CHICKERINGS VECTORS

Chickering Based Interview

Tiffany Seaman
University of Memphis
HIAD 7442
November 3, 2013

CHICKERINGS VECTORS

The development of a college student has been the topic of research

for many years. Questions of when development occurs, how development
occurs, and who influences students development have been the basis of
many theories, including Chickerings theory of development. Although
Chickering does not provide many details on the subject of who has influence
on the students development outside of the student itself, he does
emphasize the student as the center of control as they progress through the
seven vectors.
Chickerings seven vectors are focused on issues that affect students
development through their postsecondary careers. How one reacts to those
issues will indicate their level of development within the vectors. The seven
vectors included in Chickerings theory are: developing competence,
managing emotions, moving through autonomy toward interdependence,
developing mature interpersonal relationships, establishing identity,
developing purpose, and developing integrity (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton
& Renn, 2010).
In order to further study Chickerings theory, two students were
interviewed using a series of questions that centered on their development
within Chickerings seven vectors. Mathew, a first-year student at Butler
University, was the first student to be interviewed. He is the younger of two
children and is eighteen years old. He was raised Catholic but is not
practicing and is attending a private, residential university half an hour away
from home.

CHICKERINGS VECTORS

Amanda was the second student interviewed. She is a senior at The

Catholic University of America and will be graduating this May. She is the
older of two children and is twenty-one years old. She was raised Catholic
and is currently practicing. The Catholic University of America is a private
Catholic college that is largely residential and several hours from Amandas
home.
Surprisingly, the students showed very similar levels of development in
many of the stages. In the area of developing competence, Mathew seemed
to be developing appropriately. He was very conscious of his academic
performance, and when asked what his goals were for the year, he said he
would like to keep good time management skills and make good choices both
academically and socially. He had confidence that both those goals could be
met. He is also heavily involved in recreational activities, including ultimate
Frisbee and intramural softball, as well as social groups such as the nondenominational religious group on campus. Mathew is a Type 1 diabetic and
has successfully transitioned into collegiate life in a way that has not
affected his health.
Amanda is very academically centered in her approach to collegiate
life, causing an imbalance in the development of competence. She is not as
well rounded as Mathew when it comes to academics, athletics, and personal
health. Her goal for the semester was to receive the honor of being on the
Deans List, and thought this goal was achievable due to her confidence in
her study habits. She is part of a group on campus that performs Irish step

CHICKERINGS VECTORS

dancing, but this is her only athletic involvement. When she is stressed or
upset, she finds it difficult to eat or sleep, and often times sees fluctuation in
her weight. In this example, we are able to see how one vector can affect the
students development in another vector.
Amandas response to her stress and anxiety is an indication that she
is not at a developmental level that allows her to manage her emotions
properly. When asked about how she handles confrontations with her peers,
she responded that she does not handle them at all. She chooses to ignore
the problem, and finds little success in this strategy and has not made an
effort to try another approach. Mathew had the opposite response. When a
conflict arises within his social group, Mathew likes to sit down and talk with
the person about how and why they feel the way that they do. This shows
that Mathew is not only aware of how to handle his own emotions, but also
how to approach and understand the emotions of his peers.
When it came to discussing their autonomy, both students seemed to
be at the same level of development. When asking how often they rely on
the opinions of others to make their decisions, both students said it largely
depended on the situation. Amanda said that she uses the opinions of others
and allows them to shape her opinion, but she feels her final decision is
always of her own making. Mathew relies on the opinions of others when it
comes to a decision that affects a group, but he can make his own decisions
on what to wear and what to eat. Both students seem to have a healthy
balance of autonomy and interdependence.

CHICKERINGS VECTORS

Because both Mathew and Amanda were open to hearing the opinions
of their peers, it appears that they are reaching a successful level of
development in maintaining mature interpersonal relationships. When asked
about their level of independence when compared to their relationship with
their parents, both students felt that their time at universities has allowed
them to grow in their independence and understanding of themselves while
continuing to feel a strong connection with their parents. When asked to give
their opinion of what diversity meant, Mathew and Amanda both said it was a
variety of backgrounds, opinions, morals and beliefs. Both students felt
comfortable interacting with students that differ from themselves culturally
or economically, and both students felt that their social groups were a good
representation of diversity.
After being asked about the identity of their peers, they were asked to
compare their opinions of themselves with the opinions their peers have of
them. Mathew showed a prominent level of development in this vector. He
said that how his friends view him and how he views himself are the same
because he composes himself the same in front of everyone as he would if
he were alone. Both students were able to identify a time where they felt
comfortable with themselves and a time where they did not. Amanda did not
show as prominent a development of identity. She said that the way her
friends viewed her was different than the way she viewed herself.
Although their development of identity differed, Amanda and Mathew
had a strong sense of purpose. Amanda expressed that she enjoyed when I

CHICKERINGS VECTORS

asked her to describe what it means to have a purpose. Her purpose is both
academically based and socially based. She felt that it was her purpose to
succeed academically and make a positive impact on the lives of others.
Mathew felt that his purpose was to figure out what he is called to do.
Mathews purpose indicated that he was still discovering how he would like
to spend his life.
Amandas strong sense of purpose mirrored her strong sense of
integrity. Both students seemed to be appropriately developed in the vector
of integrity, and this may be a reflection of their religious upbringing.
Amanda and Mathew were raised Catholic and have a strong set of morals
and beliefs. When asked if they have felt their values have been tested, both
students responded that they had. When asked if the confrontation with their
values or beliefs caused them to question or revaluate their ideals, both
students responded that it did not.
There was not as clear of a difference in development between the
first-year student and the senior as one would have thought. Amanda and
Mathew differed in their development in a few of Chickerings vectors, but I
was impressed with their overall level of development within the seven
vectors. Arguably, Mathew was more developed within Chickerings theory
than Amanda. Both Amanda and Mathew have qualities of their personality
that played a roll in their development within the vectors. There were also
times during the interviews when I saw the students development within
one vector affect another vector.

CHICKERINGS VECTORS

Seeing how large of a role reflection played in the success of the

interviews will affect how I approach students during their development.
Giving them time to understand and reflect on their experiences is essential
to their growth and development. There are other factors that I can assume
play a role in the development of Amanda and Mathew that Chickerings
theory does not address. Some of those factors may include personality
traits, family dynamic, and the atmosphere of their institutions. As
administrative faculty, it is important to approach student development with
the knowledge of multiple theories and ideas. Combining the work of many
great researchers can only add to the understanding and assessment of a
college students development.

CHICKERINGS VECTORS

8
Reference

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010).
Student
development in college: Theory, research, and practice, 2nd Ed. San
Francisco,
Jossey-Bass.