1. Applying Developmental Frameworks to Learning with Alums PATRICIA KING, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AACU ANNUAL CONFERENCE, JANUARY 23, 2016

2. Designing Strategies for Learning with Alums: Factors to Consider  Intended outcomes and their relationship to intended collegiate outcomes (e.g., critical thinking, intercultural effectiveness, integration of learning)  Student characteristics (background, assumptions, developmental complexity)  The nature and context of the experience(s) being designed  Facilitators’ expertise and assumptions “To shift from randomness to purposeful pathways, we need to examine what kinds of civic learning occur in which sites of activity at what stage in the student’s intellectual development” (Musil, 2003, p. 5).

3. Learning from and about Development Handout: Frameworks that Inform Working with Alumni/ae toward Civic Ends ◦Self-Authorship theory (based on Baxter Magolda & King, 2012) ◦Musil’s (2003) Faces/Phases of Citizenship. [Note: I have extrapolated the timing using Musil’s framework based on other research.] ◦Developmental Model of Intercultural Maturity (King & Baxter Magolda, 2005; Perez, Shim, King, & Baxter Magolda, 2014) My strategy here was to map well-established developmental transitions observed in research on college students onto the timeline of transitions into, during and after college I offer this as a tool for asking questions and considering strategies to promote civic outcomes.

4. Implications  Most college students don’t evidence the knowledge, skills, or developmental capacities associated with mature development on these theories.  Clearly, we need to continue to improve our record of achieving educational outcomes during college.  Working with alums allows for additional opportunities to refine these skills, arguably when students better see their value.  The impact of “high impact” practices varies by developmental level.  This shows the importance of paying attention to students’ developmental characteristics when selecting educational strategies.  New majority students and older, more experienced alums may have more advanced developmental skills, different motivations for engagement, and different assumptions about ”how the world works.”  The nature and quality of responsibilities, expectations, and scaffolded support are key factors affecting the achievement of developmental outcomes.

5. References 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. King, P. M. & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2005). A developmental model of intercultural maturity. Journal of College Student Development, 46 (6), 571-592. Musil, C. M. (2003). Educating for citizenship. Peer Review 5(3), 4-8. 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. Seifert, T., Gillig, B., Hanson, J. M., Pascarella, E. T., & Blaich, C. F. (2014). The conditional nature of high impact/good practices on student learning outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 85 (4), 531-564.