Running head: THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 1

Theory to Practice Case Study Analysis

Lauren Kelly
Bridgewater State University
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 2

Introduction:

Identity and self-authorship formation are integral parts of college student development

and can be both liberating and difficult processes. The following is an analysis of the case, “A

First Year Student’s Struggle with Identity” from Linking Theory to Practice: Case Studies for

Working with College Students (2012). The decision issues, essential facts, additional

information needed, key actors, relevant theories, alternative solutions, and course of action will

be outlined and explored. In this case study analysis, Marcia Baxter Magolda’s Theory of Self-

Authorship (2001) and the Unifying Model of Sexual Identity Development (2011) will be used

to inform a response through the student affairs lens.

Decision Issues:

In the case, “A First Year Student’s Struggle with Identity” the presenting decision issues

are responding to the individual, interpersonal, and institutional conflicts that arose in response

to a student’s coming out process (O’Halloran & Delaney, 2012). From the perspective of a

student affairs practitioner, the most central issue and concern is Susan, a first generation, first-

year college student who is struggling with her sexual identity development. This experience has

caused internal conflict and shame as she tries to reconcile her sexual identity with her religious

identity. It has also caused conflict with Susan’s roommate, Jenna, in whom she confided and

who has responded with homophobic comments and an unwelcoming living environment. As a

result, Susan reached out to her mother in hopes of leaving school, but her mother reacted by

calling the College President, Jack O’Brian, to condemn the college for fostering an environment

that supports the gay lifestyle. Finally, there are concerns from the Director of Institutional

Advancement, Joseph Takeem, about negative publicity with this incident and potential impact.
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 3

Essential Facts:

Susan is a first generation, first-year student in her second semester at a small liberal arts

college in an affluent, conservative suburb. The college has an active alumni base who make

many generous donations towards scholarships, which has recently resulted in the admittance of

a diversifying student population. Susan has experienced difficulty transitioning to college and

was referred to Counseling Services during first semester by her resident assistant (RA), Sharon.

During her second semester, Susan shared with Sharon her challenges associated with her sexual

identity development. Susan also came out to her roommate Jenna, who responded by telling her

that homosexuality is a sin, especially given that Susan is Catholic. Jenna has also made

homophobic comments and created a hostile living environment in which Susan doesn’t feel she

can be herself and explore this part of her identity. According to Woodford and Kulick (2014),

contemporary heterosexism occurs in more subtle ways such as derogatory slurs and social

exclusion, which is what is occurring between Jenna and Susan. As a result, this harassment

causes lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning (LGBTQ) students to anticipate

prejudice, hide their identity, and internalize stigma. Experiences of homophobia and

heterosexism correlate with increased academic disengagement and decreased acceptance on

campus, all of which are reasons to respond (Woodford & Kulick, 2014).

Additional Information:

There are many details not presented in the case study that would be integral in

determining the best course of action. It is not explicitly stated whether or not the institution is

religiously affiliated, which may affect how both the institution and alumni respond. It would

also be useful to know of existing or potential support systems on campus for Susan such as

faculty and staff, student organizations and affinity spaces, and resources for first-generation
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 4

students’ transition to college. Retention of minority-affiliated students is crucial to student

development and success, and requires academic and social integration through faculty/staff

relationships, peer relationships, and involvement (Woodford & Kulick, 2014).

With an increasingly diverse campus, what is offered for training and programming to

foster an inclusive environment for all students? What is the current campus climate, both in

terms of attitudes and norms, as well as current demographics? According to Rockenbach,

Riggers-Piehl, Garvey, Lo, and Mayhew (2016), key elements to determine campus climate are

the institution’s history and legacy with inclusion and/or exclusion, structural diversity reflected

in demographic data, psychological climate of attitudes towards different groups, and behavioral

climate of interactions between groups. This information would be important in assessing the

impact on LGBTQ student’s ability to construct knowledge, build relationships, and form their

sense of self. Given the college’s active alumni donor base and concerns about negative press,

what are their demographics and do any of them identify as LGBTQ? In Drezner and Garvey’s

(2016) research on LGBTQ alumni donors, they found identity plays a role in motivations to

give to one’s alma mater, allocation of gifts, and decisions not to donate, depending on the

campus climate.

Key Actors:

Susan Hernandez is the main student in this case study. She is a first generation, first-

year student who is undeclared. In addition to her transition to college and conflicts with her

roommate, she is coming to terms with her sexual identity. Sharon Burns is a senior and Susan’s

RA, with whom she shared this and her roommate challenges during their second-semester

check-in. Sharon had previously referred Susan to Counseling Services because of challenges

with adjusting to campus and feeling very down during their first semester check-in meetings.
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 5

Jenna Maggiano is Susan’s roommate, a transfer student majoring in Religious Studies, and is on

the executive board of the Catholic Students’ Association. Jack O’Brian is the College President

who is contacted by Susan’s mother, accusing the college of encouraging students to embrace the

gay lifestyle. Joseph Takeem is the Director of Institutional Advancement and is concerned

about the situation escalating and generating news attention. He reaches out to Kevin Dean, the

Director of Residence Life and is the one expected to respond to this issue. He has been brought

the information of this case by both Joseph and Sharon. In learning about the case, Kevin

reaches out to the Director of Counseling Services, Fiona Brennan, who explains she cannot

disclose anything Susan shared in counseling due to student confidentiality.

Relevant Theories:

Based on Susan’s current understanding and experience with her identity, the Unifying

Model of Sexual Identity Development (2011) and Self-Authorship Theory (2001) would be

most timely and relevant when working with her. In further exploration and analysis, James

Fowler’s Theory of Faith Development (1981, 1986, & 2000) may be useful in addressing

Susan’s faith formation in relation to her newly established self-authored identity.

The Unifying Model of Sexual Identity Development encapsulates the process of

individual and social identity development as it relates to a person’s understanding and

acknowledgement of their attraction towards others (Patton, Renn, Guido, & Quaye, 2016).

Susan has previously experienced attraction to women, but has started to contemplate acting on

these feelings for the first time. This acknowledgement of her sexual orientation identity

illustrate her ability to move through the compulsory heterosexuality and active exploration

stages. However, the negative response from her mother and roommate and inability to build

community have led to the diffusion stage, due to lack of purposeful exploration and
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 6

commitment. The lack of support, pressure to adhere to certain expectations, and exposure to

heterosexism have resulted in Susan’s, “underlying uncertainty or insecurity and is more likely

distressed by lack of commitments” (Patton et. al., 2016, p. 165). In order to achieve the

deepening and commitment and synthesis stages, there is need to address the intersection of

personal, cognitive, and identity development in order to experience integration in the campus

community, retention, and overall success in her college career (Woodford & Kulick, 2014).

Susan is also in the early stages of establishing her, “internal capacity to define one’s

beliefs, identity, and social relations,” (Rockenbach et. al., 2016, p. 500). This process reflects

the Self-Authorship Theory and involves the exploration and establishment of her own

knowledge, sense of self, and connection to others. Susan has begun to move through the

following formula phase into the crossroads phase as she tries to no longer adhere to other’s

expectations by establishing her own identity, values, and plan (Patton et. al., 2016). Her

challenges of adjusting to campus, coming out, navigating peer relationships, and being the first

in her family to go to college are rooted in her forming her own worldview. In order for her to

achieve becoming the author of her life and creating an internal foundation, she needs supportive

relationships that will encourage her to explore and live out her intersectional identity. In doing

this she can garner information to inform her sense of self, opportunities for self-reflection,

confidence to build her own belief-system in order to live out her authentic life.

Further analysis may explore Susan’s continued faith formation as she solidifies her self-

authored worldview and unifying sexual identity. It appears she is currently in Fowler’s second

of six stages of faith development: mythical-literal faith as messages from her religion are

impacting her understanding of her coming out process (Patton et. al. 2016). This is causing

Susan to experience spiritual struggle by questioning her beliefs, struggling to reconcile

THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 7

conflicting messages, and experiencing anger and disillusionment (Patton et. al., 2016).

However, it may be difficult to work through this until she has a more empowered sense of self.

Alternative Solutions and Advantages/Disadvantages:

The stakeholders in this case all play a role in responding and have options to explore in

considering the most pressing needs, available support and resources, and possible outcomes.

From the residence life perspective, Sharon and Kevin needs to respond and address the pressing

roommate conflict between Susan and Jenna. Possible solutions are mediation, psychoeducation,

and conflict resolution; or housing changes and reassignment for either Jenna or Susan. The

former could allow for each student to explore their own values, build acceptance of difference,

solidify their own identity formation, and explore commonalities and connection. However, it

could also exacerbate conflict between the two, leading to increased isolation and hostility.

Susan’s options are to transfer, drop out, establish connections with others on campus, or

maintain her current situation. In exploring opportunities to build community and connection,

Susan will inform her multiple intersecting identities and have an increased sense of belonging.

If she maintains her current situation, it is unlikely anything will change. Transferring may

allow her to attend a college where she feels more accepted, but there is also the potential she

may encounter similar challenges on a different campus.

President O’Brian could ignore this situation and consider it an isolated issue, or he could

use this as an opportunity to explore the current campus climate, especially for minority students.

His actions could either lead to inclusion and celebration of all students or decline in enrollment

if students do not feel accepted on campus. For Joseph, this situation may result in negative

attention and potential loss of donors, especially those who identify as LGBTQ. On the other
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 8

hand, this may be an opportunity to engage alumni and donors, allocating funds towards

programs that support current LGBTQ students who will become alumni and potential donors.

Course of Action:

Based on the information provided, it is important to for Susan to gain self-awareness,

understanding, and efficacy in order to grow and thrive during her college experience. Given the

negative messages, shame, and isolation Susan has received from Jenna, it would be important

for the Kevin and Sharon, from a residence life perspective, to facilitate intentional conversation

and mediation with both roommates. According to Woodford and Kulick (2014), by providing

spaces for each student to share their truth, they gain understanding and acceptance of one

another and find opportunities for common ground. They also suggest programming to address

heterosexist attitudes, intentional and unintentional contributions to negative experiences of

LGBTQ students, and skill building to be active bystanders (Woodford & Kulick, 2014).

Additionally, it is important to provide spaces and opportunities across campus for

interactions based on commonalities and differences that will empower Susan to explore and

embrace her intersectional identity and build community. Given that Susan has previously

questioned her sexual orientation and is in the crossroads phase of self-authorship, college may

be her first opportunity to form an understanding of her identity without imposed expectations or

messages (Patton et. al., 2016). Rockenbach et. al. (2016) suggest a few strategies to help

students develop their own worldview and greater understanding of themselves and others.

Some identity and affinity formation opportunities are curricular and co-curricular activities that

promote identity construction; relationship and mentorship building with faculty and staff,

especially those who identify as LGBTQ; and informal interactions with a diverse range of peers.

In their research Rockenbach et. al. (2016) found that all of these factors positively impacted
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 9

students’ self-authorship and fostered an empowering campus climate. Given Susan’s challenge

reconciling her sexual identity with her religious identity, it is important to also provide

programming that affirms the religious or spiritual experiences of LGBTQ individuals

(Rockenbach et. al., 2016). This would allow Susan to experience commitment of her

intersecting identities and understand other’s diverse experiences, in order to thrive in her self-

authored journey throughout college.

There are also actions that can be taken on an institutional level to promote a safe,

accepting, and empowering campus climate for all students through programming, campus

resources, and alumni engagement (Woodford & Kulick, 2014; Drezner & Garvey, 2016). For

the College President and Office of Institutional Advancement, it is important to acknowledge

that LGBTQ alumni giving is directly linked to perceptions and experiencing of inclusion within

campus climates (Drezner & Garvey, 2016). This is consistent with research on alumni of color

giving and for a college with an increasingly diverse student population, it would be crucial to

engage alumni in helping to foster a safe and accepting campus community. By focusing on

student wellness, potential donors can provide opportunities to connect allocated funds to

resources, programs, and services that will support LGBTQ students in their sexual identity and

self-authorship development.

Conclusion:

As a student affairs professional responding to this case through the lens of self-

authorship and sexuality identity development, it is important to ensure Susan’s overall

wellbeing. By addressing immediate needs within the housing situation and promoting

acceptance and understanding, Susan and Jenna can express their identities freely and build

common ground. Offering programming through residence life, student involvement, and
THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 10

academics to facilitate identity exploration and reflection, allows Susan to construct her own

worldview and build community with others through shared experience. Lastly, in promoting a

safe and empowering campus climate and allocating toward necessary resources for minority-

identified groups, students like Susan are able to persist and succeed in their college experience.

These opportunities will allow Susan to freely explore and construct her sexual and overall

identity, build systems of support, form her own outlook and approach to life, and have the

confidence to continue her ongoing exploration and development throughout the remainder of

her college experience.

THEORY TO PRACTICE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS 11

References

Drezner, N. D. & Garvey, J. C. (2016). LGBTQ alumni philanthropy: Exploring (un)conscious

motivations for giving related to identity and experiences. Nonprofit and Voluntary

Sector Quarterly, 45, 52-71.

O’Halloran, K. C. & Delaney, M. E. (2012). A first year student’s struggle with identity. IN F.K.

Stage & S.M. Hubbard (Eds.), Linking theory to practice: Case studies for working

with college students (pp. 189-190). New York, NY: Routledge.

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Development of faith and

spirituality. Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 196

-242). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Development of self-

authorship. Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 355-

377). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Sexual identity development.

Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 156-174). San

Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

Rockenbach, A. N., Riggers-Piehl, T. A., Garvey, J. C., Lo, M. A., & Mayhew, M. J. (2016). The

influence of campus climate and interfaith engagement on self-authored worldview

commitment and pluralism orientation across sexual and gender identities. Research in

Higher Education, 57, 497-517.

Woodford, M. R. & Kulick, A. (2014). Academic and social integration on campus among

sexual minority students: The impacts of psychological and experiential campus

climate. American Journal of Community Psychology, 55, 13-24.