Encouraging Authenticity and Spirituality in Higher Education E-Book

Arthur W. Chickering

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Bildung
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 607

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2015

Beschreibung

This groundbreaking book provides a comprehensive resource that addresses the growing movement for incorporating spirituality as an important aspect of the meaning and purpose of higher education. Written by Arthur W. Chickering, Jon C. Dalton, and Leisa Stamm--experts in the field of educational leadership and policy--Encouraging Authenticity and Spirituality in Higher Education shows how to encourage increased authenticity and spiritual growth among students and education professionals by offering alternative ways of knowing, being, and doing. Encouraging Authenticity and Spirituality in Higher Education includes a rich array of examples to guide the integration of authenticity and spirituality in curriculum, student affairs, community partnerships, assessment, and policy issues. Many of these illustrative examples represent specific policies and programs that have successfully been put in place at diverse institutions across the country. In addition, the authors cover the theoretical, historical, and social perspectives on religion and higher education and examine the implications for practice. They include the results of recent court cases that deal with church-state issues and offer recommendations that pose no legal barrier to implementation.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

Title

Copyright

Foreword

Dedication

Preface

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Authors

PART ONE: Framing Perspectives

CHAPTER ONE: Our Orientation

THE LANGUAGE CHALLENGE

VALUES AND INDOCTRINATION

OUR BEDROCK ORIENTATION

THE AUTHORS

THE NEED

CHAPTER TWO: The Dynamics of Spirituality and the Religious Experience

THE MULTIDIMENSIONALITY OF RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY

THEORIES OF RELIGIOUS AND SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT

CONCLUSIONS

CHAPTER THREE: The Influence of Religion and Spirituality in Shaping American Higher Education

FROM DENOMINATIONALISM TO DIVERSITY: THE CHANGING NATURE OF AMERICAN RELIGIOUS AND SPIRITUAL LIFE

THE RELIGIOUS FOUNDATIONS OF AMERICAN HIGHER EDUCATION

THE SECULARIZATION OF THE ACADEMY

SPIRITUAL SEEKING ON CAMPUSES TODAY

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

PART TWO: Institutional Amplification

CHAPTER FOUR: Policy Issues: Legislative and Institutional

THE CONSTITUTION

FORMULATING INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST DEAN OF STUDENTS OFFICE GUIDELINES FOR RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS AUGUST, 1994

GUIDELINES FOR UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS CAMPUS RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS

RELIGIOUS LIFE AT EARLHAM COLLEGE

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER FIVE: Curricular Content and Powerful Pedagogy

CURRICULAR CONTENT

TEACHING, LEARNING, AND STUDENT-FACULTY RELATIONSHIPS

IT’S MORE THAN TECHNIQUE

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER SIX: The Place of Spirituality in the Mission and Work of College Student Affairs

MEDIATING SPIRITUALITY THROUGH CAMPUS CULTURE

RESPONDING TO NEW TRENDS AND PATTERNS OF COLLEGE STUDENT SPIRITUALITY

TRENDS AND PATTERNS IN COLLEGE STUDENT SPIRITUALITY

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STUDENT AFFAIRS PRACTICE

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER SEVEN: Integrating Spirit and Community in Higher Education

THE DECLINE OF COMMUNITY AND SPIRITUALITY IN THE ACADEMY

COMPARTMENTALIZING COMMUNITY ON CAMPUS

COMMUNAL LIFE IN COLLEGE AND THE SPIRITUAL QUEST

FORMS AND MEANINGS OF COMMUNITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION

REENGAGING SPIRIT THROUGH CAMPUS COMPACTS

STRATEGIES FOR PROMOTING COMMUNITIES THAT INTEGRATE SPIRIT AND COMMUNITY

CONCLUSION

PART THREE: Getting There from Here

CHAPTER EIGHT: Planned Change and Professional Development

INSTITUTIONAL AMPLIFICATION

CONVERSATION 1: WHAT ARE OUR AGREEMENTS OF BELONGING?

CONVERSATION 2: WHAT SHARED VISIONS AND MEANING DRIVE OUR WORK?

CONVERSATION 3: WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO CO-CREATE AND CARE FOR OUR INSTITUTIONS?

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

TWO WORKING EXAMPLES

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER NINE: Assessing Ineffable Outcomes

ALVERNO COLLEGE—A WORKING EXAMPLE

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER TEN: Leadership for Recovering Spirit

BRINGING SPIRIT BACK INTO HIGHER EDUCATION

LEADING FROM THE HEART: PRACTICES FOR GENERATING AUTHENTICITY, MEANING, AND PURPOSE

CREATING AN INSTITUTIONAL CULTURE OF VALUES AND PURPOSE

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER ELEVEN: Principles and Practices for Strengthening Moral and Spiritual Growth in College

BACKGROUND

THE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES

CONCLUSION

APPENDIX A: University of Missouri-Columbia Policy Statement

ASSOCIATION OF CAMPUS RELIGIOUS ADVISORS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA BY-LAWS, 1997

CODE OF ETHICS

APPENDIX B: Illustrative Course Syllabi

FIRST YEAR SEMINAR 13: EROS AND INSIGHT

AGONY AND ECSTASY: SPIRITUALITY THROUGH FILM AND LITERATURE

SPIRITUALITY AND BUSINESS LEADERSHIP

APPENDIX C: Rutgers Evaluation and Dissemination Plans

DEVELOPING MODELS OF INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE

APPENDIX D: Teacher Formation Evaluation Results

APPENDIX E: Inventory for Assessing the Moral and Spiritual Growth Initiatives of Colleges and Universities

WHAT ARE THE PRINCIPLES?

COMMENTS:

PRINCIPLE 1: THE INSTITUTION MAKES A DELIBERATE AND COMPREHENSIVE EFFORT TO COMMUNICATE ITS CORE VALUES, PURPOSES, AND MORAL COMMITMENTS TO STUDENTS, FACULTY, STAFF, AND OTHER KEY CONSTITUENTS.

PRINCIPLE 2: THE INSTITUTION MODELS ITS MISSION AND CORE VALUES THROUGH ITS LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATIONS.

PRINCIPLE 3: THE INSTITUTION’S MISSION AND CORE VALUES ARE INTEGRATED WITH ACADEMIC PROGRAMS.

PRINCIPLE 4: THE INSTITUTION TRANSLATES ITS VISION AND VALUES INTO GUIDELINES REGARDING CONDUCT AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITIZENSHIP.

PRINCIPLE 5: THE INSTITUTION PROMOTES PUBLIC DIALOGUE AND DEBATE ABOUT ITS MISSION AND CORE VALUES.

PRINCIPLE 6: THE INSTITUTION TAKES DELIBERATE STEPS TO HELP STUDENTS CRITICALLY EXAMINE AND ACT ON ITS MISSION AND CORE VALUES.

PRINCIPLE 7: THE INSTITUTION PROMOTES A PURPOSEFUL, CARING, AND INCLUSIVE CAMPUS COMMUNITY.

PRINCIPLE 8: THE INSTITUTION IS COMMITTED TO THE HOLISTIC LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF STUDENTS.

PRINCIPLE 9: THE INSTITUTION ASSESSES ITS EFFORTS TO STRENGTHEN AUTHENTICITY, SPIRITUAL GROWTH, MEANING, AND MORAL PURPOSE.

PRINCIPLE 10: THE INSTITUTION HONORS ACHIEVEMENTS OF AUTHENTICITY, SPIRITUALITY, MEANING, AND MORAL PURPOSE.

References

Name Index

Subject Index

End User License Agreement

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Begin Reading

List of Tables

CHAPTER SEVEN: Integrating Spirit and Community in Higher Education

Table 7.1. Taxonomy of Student Compacts.

CHAPTER TEN: Leadership for Recovering Spirit

Table 10.1. Presidents’ Rankings of Principles for Character Development.

Table 10.2. Practices to Promote Character Development.

Table 10.3. Special Programs and Exemplary Practices to Implement Character Development on Campuses.

APPENDIX E: Inventory for Assessing the Moral and Spiritual Growth Initiatives of Colleges and Universities

Table E1. SUMMARY SHEET FOR SCORING PRINCIPLES

Table E.2.

Table E.3.

Table E.4.

Table E.5.

Table E.6.

Table E.7.

Table E.8.

Table E.9.

Table E.10.

Table E.11.

Table E.12.

Table E.13.

Table E.14.

Table E.15.

Table E.16.

Table E.17.

Table E.18.

Table E.19.

Table E.20.

Table E.21.

Table E.22.

Table E.23.

Table E.24.

Table E.25.

Table E.26.

Table E.27.

Table E.28.

Table E.29.

Table E.30.

Table E.31.

Table E.32.

Table E.33.

Table E.34.

Table E.35.

List of Illustrations

CHAPTER SIX: The Place of Spirituality in the Mission and Work of College Student Affairs

Figure 6.1. Have you observed an increase or decrease among your students in spiritual concerns and involvements during the past five years?

Figure 6.2. Do you believe there is a significant difference between religion and spirituality?

Figure 6.3. Are you concerned that engaging students’ spiritual interests and involvements more actively on your campus may create legal problems?

Figure 6.4. Are students dissatisfied with traditional religion?

Figure 6.5. Students are cynical about the moral examples of society’s leaders

Figure 6.6. Interest in spirituality reflected in students’ participation in campus activities that have a spiritual focus

Figure 6.7. Students are disillusioned by our society’s materialistic values

CHAPTER EIGHT: Planned Change and Professional Development

Exhibit 8.1. Questions for Reflection, Conversation 3.

Pages

cover

contents

iii

iv

vii

viii

ix

x

xi

xii

xiii

xiv

xv

xvi

xvii

xviii

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

Encouraging Authenticity and Spirituality in Higher Education

Arthur W. Chickering

Jon C. Dalton

Liesa Stamm

Copyright © 2006 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.

Published by Jossey-BassA Wiley Imprint989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103-1741 www.josseybass.com

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, fax [phone], or on the Web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, 201-748-6011, fax [phone], or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

Readers should be aware that Internet Web sites offered as citations and/or sources for further information may have changed or disappeared between the time this was written and when it is read.

Jossey-Bass books and products are available through most bookstores. To contact Jossey-Bass directly call our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at 800-956-7739, outside the U.S. at 317-572-3986, or fax [phone].

Jossey-Bass also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Chickering, Arthur W., 1927-

Encouraging authenticity and spirituality in higher education / Arthur W. Chickering, Jon C. Dalton, Liesa Stamm.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 0-7879-7443-9 (alk. paper)

1. Education, Higher—Aims and objectives—United States. 2. Spirituality—Study and teaching (Higher)—United States. I. Dalton, Jon C., 1941- II. Auerbach, Liesa Stamm, 1944- III. Title.

LB2324.C49 2005

378.01—dc22

2005012620

FIRST EDITION

Foreword

Although American higher education can justifiably take pride in its capacity to develop the student’s ability to manipulate the material world through its programs in science, medicine, technology, and commerce, it has paid relatively little attention to the student’s “inner” development—the sphere of values and beliefs, emotional maturity, moral development, spirituality, and self-understanding.

What is most ironic about this neglect of the student’s interior is that many of the great literary and philosophical traditions that constitute the core of a liberal education are grounded in the maxim, “know thyself.” This imbalance in emphasis on outer versus inner development has enormous implications for the future not only of our society but also of our world. Self-understanding is fundamental to our capacity to understand others: our spouses, partners, parents, children, friends, coworkers, and neighbors, not to mention people of different races, religions, cultures, and nationalities. If we lack self-understanding—the capacity to see ourselves clearly and honestly and to understand why we feel and act as we do—then we severely limit our capacity to understand others.

In exploring the connection between spirituality and higher education, a good way to start is to take a look at the interior lives of today’s students. Thus, if we look at how our students’ values have been changing during recent decades, the good news is they have become strong supporters of both gender and racial equity and of students’ rights in general. The bad news is that they have become much less engaged both academically and politically, much more focused on making a lot of money, and much less likely to concern themselves with “developing a meaningful philosophy of life.” These contrasting values—the material and the existential—have literally traded places since the early 1970s, a time when developing a meaningful philosophy of life was the number one value for students. Today “being very well off financially” is the top value, whereas developing a meaningful philosophy of life has dropped way down on the list. In short, a focus on the spiritual interior has been replaced by a focus on the material exterior.

It’s probably safe to say that this shift in values is a reflection of changes not just in students but also in the larger society. Research suggests that at the societal level, the ascendance of television during the 1950s and 1960s—with its wall-to-wall message of acquisitiveness and its near-total absence of any emphasis on self-reflection—had been a major cause of these value shifts. Today, of course, we have many other kinds of electronic distractions that make it even more difficult for the student to engage in serious self-reflection. In higher education, our colleges and universities have become larger, more acquisitive, and increasingly impersonal, as exemplified by the rapid increase in commuting and part-time attendance, not to mention the current burgeoning market in so-called distance education. In the academy we’ve also seen the ascendance of business and physical science—with their exclusive focus on material exteriors—and the parallel demise of the humanities, the very fields whose priority is (or at least ought to be) our interiors. Our own field of psychology—in its eagerness to emulate the hard sciences—long ago separated itself from philosophy and, for a period of time—during the heyday of behaviorism—argued vigorously that there was no such thing as the interior. Cognitive science and neuroscience have subsequently tried to acknowledge the existence of a human interior reality, but view it primarily as an epiphenomenon of physical processes.

In recent years the two of us have become increasingly interested in educational transformation and reform, and nowhere is the importance of this issue of “the inner versus the outer” more obvious than in the case of attempts to change institutions. When we talk about educational reform in the academy, for example, we usually focus heavily on exterior “structures,” such as programs, policies, curricula, requirements, resources, and facilities. As a consequence, we ordinarily give little attention to the “interior” of the institution, by which we mean the collective or shared beliefs and values of the faculty that constitute the “culture” of the institution. Research, however, suggests strongly that any effort to change structures has little chance of success if it ignores our collective interiors or culture. In other words, changing our institutions and programs necessarily requires us to change the academic culture—our collective interiors—as well.

As a response to this external and materialistic emphasis and to the fragmentation it generates, we see a movement gradually emerging in higher education where many academics find themselves actively searching for meaning and purpose and trying to discover ways to make their lives and their institutions more whole. We think this movement reflects a growing concern with recovering a sense of meaning and authenticity in American society more generally. How do we achieve a greater sense of community and shared purpose in higher education?

Given that “spiritual” issues cover such a wide range of questions, each person will view his or her spirituality in a unique way. For some academics, religious beliefs form the core of their spirituality; for others, such beliefs play little or no part. How one defines his or her spirituality or, if you prefer, sense of meaning and purpose in life, is not the issue. The important point is that academia has for far too long encouraged us to lead fragmented and inauthentic lives, in which we act either as if we were not spiritual beings or as if our spiritual side were irrelevant to our vocation or work. Under these conditions, our work becomes divorced from our most deeply felt values, and we hesitate to discuss issues of meaning, purpose, authenticity, and wholeness with our colleagues. At the same time, we likewise discourage our students from engaging these same issues among themselves and with us, even though many of us personally and privately engage in reflection about these concerns.

These observations were confirmed in a recent in-depth study of faculty members from four diverse colleges and universities.1 Personal interviews with randomly selected faculty from each institution revealed that virtually all these faculty members were willing and able to speak openly about the role of either “spirituality” or “meaning and purpose” in their professional and personal lives. Many respondents expressed their spirituality through their scholarly work. Other avenues of expression included teaching and working with students, community service, social activism, church activities, and child rearing.

When it comes to the issue of authenticity, many faculty members report conflicts between their own values and those of their institutions, the most frequent being the devaluing of work with students in order to fulfill expectations for research and scholarly achievement. Other areas of inauthenticity involve performing administrative work that they see as a waste of time, sacrificing personal research interests in order to carry out studies that will receive collegial approval, not fulfilling family responsibilities in order to meet institutional expectations, and not giving colleagues honest criticism of their work.

Our clear impression from this study—that college faculty are eager to discuss issues of meaning, purpose, and spirituality—has been strongly reinforced by our experience at several national conferences where sessions have been convened for academics to discuss these same issues.

Under these circumstances, this book could not be more timely. And given the complexity and importance of the topic, it would be difficult to find three authors whose collective backgrounds and experience are more appropriate to the task, considering that in addition to their many scholarly accomplishments, one or more of them has served higher education in the capacity of faculty member, policymaker, administrator, and student affairs professional. They have approached their challenging task in a comprehensive fashion, integrating cultural and historical perspectives with practical advice about how to reshape programs in order to give greater attention to the spiritual dimension of student growth and development.

The authors’ first chapter in Part One introduces us to the topic by addressing a number of fundamental and potentially sensitive issues concerning the place of spirituality in higher education: what spirituality means and how it differs from religiousness, education versus indoctrination, and the fundamental importance of self-knowledge. They also provide us with three brief autobiographical essays so that we may understand the personal perspectives each one brings to the task. They conclude with a series of powerful arguments for why higher education needs to begin giving greater priority to issues of spirituality and authenticity.

In the next chapters, the authors discuss the changing roles of religion and spirituality, both in higher education as well as in the larger U.S. society. These discussions help us not only see how and why the twentieth-century process of secularizing American higher education ended up throwing out the student’s interior along with the religious bathwater but also understand some of the ethical and legal issues surrounding religion and spirituality in higher education.

Part Two takes us from the conceptual to the very practical issues of how we can begin to enrich our curricula, pedagogy, student affairs programs, and sense of community by giving greater emphasis to cultivating spirituality and authenticity in our colleges and universities.

Part Three addresses the challenges of “institutional amplification” Part Two has suggested. It considers issues concerning planned change and professional development, assessment, and leadership. The book concludes with a very insightful and practical summary of principles and practices that can be followed by any institution that might be interested in “strengthening spiritual growth and the search for meaning and purpose.”

We congratulate the authors for a very difficult job well done. At a very critical time in the history of American higher education, they have produced a comprehensive and very accessible treatise that should be widely read by faculty members, student affairs professionals, staff, trustees, and administrators in all types of institutions.

Alexander W. AstinHelen S. AstinUniversity of California, Los Angeles

1

A. W. Astin & H. S. Astin, with the assistance of A. L. Antonio, J. Astin, & C. M. Cress. (1999).

Meaning, purpose and spirituality in the lives of college faculty

. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute.

Art Chickering: To my grandchildren, Lars, Gabriel, Silas, and Luke, hoping for a better world for their grandchildren.

Jon Dalton: To my family, Beverly, Stacy, and Jonathan.

Liesa Stamm: To my family with whom I continue to engage in the search for the truth and who serve as models for acting out of conviction: my parents, John and Beverly, my brother, Eric, my children Aaron, Peter and Ana, and my granddaughter, Rebecca.

Preface

This book aims to help two- and four-year colleges and universities amplify existing programs in ways that encourage increased authenticity and spiritual growth among our students and among us professionals. It argues that our almost exclusive emphasis on rational empiricism needs to be balanced by similar concern for other ways of knowing, being, and doing. We do not suggest neglecting our devotion to scientific research and theory. We do suggest complementing this work with policies, programs, and practices that create a better balance.

We believe that our institutional effectiveness with our students will be enhanced when we help them address these key developmental issues. We also believe that it is important for us to recover our own sense of calling, to recapture our sense of the values and purposes that brought us to our various roles and responsibilities. We believe that by participating in these efforts, we strengthen our motivation to plug away at this work in the face of budget cuts, political neglect, and public challenges. Most important, perhaps, we believe that our work life, day in and day out, year in and year out, will include more joyful, satisfying, and rewarding experiences.

We suggest various areas for what we choose to call “institutional amplification.” We are not talking about “transformation.” One definition of amplify is “to make larger or great, as in amount, importance, or intensity.” We want to acknowledge and to build on the good work we all are doing, not discount it. We want to sharpen our sense of our own worth and to build on our professional strengths and purposes. We think our diverse higher education colleagues and other professionals have the talents and perspectives needed for them to undertake and implement a variety of additional alternatives. Indeed many of these efforts are already under way here and there around the country. We want to examine these perspectives and to share working examples.

The book has three major sections. Part One supplies some framing perspectives. Part Two offers specific suggestions for changes to strengthen authenticity and spiritual growth. Part Three discusses how these changes can be pursued.

In Part One, Chapter One addresses our orientation. It discusses our definitions of spirituality and authenticity and shares some of our personal backgrounds. It closes with a discussion of issues that make us believe these amplifications are urgently needed, for ourselves and our students, for our colleges and universities, and for our domestic and global societies. The next two chapters offer theoretical, historical, and social perspectives on religion and higher education and on the current situation. This work is based on Liesa Stamm’s extensive literature surveys, face-to-face and telephone interviews, and years of direct experience in higher education.

Part Two considers general implications for practice. Chapter Four discusses public and institutional policy issues. It presents recent court cases dealing with church-state issues and notes that there is no legal bar to undertaking the changes we suggest. It then argues for creating institutional policies that can support and legitimize these efforts. Chapter Five addresses curricular content and powerful pedagogy. Chapters Six and Seven discuss the implications for student affairs policies and practices and for fostering an increased sense of community. We illustrate general propositions with specific policies and programs under way at diverse institutions across the country. Many of these illustrations come from presentations at the annual Institute on College Student Values conducted by Jon Dalton and his colleagues at Florida State University. Jon, through his Center for the Study of Values in College Student Development, has also completed surveys of college and university presidents and student affairs professionals that have generated useful, up-to-date results.

Part Three shares our thinking concerning strategies and processes necessary to achieve the amplifications suggested in Part Two. It opens with a chapter on institutional change and professional development. The next chapter tackles the challenges involved in assessing the “ineffable outcomes” associated with this complex arena. Following that is a chapter on the special leadership characteristics necessary to help us move in this direction. We close with some principles for good practice to strengthen authenticity and spirituality in higher education. Appendixes give examples of policy statements and detailed syllabi that illustrate our discussion of curricular content and powerful pedagogy. Appendixes also share evaluation and dissemination plans of Rutgers University, evaluation results with regard to a “teacher formation” program, and an assessment instrument based on the principles discussed in Chapter Eleven.

Throughout this volume we have tried to combine general propositions, principles, and recommendations with specific working examples. We do not believe that the institutional amplifications we suggest are mysterious or esoteric. They are consistent with what we know from prior research. Concrete, illustrative programs and practices can demystify ways to encourage authenticity and spiritual growth; for this reason, this book includes quite lengthy quotations, reports, case studies and such. You can choose which you wish to learn about in detail.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Needless to say, our work stands on the shoulders of a multitude of theorists and practitioners. There are too many for us to attempt a comprehensive list. There are, however, a few key people we need to recognize. Chickering’s initiation into the issues of spirituality in higher education began with a series of workshops stimulated and organized by Tony Chambers when he was a program officer at the Fetzer Institute. A working group that came to call itself the Initiative for Authenticity and Spirituality in Higher Education grew out of and is helping to carry forward that initiative. In addition to Chambers and Chickering, it includes Alexander and Helen Astin, Jon Dalton, Paul Elsner, John Gardner, Stuart Hunter, Cynthia Johnson, James and Cheryl Keen, Laura Rendon, Eugene Rice, and David Scott. The wisdom, activities, and support of these colleagues provided the backbone for Chickering’s motivation and substantive contributions.

Dalton would like to acknowledge the John Templeton Foundation for their support of his research and dissemination efforts on character development in college. He also thanks the many colleagues who have, over the past fifteen years at the annual Institute on College Student Values at Florida State University, shared their work and concern for the moral and spiritual development of college students.

Stamm would like to acknowledge the John Templeton Foundation’s support of the research that, in part, provided the basis for Chapters Two and Three. Special recognition goes to Arthur Schwartz, the foundation’s vice president for programs and services in the human sciences, for his valuable insights and contributions during the development of this research.

We also need to recognize both the editorial and substantive contributions David Brightman made through his penetrating critical suggestions and his leads to important relevant literature. Specific references and a variety of practitioners are mentioned in the text. All of them are quick to recognize their indebtedness to others. We hope that by pulling this wide-ranging work together we provide a basis for legitimizing and expanding conversations about this key arena for human development throughout our two- and four-year colleges and universities. Those conversations in turn may lead to the broad-based incremental changes required to balance our emphasis on rational empiricism with equal talent and energy that helps our students, and us professionals, address the lifelong, recurrent challenges to our authenticity and spiritual growth.

The Authors

Arthur W. Chickering is special assistant to the president of Goddard College. He began his career in higher education as a psychology teacher and coordinator of evaluation at Goddard College from 1959 to 1965. From 1965 to 1969, he directed the Project on Student Development in Small Colleges. In 1969–70, he was a visiting scholar in the Office of Research at the American Council on Education. From 1970 to 1977, as founding vice president for academic affairs, Chickering played a major role in creating Empire State College. He was Distinguished Professor and director of the Center for the Study of Higher Education at Memphis State University from 1977 to 1986; from 1986 to 1996, he was university professor at George Mason University. From 1996 to 2004, he was Visiting Distinguished Professor at Vermont College.