Comparison of Developmental Theories for College Students

Description

Comparison of Developmental Theories for College Students

Student development theories aide student affairs professionals in understanding the developmental milestones of traditional college students. Student development theories examine the physical, emotional/social, and intellectual/cognitive development that takes place in late adolescence.

Using Chickering’s seven vectors theory, Perry’s theory of cognitive development, Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, and Park’s theory of faith development, create a 250-500 word quick reference chart or graphic organizer that addresses the following:

Define the main characteristics of each theory.
Describe developmental milestones of traditional college students as defined by each theory.
Provide examples of how each theory applies to the field of higher education student affairs.

In addition, below your chart or graphic organizer, write a 150-250 word rationale explaining the student development theory you believe would assist you most in your role as a student affairs professional.

Support your chart or graphic organizer with 3-5 scholarly resources.

Rubric: Comparison of Developmental Theories for College Students

Main Characteristics

20.0

Not addressed.

Incorrectly defines the main characteristics of each theory.

Unclearly defines the main characteristics of each theory.

Clearly defines the main characteristics of each theory.

Thoroughly defines the main characteristics of each theory.

Developmental Milestones

20.0

Not addressed.

Inappropriately describes developmental milestones of traditional college students as defined by each theory.

Partially describes developmental milestones of traditional college students as defined by each theory.

Appropriately describes developmental milestones of traditional college students as defined by each theory.

Skillfully describes developmental milestones of traditional college students as defined by each theory.

Examples

20.0

Not addressed.

Provides ineffective examples of how each theory applies to the field of higher education student affairs.

Provides vague examples of how each theory applies to the field of higher education student affairs.

Provides effective examples of how each theory applies to the field of higher education student affairs.

Provides insightful examples of how each theory applies to the field of higher education student affairs.

Rationale

15.0

Not addressed.

Unconvincingly explains the student development theory that would assist the most in the role as a student affairs professional.

Weakly explains the student development theory that would assist the most in the role as a student affairs professional.

Soundly explains the student development theory that would assist the most in the role as a student affairs professional.

Thoughtfully explains the student development theory that would assist the most in the role as a student affairs professional.

Chart/Graphic Organizer Format

10.0

Not addressed.

Content/Graphic organizer is confusing, missing key elements, or includes pervasive errors. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Content is unfocused. Chart/Graphic organizer is appropriate, but formatting includes several errors or lack of clarity.

Content is clear. Chart/Graphic organizer is appropriate, template is fully used. There are very few errors in formatting style.

Content is well-presented and easy to read. All chart and format elements are correct.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5.0

Not addressed.

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. A variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some practice and content-related language.

Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are varied and engaging.

Format and Documentation of Sources (layout, citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

10.0

Not addressed.

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some key formatting and citation errors are present.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Sources are documented completely and correctly, as appropriate to assignment and style. Format is free of error.

Total Percentage 100