginality results in self-consciousness. Selfconsciousness results in the inability to perform up to
one’s capabilities.
When people believe that they matter, marginality
diminishes. Students succeed when they are
appreciated by others and receive positive attention.
Nancy Schlossberg’s Theory of Mattering and
Marginality (1989)






Mattering includes:
Attention: being noticed
Importance: believing one is cared about
Ego Extension: belief that someone else will be
proud of their successes or sympathize with their
failures
Dependence: being needed
Appreciation: feeling that one’s efforts are
appreciated by others
Discussion

How does this relate to our interactions with our own
students? How can we make students feel like they
matter in the classroom/lab/office hours?
Chickering & Reisser’s Seven Vectors of
Development (1993)
1. Achieving competence
2. Managing emotions
3. Moving through autonomy toward
interdependence.
4. Developing mature interpersonal relationships.
5. Establishing identity.
6. Developing purpose.
7. Developing integrity.
Who are these people and what are
their values?
Consulting companies


Industry devoted to figuring out young people
Institutions (education and otherwise) rely on these
consultants to understand what it is that a particular
generation cares about and ultimately will want to
BUY!
Discussion

How would you describe the students that you have
encountered so far at Gonzaga? What are some
of their positive and negative traits?
Millennials?


Born after 1981; come into early adulthood around
2000
Traits
 Special,
confident, sheltered, team-oriented, achieving,
pressured, conventional



Defined by technology
Parented by “helicopter parents” – educated, overly
concerned, BOLD!
Millennials are aware of the term and don’t like it!
Get rid of the terms like
“Millennials”!

Santilli argues that we should define the period between
adolescence and young adulthood as “emerging
adulthood” while still acknowledging changes in
generations (marrying later, putting off becoming
parents).
 Five
essential qualities of emerging adulthood: identity
exploration, instability, self-focus, feelings of transition, and
openness to possibilities

Santilli also acknowledges the match/overlap between
the Jesuit education model and emerging adulthood
Sweeping generalizations aren’t a
good idea


Singham is amazed that the same professors and
educators who quickly stereotype students in terms
of generation are the same professors who display
great sensitivity when it comes to gender and ethnic
stereotypes
Singham argues that what we think we know about
students prevents us from actually getting to know
them!
Okay, so who are our students?
Changes from 1990 to 2010
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
2010
Number of freshman surveyed
260
560
604
784
922
920
Father – BA or higher
51%
67%
72%
74%
71%
74%
Mother – BA or higher
49%
58%
63%
68%
70%
75%
A+, A, or A- high school avg
49%
64%
70%
67%
64%
72%
“very good” chance of B avg at
56%
GU
62%
61%
65%
61%
86%
B- or lower high school avg
3%
4%
1%
2%
0.4%
11%
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2011, Number 5
Reasons for choosing GU
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
2010
Very good academic reputation 66%
80%
76%
77%
80%
76%
Offered financial assistance
57%
64%
59%
62%
65%
71%
Graduates get good jobs
50%
55%
60%
59%
61%
62%
Religious affiliation
24%
30%
25%
27%
26%
24%
Good reputation for social
activities
13%
28%
31%
42%
50%
57%
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2011, Number 5
When asked to “rate yourself compared to peers”,
percentages of GU freshman who considered that they
were above average or in the Top 10%
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
2010
Academic ability
76%
85%
82%
83%
79%
88%
Emotional health
54%
65%
55%
60%
61%
66%
Leadership ability
55%
68%
67%
69%
66%
74%
Self-confidence socially
42%
54%
50%
53%
52%
58%
Writing ability
46%
57%
56%
51%
57%
58%
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2011, Number 5
Activities during senior year in high school
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
2010
Performed volunteer work
80%
89%
92%
96%
96%
96%
Tutored another student
62%
63%
60%
61%
59%
70%
Drank beer
60%
45%
54%
50%
43%
37%
Drank wine/liquor
61%
55%
57%
55%
48%
38%
No hour per week partying
22%
19%
23%
20%
35%
46%
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2011, Number 5
Life goals that are essential or very
important
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
2010
63%
60%
62%
64%
69%
75%
38%
24%
18%
26%
36%
28%
41%
33%
51%
55%
61%
60%
Promote racial understanding
48%
38%
30%
39%
39%
37%
Raise a family
68%
71%
72%
79%
80%
84%
Be very well off financially
Become involved in cleaning up
environment
Develop a meaningful
philosophy of life
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2011, Number 5
“One of the most important tasks of
the academic advisor is mediating
the dissonance between student
expectations and the realities of the
educational experience.”
•
Wes Habley
Percentage of respondents saying that there is
a “very good chance” that they will:
All
Arts
Science
Bus.
Eng.
Health
Change major
15%
27%
6%
14%
0%
6%
Change career choice
Work to help pay for
college expenses
Participate in volunteer or
community service
17%
28%
14%
14%
4%
6%
49%
50%
54%
44%
42%
54%
50%
56%
46%
42%
38%
62%
Study abroad
Be satisfied with college
experience
48%
55%
43%
52%
14%
44%
71%
71%
73%
70%
74%
67%
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2008, Number 3
Other places where dissonance
might occur:
•
•
68% of incoming male students and 75% of
incoming female students had a high school GPA of
A- or above.
Only 36% studied 11 or more hours per week in
High School.
(Nationwide, college students report studying an
average of only 13 – 14 hours per week, about
half what their professors think is necessary to keep
up.)
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2011, Number 3
Reported grade point averages of seniors,
overall and in the major:
All
Arts
Science
Bus.
Eng.
Overall, A- or above
43%
43%
43%
43%
43%
Overall, B or B+
48%
47%
52%
48%
48%
Major, A- or above
55%
67%
37%
50%
28%
Major, B or B+
37%
29%
57%
37%
47%
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2008, Number 1
Percentage of senior respondents saying that
they spent 11 or more hours per week on:
All
Arts
Science
Bus.
Eng.
Studying or doing homework
38%
34%
56%
27%
69%
Socializing with friends
48%
47%
36%
57%
49%
Exercising or sports
14%
12%
9%
20%
16%
Partying
15%
12%
9%
24%
20%
GU Division of Student Life Research Notes, Spring 2008, Number 1
Expectations versus reality





Eight percent of college seniors are “proficient” at level 3 math, up from 5
percent of freshmen.
Eleven percent of college seniors are “proficient” at level 3 writing.
Six percent of college seniors are “proficient” in critical thinking, 77 percent
are “not proficient”.
Less than 13 percent of college students achieve basic competence in a
language other than English Less than 34 percent of college students earn
credit for an international studies class; of those who do, only 13 percent
take more than four classes.
Less than 10 percent of college students participate in study abroad
programs.
Academic Profile, Educational Testing Service (2003–04); Clifford Adelman, “‘Global Preparedness’ of Pre-9/11 College
Graduates: What the U.S. Longitudinal Studies Say,” Tertiary Education and Management 10 (2004): 243.
Who are your students?
References for Student
Development Theories



Schlossberg, Nancy K. “Mattering and Marginality:
Key Issues in Building Community” New Directions for
Student Services, 1989, 48, pp. 5-15.
Chickering, Arthur & Reisser, Linda (1993). Education
and Identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Skipper, Tracy L. (2005). ”Chapter 2: Psychosocial
Theories of Student Development” in Student
Development in the First College Year: A Primer for
College Educators Columbia, SC: University of South
Carolina, National Resource Center for The FirstYear Experience and Students in Transition.
References for Millennials




Howe, N. and Strauss, W. (2000) Millennials Rising:
The Next Great Generation, New York: Random
House, Inc.
Santilli, Nicholas (2010) “Don’t Call Us Millennials!”
in Conversations on Jesuit Higher Education: Vol 37,
Article 6.
Singham, Mano “More Than ‘Millennials’: Colleges
Must Look Beyond Generational Stereotypes” The
Chronicle of Higher Education, Oct. 2009.
Hoover, Eric “The Millennial Muddle” The Chronicle
of Higher Education, Oct. 2009.