Running head: MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 1

Self-Authorship: The key to making mattering and marginality better influence our students

Cody Dunlap

Western Carolina University

MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 2

Self-Authorship: The key to making mattering and marginality better influence out students

Going through life, students experience all different forms of changes, challenges, and

transitions. However, one of the hardest things that a student could face is feeling out of place or

as if they do not matter to other individuals or social groups to which they identify. When these

feelings arise, the student faces the possibility of being marginalized due to taking on a new role

or challenge. To provide a framework for understanding this continuum of mattering and

marginality better, Nancy Schlossberg first proposed a theory of her own in 1989. Since its

inception, Schlossberg’s theory has not undergone much editing. An item to note about this

theory, however, is that while working with students to make sure they feel a sense of mattering

or belonging is important, there remains one key stakeholder within the theory one must consider

above all others: the student themselves. Through the development and dissection of

Schlossberg's theory, there lies a gap when taking into question the student and how they

develop their self-worth or progress through an occurrence of self-authorship. If self-authorship

characteristics are combined properly, the Theory of Mattering and Marginality can account for

all important partners in a student's sense of mattering and complete the theory.

Mattering & Marginality Defined

First introduced in 1989 in New Directions for Student Services, Nancy Schlossberg's

Theory of Mattering and Marginality has been pivotal in acknowledging how the students on our

campuses interact and construct their sense of mattering to their peers. Asserted in her research,

Schlossberg (1989) alluded to mattering and marginality existing on a dipole with a continuum

connecting both poles (See Appendix A), where students can fluctuate between complete

marginalization and possess no mattering to their peers or vice versa. Described by Patton, Renn,

Guido & Quaye, marginality is a feeling a student may feel when they no longer can control their
MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 3

“fit” within a setting or are faced with a new role to assume (2016). Often, this condition of

marginality exists and remains permanently, studies have shown that marginality can be episodic

or temporary. When a student first comes to college they are being faced with a new role to

assume and unsure of what it will entail or what will be encountered (Patton et al., 2016).

Readily transitioning into a new environment can cause issues of mattering to arise. What

has come from the research of sociologists, is that mattering is situational and location dependent

(Schieman & Taylor, 2001). As discussed by Schlossberg (1989), every time individuals change

roles, the potential for marginality occurs. When there is a more substantial difference between

the currently assumed role and the newer role, there is an occurrence at a faster rate of

marginality (Schlossberg, 1989). Feelings of marginality stem from a myriad of reasons,

however when students feel as such, mental structures where their sense of mattering is absent

can take hold and negatively affect the students. Addressing the other end of the spectrum,

described by Schlossberg (1989), mattering is the feeling or thoughts about how others act as

stakeholders within our personas and how those interactions influence our choices and actions.

Encompassed within mattering are five aspects or feelings a student can assume within

mattering and subsequent marginality (Schlossberg, 1989). In the work of Patton et al. (2016),

the five points are attention, importance, ego-extension, dependence, and appreciation.

Considered particular aspects of mattering, the locus of caring is different from each one. When

an individual feels attention, a student maintains a feeling of being noticed and viewed by others

(Patton et al., 2016). Keeping a mattering sense of importance or when an individual is cared

about is typically seen from friend groups, families, and significant others (Schlossberg, 1989).

As discussed by Patton et al. (2016), ego-extension, or the fundamental idea that one receives

support and matters to others, regardless of failures or successes, and that appreciation exists for
MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 4

efforts being put forth toward some project, goal, or task at hand. Lastly, the realization of

dependence occurs when the person has the internal belief that they are needed or depended upon

by others in some capacity (Schlossberg, 1989).

While there is always an ebb and flow motion that people seem to come across when

working with students and their concern for how others may view them or think about them,

Schlossberg's Theory of Mattering and Marginality allows the right framework for navigating

these efforts and assisting students when need be. However, there is a fundamental flaw or gap

within this theoretical framework. While we work as student affairs professionals to best provide

environments for students to foster and grow, we cannot solely rely on the theory of Mattering

and Marginality due to this gap. Due to this gap, we are not accounting for the most critical

stakeholder in a student’s collegiate experience: the student themselves and how they develop

their sense of internal mattering. However, thanks to the work of Marcia Baxter Magolda and her

Theory of Self-authorship, we can address this gap and work with students developmentally to

produce an idea of self-worth before tackling mattering to others.

Clarifying Self-authorship

Defined by Magolda (2008), self-authorship is the “internal capacity to define one’s

beliefs, identity, and social relations” (p. 269). Self-authorship becomes important to understand

because educators need to be readily available to aid students in their process of meaning-making

and allowing them to determine what their identity is and to what level it resonates with them.

Highlighted by Pizzolato (2003), we have to ask ourselves two questions when attempting to

provide avenues for self-authorship: “Do our students possess the appropriate ways of

knowing?” and “What experiences are associated with formulating that knowing?” (p. 797).
MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 5

These ideals allow a person to decide the differentiation between the authoritative

figures, usually followed in our formative years, and prescribing ourselves to following our own

set of principles or guidelines eventually answering these questions on their own. According to

the Theory of Self-Authorship, there are two distinct times when we go through these changes,

each comprised of sub-units of development. These two distinctions are bound in time and

according to the individual's age. When someone is going through the beginning stages of self-

authorship, deemed "phases," they are usually around typical college ages, 18-25 years of age

(Patton et al., 2016). The three “elements” of self-authorship, are for those within their adult life,

usually within their 30s (Baxter Magolda, 2008). In respect to addressing the gap that exists in

Schlossberg’s Mattering and Marginality theory, utilizing the beginning phases within the first

portion of self-authorship is vital.

Developed by Magolda, the four phases of self-authorship students will progress through

are: following formulas, crossroads, being the author of one’s life, and internal foundations

(2008). When an individual is found to be in the first phase of self-authorship, following

formulas, one can think of this process as the individuals that allow others to dictate their

decisions. Individuals found within this first phase are the ones who have their plans or life

events planned by an authority who is external to themselves. These authorities could be

considered a parent, guardian, or any other person who is viewed by the student having authority

over them and is typically exemplified by parents planning the college major and career path for

their students (i.e., doctors, dentists, lawyers). The appeasement and approval of actions within

phase one is a critical aspect of relationship building (Patton et al., 2016). When individuals are

identified to be in phase one, we typically see no sense of self-established. Moving through

phase one and into crossroads our phase two focuses on the moments when there are
MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 6

disorienting dilemmas that individuals face, and the plans made by the authority figures are not

their own and not wanted (Patton et al., 2016). Typically seen within these phases, there is a

revisiting to the formulas or plans made within phase one, where some re-configuring occurs to

move away from how their sense of self is identified by others (Baxter Magolda, 2001). Once

these identities are established work is needed by the individual to maintain fitting in with their

peers or "to matter" as well as standing out and being themselves.

As individuals move into the third phase, Being the Author of one’s life, we see students

alike attempting to stand solely on their views and beliefs (Baxter Magolda, 2001). Through this

phase, individuals are going to try to live their own identities and ideas out, yet they will struggle

and could even revert to the beginnings of phase three, sometimes late phase two as well (Patton

et al., 2016). According to the research and typical college student development, phase three is

where most of these individuals will fall. Students will attempt their new experiences, embrace

their freedom and be away from home through their phases of experimentation, questioning and

even challenge the systems with their own beliefs. As addressed by Mak and Marshall (2004), it

has been seen that individuals who are working or attempting to develop their ideas of self-

authorship/self-worth will work through these dilemmas and seek to recognize and align with

behaviors and views that align with their own. Characterized by an individual being able to

ground themselves thoroughly and their beliefs, Internal foundations is where students have

actualized and started living themselves as they see fit and as who they are (Patton et al., 2016).

With the new directions this brings, phase four provides for the best version or most self-

authored individual in their early 20s. Due to this theory heavily emphasizing meaning-making

and filling in the holes of mattering and marginality, a fusion of the two theories provides a

perfect model concerning all stakeholders in a student’s mattering.

MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 7

Incorporating Self-Authorship Into Mattering

Melding these two theories together provides an improved Theory of Mattering and

Marginality where we, as practitioners, can account for the student and how they evaluate their

ideas of self-worth when developing their own identities. When discussing the actual building of

oneself, it is not to accomplish the simple task of making you who you are, but to stake a

student's best self on those systems and to lay out what those structures will look like (Crocker,

Luhtanen, Bouvrette, & Cooper, 2003). To support this alteration of mattering and marginality,

we must understand that there is a need to recognize we matter to ourselves internally, and that

we cannot move forward and establish matter to others until this is accomplished (Rayle, 2006).

Moving away from the idea that mattering and marginality exist within a dipole structure, we can

eliminate the binary outcomes and allow for the more significant development of self-awareness.

Through doing this, we can structure mattering around self-authorship, ideally phases two and

three, to account for the discovery of mattering to both the individual and external entities (see

Appendix B). Once a student begins their journey of discovering their mattering, they will follow

through with phase one: finding formulas. Within phase two, the individual has moved away

from their sense of following the rules of others and has gone to developing their own. Upon

entering this second phase, it causes the individual to question their mattering, and will continue

until the individual has moved out of stage three. Once individuals move from stage three, they

are not worried about mattering to others and have transitioned into stage four and supported by

their own beliefs and cares.

In keeping with the idea of continually questioning mattering, individuals go through a

process of reflexivity. Described by Mak and Marshall (2004), reflexivity is the process of

internal processing and comparing where the individual has come from, where they want to go,
MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 8

and how mattering to others is affected. When these processes occur, they can return to the phase

where they entered, or they can move on to the next one, and possibly out of the realm of

mattering. Maintaining that marginality can still occur, individuals can again become

marginalized when they are not able to fully process an understanding of their mattering.

Conclusion

Research has shown that how much students feel they matter to others outside of

themselves plays a significant factor in their happiness and their level of marginality. When

students do not feel that they matter, they can quickly become marginalized, whether that is

temporary or not is unable to be determined. With the theory of Mattering and Marginality, this

dipole framework has only ever considered the relationship between the individual and those

external to themselves. However, as the most significant stakeholder of the student's self-worth

and mattering, educators must first allow students to establish themselves and their identities

before worrying about other. Reorganizing and inserting the elements of Baxter Magolda's

Theory of Self-Authorship allows, us as practitioners, to do just that. As suggested by Magolda

and King (2008), we can foster this by intentionally having or encouraging reflective

conversations with our students. During these conversations, we can account for the processed

self-discovery and worth. While the student continues to grow themselves, they are then able to

concern themselves with how others perceive them through critically analyzing their experiences

(both academic and social). Building on this change in perception allows for educators to assist

students in making them aware of their important voice, that they are their hardest critics, and

that their opinions of themselves genuinely come first and are what matters.
MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 9

References

Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R. K., Bouvrette, A., & Cooper, M. L. (2003). Contingencies of self-worth

in colleges students: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 85(5), 894-908. doi: 10.1037/022-3514.85.5.894

Magolda, M. B. B. (2001). Making their own way: Narratives for transforming higher

education to promote self-development. Sterling, VA: Stylus

Magolda, M. B. B. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student

Development, 49(4), 269-284. doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0016

Magolda, M. B. B., & King, P. M. (2008). Toward reflective conversations: An advising

approach that promotes self-authorship. Peer Review, 10(1), 8-11.

Mak, L., & Marshall, S. K. (2004). Perceived mattering in young adults’ romantic relationships.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21(4), 469-486.

doi:10.1177/0265407504044842

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student development in college:

Theory, research, and practice, 3rd Ed. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Pizzolato, J. E. (2003). Developing self-authorship: Exploring the experiences of high-risk

college students. Journal of College Student Development 44(6), 797-812.

Rayle, A. D. (2006). Mattering to others: Implications for the counseling relationship. Journal of

Counseling and Development, 84, 483-487.

Schieman, S., & Taylor, J. (2001). Statuses, roles, and sense of mattering. Sociological

Perspectives, 44(4), 469-484. doi:10.1525/sop.2001.44.4.469

Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and Mattering: Key issues in building community. New

Directions for Student Services, 48, 5-15.

MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 10

Appendix A

Schlossberg’s Theory of Mattering and Marginality (Schlossberg, 1989)

Mattering Continuum of Mattering Marginality

As described and defined by Schlossberg in 1989, the Theory of Mattering and

Marginality is two definitive poles that exist on a spectrum or continuum of mattering. This

continuum is represented above. One end of the spectrum; "Mattering" is when a student has

little to no marginality at all and feels they fully matter to other stakeholders or those external to

themselves. On the other end of the diagram, we see Marginality or the disorientation where

there is little to no mattering the student feels and cannot perceive their "fit."
MODIFYING HOW STUDENTS MATTER 11

Appendix B

Visual Representation Addressing the Gap Between Schlossberg's Theory of Mattering and

Marginality

Phase #1
• Finding Formulas

Phase #2
• Crossroads

Mattering
Reflexivity

Phase #3
• Being the Author of One's Life

Marginality Phase #4
• Internal Foundations

Depicted here is the Theory of Mattering and Marginality accounting for elements of the

Theory of Self-Authorship. Item of note is that within the text above, it states that when students

do not matter in this model, they can become marginalized for any amount of time. The dotted

arrow linking "Marginality" and "Reflexivity" depicts the circumstances of an individual being

able to remove themselves from marginality.