Table 1. Frameworks that Inform Working with Alumni/ae toward Civic Ends
Transitions into College
Self-Authorship (Baxter Magolda & King, 2012)
Solely External Meaning Making
Consistently rely on external sources
to discern meaning
Look to authorities to resolve conflicts
Allow others to define who you are
and what you believe
Faces/Phases of Citizenship (Musil, 2003)
Exclusionary / Oblivious
Community is: Only your own (civic disengagement,
a monocultural sensibility) /
A resource to mine for the benefit
of the onlooker (civic detachment)
A Continuum of Transitions
Transitions during College
Crossroads Meaning Making
Realize dilemmas of external reliance,
yet are unsure how to proceed
Begin to listen to one’s own voice to
mediate external influences, and
do so inconsistently
Transitions after College
Internal Meaning Making
Trust internal voice to guide reactions,
manage external influences; to refine
beliefs, values, identities, and
relationships; and to craft
commitments
Naïve / Charitable
Reciprocal / Generative
A resource to engage (civic amnesia,
A resource to empower and
lack of historical or cultural knowledge) / be empowered by (civic engagement,
A resource that needs assistance (civic
negotiate with community partners) /
altruism)
An inter-dependent resource filled with
possibilities (civic prosperity)
Intercultural Maturity (King & Baxter Magolda, 2005; Perez, Shim, King, & Baxter Magolda, 2015)
Cognitive
Understands culture simplistically
Resists challenges to own beliefs
Views differing cultural perspectives
as wrong or erroneous
Assumes others hold the same cultural
perspective; unaware of multiple views
The concept of culture is focused
on demography and geography
Shifts from accepting authority’s
knowledge claims to identifying
personal processes for adopting
knowledge claims about cultures
Engages in cultural perspective-taking
Tries to understand areas of similarity
and difference
Has ability and will to consciously shift
perspectives and behaviors
Is able to use multiple cultural frames
Intrapersonal
Others define one’s cultural identity
Conforms to dominant norms without
questioning
Is unaware of own privilege
Sees identity as assigned, not claimed
Shows sense of identity distinct from
others’ perceptions
Tension between internal and external
definition prompts self-exploration
Is aware of other cultures, but immersed
in own culture
Shows capacity to create an
internal self that openly engages
challenges to own views
Integrates aspects of self into
one’s own identity
2
Intercultural Maturity, Intrapersonal Dimension, continued
Sees social identities as categorical
and without personal meaning
Interpersonal
Recognizes legitimacy of other cultures
Uses dependent relations with similar
Is willing to interact with others across
others as a primary source of identity
differences and refrain from judgment
and affirmation
Self is overshadowed by need for others’
Believes others are entitled to their
approval
views and practices as long as they do
May avoid discussing difficult topics that
not affect one’s own social identity group highlight differences
Lacks awareness of how social systems
Begins to explore how social systems affect
affect group norms and intergroup
group norms and intergroup relations
differences
Views social problems and relationships
egocentrically
States that differences don’t matter and
instead focuses on similarities
Focuses on own feelings, not others’ feelings
Sees self as “normal” and those with different
cultural perspectives as strange or unusual
Considers collective identities
(e.g., Pan-Asian) and interest in
coalition building
Builds relationships because of
differences rather than in spite
of them
Shows appreciation for diversity
Shows capacity to engage in
meaningful, interdependent
relationships with diverse others
Understands how individual and
community practices affect
social systems
Understands society as an
organized entity that shapes
social interactions and creates
social inequalities
Is willing to work for the rights
of others to promote social justice
Note the increasing complexity of understanding across developmental levels within each framework and the consistencies across
frameworks. Each of these illustrates the value of taking the developmental characteristics into account when planning initiatives with
alums, who will likely operate from a variety of perspectives, which in turn will affect how they approach the experience and interact
with others.
Sources
Baxter Magolda, M. B. & King, P. M. (2012). Assessing Meaning Making and Self-Authorship: Theory, Research, and Application. ASHE Higher
Education Report, 38(3). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Musil, C. M. (2003). Educating for citizenship. Peer Review 5(3), 4-8.
King, P. M. & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2005). A developmental model of intercultural maturity. Journal of College Student Development, 46 (6),
571-592.
Perez, R. J., Shim, W., King, P. M. & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2015). Refining King and Baxter Magolda’s model of intercultural maturity.
Journal of College Student Development, 56(8), 759-776.
Handout prepared by Patricia King, University of Michigan, AACU Annual Meeting, January, 2016.