By: Isaiah Lunsford Agenda Topics Covered Theory Introduction Background Literature Gaps in Theory & Literature Theory Proposal Theory Introduction Social identity development theory is relatively new in social sciences New perspectives on inequality and inequity have gained traction in 3rd wave identity development theory Dominant power structures still benefit privileged students, specifically White privilege combined components of Abes, Jones, and McEwen's MMDI and Baxter-Magolda’s Self Authorship, with an emphasis on critical paradigms Background Literature Abes et al. (2007) represents the multidimensional nature of identity Considers identity construction fluid and dynamic; subject to time and context at a particular moment Represented as a 2D atom with a core self and circling identities whose distance from the core shows their salience Newest MMDI iteration by Abes et al. (2007) incorporates a meaning making filter; filters experiences into identity, complexity of meaning making changes permeability of filter (Bettencourt,2020, p. 157) Background Literature Cont. Baxter-Magolda’s (2001) self- authorship theory Baxter Magolda (2008) defines self- authorship as "the internal capacity to define one's beliefs, identity, and social relations" (p.269) Set up as four phases that depend on time and context when developing a sense of self four phases:following formulas, crossroads, becoming the author of (Who Are You?, 2011) one’s life, and internal foundation (Patton et al., 2016) Gaps in Theory & Literature MMDI is still relevant as a proto-third wave model that away from white male students as the research focus (Perez, 2019) Limited sample of 10 female students; does not consider simultaneous privilege and oppression due to multiple identities(Brown & Craig, 2020) Self Authorship Theory had a limited, predominantly white population Constructivist paradigm does not consider the importance of power, privilege and oppression (Perez, 2019) Theory Proposal Theory Proposal Cont. Critical Self Authorship Model 1. Following Dominant Formulas 2. Awareness of Privilege 3. Becoming critical of one’s privilege 4. Internal Critical Foundation Fluid and Dynamic Ongoing process Conclusion Social identity construction is not in a bubble MMDI and Self Authorship begin to address time and context, but not privilege and oppression Privileged students must become aware and deconstruct their privilege The Model-Theory relationship would benefit from a large sample size and diverse identity representation in future research References Abes, E. S., Jones, S. R., & McEwen, M. K. (2007). Reconceptualizing the model of multiple dimensions of identity: The role of meaning-making capacity in the construction of multiple identities. Journal of College Student Development, 48(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2007.0000 Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student Development, 49(4), 269- 284. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0016 Bettencourt, G. M. (2020). “When I think about working class, I think about people that work for what they have”: How working-class students engage in meaning making about their social class identity. Journal of College Student Development, 61(2), 154-170. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2020.0015 Brown, R. M., & Craig, M. A. (2020). Intergroup inequality heightens reports of discrimination along alternative identity dimensions. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(6), 869-884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219880186 Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. John Wiley & Sons. Perez, R. J. (2019). Paradigmatic perspectives and self-authorship: Implications for theory, research, and praxis. Journal of College Student Development, 60(1), 70-84. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2019.0004 Who Are You? Self Authorship Defined. (2011, April 24). https://imjoeboe.wordpress.com/2011/04/28/self-authorship/