University student development is a broad topic that researchers have studied from many angles. There have been many influential theories and models of university student development since the 1960s (Arnold & King, 1997; Evans, Forney, & Guido-DiBrito, 1998). For example, Chickering (1969) proposed a seven-vectors model to address general development directions of university students that includes the following facets: developing competence, managing emotions, moving through autonomy toward interdependence, developing mature interpersonal relationships, establishing identity, developing purpose, and developing integrity (pp. 6-7).
According to Evans et al. (1998), various theories and models of university student development could be grouped into four categories: (a) psychosocial theories, such as Chickering ¯s theory of identity development (Chickering & Reisser, 1993, 1996), Marcia ¯s model of ego identity status (Marcia, 1966), Josselson ¯s pathways to women ¯s identity (Josselson, 1973, 1987), and Schlossberg ¯s transition theory (Schlossberg, 1981, 1984); (b) cognitive-structural theories, including Perry ¯s theory of intellectual and ethical development (Perry, 1968), Baxter-Magolda ¯s model of epistemological reflection (Baxter-Magolda, 1992), King and Kitchener ¯s reflective judgment model (King & Kitchener, 1994), Kohlberg ¯s theory of moral development (Kohlberg, 1976), and Giligan ¯s theory of women ¯s moral development (Gilligan, 1981, 1991); (c) typology theories, for example, Kolb ¯s theory of experiential learning (Kolb, 1976), Holland ¯s theory of vocational personalities and environments (Holland, 1985), and Myers-Briggs ¯ adaptation of Jung ¯s theory of personality type (Myers, 1962; Myers, 1978); and (d) person-environment theories, for instance, Rodgers ¯s theory of interaction between student and environment (Rodgers, 1990a, 1990b). All these theories and models actually address the nature of student changes through university from the perspectives of the sociological impact of university and/or psychological development (Quinlisk, 1995). The first generation of university student development models relied heavily on psychological-stage theories. But contemporary views of university students draw from both sociological and psychological perspectives and from diverse cultures (Arnold & King, 1997). Among the above theories, typology theories reflect individual stylistic differences in how students approach their worlds (Evans et al., 1998, p. 204).
Since the development of Sternberg ¯s theory of mental self-government, the impact of thinking styles on university students has been examined from various angles. There are associations between university students ¯ styles and learning activities (e.g., Zhang, 2002; Zhang & Sternberg, 1998). Style studies (for example, of Sternberg and Zhang) have also concerned the learning outcomes of university students in relation to stylistic variances.
Nevertheless, existing studies appear to focus more on the effects of styles on university student development than on the stylistic development and change itself of university students. Although the typology theories of university student development are related to individual stylistic differences, they are not truly developmental in the sense that they do not delineate the stages through which individuals ¯ styles go (Arnold & King, 1997). This indicates that the issue of stylistic development and changes has much further room for research.
References
Arnold, K., & King, I. C. (1997). College Student Development and Academic Life: Psychological, Intellectual, Social, and Moral Issues. New York & London: Garland Publishing, Inc.
Baxter-Magolda, M. B. (1992). Knowing and Reasoning in College: Gender-related Patterns in Students' Intellectual Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, A. W. (1969). Education and Identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and Identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1996). Key influences on student development. In F. K. Stage, G. L. Anaya, J. P. Bean, D. Hossler & G. D. Kuh (Eds.), College Students: The Evolving Nature of Research. Needham Heights, Mass: Simon & Schuster.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1998). Student Development in College: Theory, Research, and Practice. San francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Gilligan, C. (1981). Moral development in the college years. In A. W. Chickering & Associates (Eds.), The Modern American College: Responding to the New Realities of Diverse Students and a Changing Society (pp. 139-157). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gilligan, C. (1991). Women's psychological development: Implications for psychotherapy. Women and Therapy, 11(3-4), 5-31.
Holland, J. L. (1985). Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI): Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Josselson, R. (1973). Psychodynamic aspects of identity formation in colleage women. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2, 3-52.
Josselson, R. (1987). Finding Herself: Pathways to Identity Development in Women. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing Reflective Judhment: Understanding and Promoting Intellectual Growth and Critical Thinking in Adolescents and Adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral Development and Behavior: Theory, Research, and Social Issues (pp. 31-53). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Kolb, D. A. (1976). Learning Style Inventory: Technical Manual. Boston, MA: McBer and Company.
Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3(5), 551-558.
Myers, I. B. (1962). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Manual. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
Myers, I. B. (1978). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists' Press.
Perry, W. G. (1968). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the Collefe Years: A Scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Quinlisk, K. M. (1995). Cognitive development of college students: An analysis of ways of thinking about the learning process. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 55(8-A), 2328.
Rodgers, R. F. (1990a). An integration of campus ecology and student development: The Olentagy project. In D. G. Creamer & Associates (Eds.), College Student Development: Theory and Practice for the 1990's (pp. 155-180). Alexandria, VA: American College Personel Association.
Rodgers, R. F. (1990b). Theories underlying student development. In D. G. Creamer (Ed.), Student Development in Higher Education (pp. 10-95). Cincinnati, OH: American College Personnel Association.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1981). A model for analyzing human adaption to transition. Counseling Psychology, 9(2), 2-18.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1984). Counseling Adults in Transition. New York: Springer.
Zhang, L. F. (2002). Thinking styles: their relationships with modes of thinking and academic performance. Educational Psychology, 22(3), 331-348.
Zhang, L. F., & Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Thinking styles, abilities, and academic achievement among Hong Kong university students. Educational Research Journal,, 13, 41-62.
(This piece of article is from: Yunfeng He. (2006). Thinking Styles and Academic Achievement of Chinese University Students. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.)
