Defining Spiritual Development: A Missing Consideration...

15
NASPA JOURNAL, Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999 Defining Spiritual Development: A Missing Consideration for Student Affairs Patrick Love Donna Talbot +:+ Spirituality and spiritual development have been conspicuously absent from student development theories and ignored by many student aflairs professionals. The authors argue for conside~ation of spiritual development by student development theorists, provide a definition and framework through which to consider spirituality and spiritual development, examine Maslow’s (1971) and Chickening and Reisser’s (1993) work through a spiritual lens, and suggest directions for future practice and research. Spiritufity and spiritual development are topics that do not appear very often in higher education and student affairs literature. k fact, ody one short essay addressing spirituality or spiritual development (Colb, Hurst, &Jacobsen, 1987) has appeared in any of the major student affairs journals ~.e., Journal of College Student Development, me NASPA Journal, College Student Aflairs Journal, and College Studwt Journal) in the past 15 years. Reluctance to address spirituality in the field of student affairs is neither surprising nor unusual given the context in whi~ it exists higher education.. tie reason for this reludance is that spirituality is often associated with refigion and is, therefore, an uncomfortable topic to dismssin society (Bokan &Deal, 1995) and on college campuses (Colti Patrick Love is an Assistant Professor of Higher Education, Kent State Univusi&, Kent, Ohio. Donna Tal/7ot is an Assistant Professor at Western Michigan Universi~, Kalama- zoo, Michigan. 361

Transcript of Defining Spiritual Development: A Missing Consideration...

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999

Defining SpiritualDevelopment: A Missing

Consideration for StudentAffairs

Patrick LoveDonna Talbot

+:+

Spirituality and spiritual development have beenconspicuously absent from student development theories

and ignored by many student aflairs professionals. The

authors argue for conside~ation of spiritual development bystudent development theorists, provide a definition and

framework through which to consider spirituality and

spiritual development, examine Maslow’s (1971) and

Chickening and Reisser’s (1993) work through a spiritual

lens, and suggest directions for future practice and

research.

Spiritufity and spiritual development are topics that do not appear veryoften in higher education and student affairs literature. k fact, ody oneshort essay addressing spirituality or spiritual development (Colb,Hurst, &Jacobsen, 1987) has appeared in any of the major student affairsjournals ~.e., Journal of College Student Development, me NASPA Journal,College Student Aflairs Journal, and College Studwt Journal) in the past 15years. Reluctance to address spirituality in the field of student affairs isneither surprising nor unusual given the context in whi~ it exists highereducation.. tie reason for this reludance is that spirituality is oftenassociated with refigion and is, therefore, an uncomfortable topic todismssin society (Bokan &Deal, 1995) and on college campuses (Colti

Patrick Love is an Assistant Professor of Higher Education, Kent State Univusi&,Kent, Ohio.Donna Tal/7ot is an Assistant Professor at Western Michigan Universi~, Kalama-zoo, Michigan.

361

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999

et al., 1987). Cultird norms in the United States dictate that issues relatedto refigion or spirituality are private matters (Coflins et al., 1987). Thisis most evident in the constitutional mandate for “separation of churchand state” so often championed by politicim, educators, and others,and of such a concern on public college campuses (Moberg, 1971). Beyondcultural norms, the Western paradigm of empirical, positivistic, objective,“value-free” knowledge so cherished in traditional academia had noroom for issues of faith, hope, and love ~aher, 1993). Academe, how-ever, is moving increasingly toward a postmodem perspective in whichvalues, assumptions, and beliefs play a central role in the social sciences(Tiemey & Meads, 1993). With this in mind, stident affairs professionalsmust understand the role that such values as faith, hope, and love playin the structure and persistence of communities, in the construction ofknowledge, in the understanding of truth, and in developmental pro-cesses of students.

The purpose of this article is to provide information about the intentionalinclusion of spirituality and spiritial development in the discourse ofthe stident affairs field and the area of student development. The articlebegins by providing a rationale for the inclusion of spiritidity andspiritual development in the s~olarship of student affairs. Propositionsare then provided as a basis for a definition and conceptual frameworkof spiritual development. Finally, the spiritual aspects of two studentdevelopment theories are dismssed and a course for future practice andresearch is suggested.

Why Spirituality and Spiritual Development?

There are several reasons for including spirituality in the discourse andscholarship of the stident affairs profession. The first is based on a verytraditional and closely held assumption of the profession the value ofholistic student development (American Cound for Education, 1937;1949). By faifing to address stidents’ spiritual development in practiceand research we are ignoring an important aspect of their development.Another reason is that these concepts are being addressed in other relatedhelping professions and in academic disciplties that have traditionallyinformed our practice, such as psychology (Ferrucci, 1982; Helminiak,1996; Tart, 1990), health (Allen & Yarian, 1981; Banks, 1980), social work(Canda, 1988; SerrnabeMan, 1994), counseling (Chandler, Holden, &Kolander, 1992; Hinterkoff, 1994; hgersoll, 1994; Maher & Hunt, 1993),nursing (Henderson, 1989; Krohn, 1989; Piles, 1990; Sims, 1977), andteaching and learning (Benally, 1994; Farber, 1995; Palmer, 1993). Thiswidening discussion not ody si@s a challenge to the titird assump-tion that spirituality is a taboo topic in academe, but dso provides aninterdisciplinary foundation of knowledge upon which a definition of

362

Love, Talbot

spiritual development can be devised. There dso continues to be a surgein the quest for spiritid or religious ti~ment both within society andamong traditiond-aged college students. This trend is evident in theincreasing empha;is on community service and service learning~acoby, 1996; Lankard, 1995), the rise of new age spirituality (Walz-Michaels, 1996), the growing emphasis on servant-leadership (Fraker &Spears, 1996), and the continued attraction to ~ts and tit-we groups@lunt, 1992).

Avoid has existed on cmpus and in academe related to spiritidity andspiritual development. There are few places to t~ about these topicsother than religious studies programs and campus ministry offices, whichcan be naxrow avenues for discussing issues of spirituality. Traditioti-aged co~ege students often experience a period of displacement, confu-

sion, and discomfort as they develop cognitively and emotionally. Duringthis time, stidents may be attracted to traditional and fundamentalistreligions, dts, and cult-like groups that promise definitive answers,especially in this area of spirituality and spiritual development. For manyeducators and student affairs professionals, the fear is that these groupsrequire, c)ften vehemently, a convergence of thoughts and beliefs fromtheir followers. This expectation necessarily works against values suchas free inquiry, exploration and questiotig. However, during a periodof time when students struggle to make meaning in and of their fives,they wfll seek support and stabflity. Unfortunately, the profession’sfailure to engage in discussions of spirituality and spiritual developmentmay contribute not otiy to foreclosure on matters of spirituality, but tioto a general narrowness of perspective and an inability or unwfignessto think critica~y, explore valuerelated issues, and question authorities.

Toward a Definition of Spiritual Development

There is no comrnody accepted definition of spirituality. hgerso~ (1994)noted that others have described it as communication with God (e.g.,Fox, 1983), a movement towards union with God (e.g., McGill& McGreal,1988), a focus on titimate concerns and meanings of life (e.g., TWch,1959), and betief in a force greater than onese~ (e.g., Booth, 1992; Wittrner,1989). h trying to define spirituality, others have introduced conceptsand language that focus on a partitiar outcome or state of being (Hawks,1994), or on the process of spiritual development (Chandler et d., 1992).StiU others have grounded aspects of spiritid development in traditionalstudent development theory. For example, Fowleds (1981) stages of faithdevelopment are based in part on Perry’s (1970) stages of inte~ectualdevelopment. In our efforts to incorporate spirituaEty into the discussionof stident development in higher education, we have developed a set

363

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999

of propositions that can guide discussion in the field and provide aframework tiough which to research the topic.

Several assumptions undertie the propositions we describe. First, thequest for spiritual development is an innate aspect of human develop-ment (Chander et d., 1992), though one “cannot cause experiences of aspiritual natire to occur; one can o~y create certain conditions in whichspiritial experiences are more likely to OCCUF’(Chandler et al., 1992,p. 169). Also, while innate, motivations toward spirituality can berepressed (Haronian, 1972). Second, spiritual development and spiritua-lity are interchangeable concepts in that both represent a process (i.e.,movement, interaction, transcendence) with no endpotit.

A third assumption is that openness is a prerequisite to spiritual develop-ment. Chander et al. (1992) describe a balanced openness. @timalopenness exists between the extremes of repressing spiritual elementsin one’s life @eing closed to spiritial experiences or spiritual aspects ofexperiences) and being obsessed by spiritual experiences. Being open tospiritual development need not be conscious, intentional, or defined asopenness to spiritual development. k fact, Helrniniak (1996) argued thata dynamic openness of spirit is behind human curiosity and longingand is, therefore, the root of ongoing development in human beings.@enness to spiritual development can include being in awe of one’ssurroundings, havtig a sense of wonder about the world, being receptiveto the as yet unexplained, being alert and sensitive to changes in one’srelationships, or being curious as to the root of our emotions.

The propositions Estedbelow acknowledge a wide range of belief systemsthat may or may not incorporate orgatied religions. Some of the compo-nents cited in these propositions, such as spiritual developments focuson connectedness to self and others, transcending locus of centricity, andderiving meaning, are aspects of traditional psychosocial and cognitivedevelopment theory. ~s relates to the contention that spiritual develop-ment is an important and titegrd aspect of stidents’ development.These five propositions arc not stages, nor are they listed in a hear,chronological order. ~ey are processes that are interrelated and oftenare in evidence concurrently.

1. Spiritual development involves an internal process of seeking personalauthentici~, genuineness, and wholeness as an aspect of identi~ develop-

ment.

Seeking personal authenticity, genuineness, and wholenessinvolves the process of developing a sense of self that is unitary (asopposed to fragmented), consistent, congruent with our actions andbeliefs, and true to our sense of se~. This process can be motivated

364

Love, Talbot

by the unrest or dissatisfaction individuals feel when their sense ofvalues and meaning are not clear or not congruent with the way theyEve theh lives. Benner (1988) describes the pursuit of authenticity,genuineness, and wholeness as “the response to a deep and mysteri-ous human yearnin~ (p. 104). This unsettled feeling encouragesindividuals to be introspedve about their lives and the conditionsunder which they have chosen to exist. This self+xamination, inmany ways, is inevitable developmenta~y as individuals strugglewith identity issues—and questions of who they are.

2. Spiritual development involves the process of continually transcending

one’s cuflent locus of centiicity.

To transcend means to go beyond one’s wrrent limits. Leean (19M)

describes spiritual development as the ongotig process of learning

and growing through life’s challenges b the direction of seM-tran-scendence. According to Maslow (1971), “transcendence refers tothe very highest and most inclusive or hoEstic levels of humanconsciousness” (p. 269). Helrniniak (1996) describes the transcen-dent dimension of spiritiafity as being aware of something beyondthe spatial-temporal world.

When discussing “locus of centricity,” Gander et d. (1992) differ-entiate among an unhealthy egocentricity (seM-centered and narcis-sistic), a healthy egocentricity (edightened self-interest), humani-centritity (centered in humanity), geocentricity (centered in theplanet), and cosmocentricity (centered in the cosmos). Certatiy,be~een egocentricity and hurnanicentricity there exist other levelsof centeredness related to the communities we experience and ofwhich we are a part, such as family, neighborhood, school, andchurch. Within each of these communities there can be variouslevels, such as nuclear famfly and extended ftiy.

3. Spiritual development involves developing a qeato connectedness to se~and others through relationships and union with community.

“Spirituality is personal [and] intimate.. . . All human existence hasa spiritual aspe~’ ~ones, Wainwright & Yarnold, 1986, pp. xxiv,xxvi), yet spirituality is dso rooted in connectedness, relationship,communion, and community with the spirit, and the sense of spiritthat often exists in true communities (Fowler, 1981). Bolman andDed (1995) address the issue of “communi~ in relationship tospirit:

fistoricaUy, humans have found meaning in work, family, commu-nity, and shared faith. They have drawn upon collective resourcesto do what they cotid not do alone. United efforts-raising a barn,shotig a levee, rescuing earthquake victims, or singing a hymn—have brought people together, created enduring bonds, and exem-

365

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fail 1999

4.

plified the possibilities of collective spirit. (p. 6)

The paradox of spirituality is that its experience is personal andunique, but otiy finds its fullest manifestation in the context ofan ever broadening, mutially supportive community (Helrniniak,1996). Community also relates to the notion of increased knowledgeand love, the contents of spiritual development. Palmer (1993)asserts that knowledge is love; however, he ako indicates that

Scholars now understand that knowing is a profoundly communalact. Nothing cotid possibly be known by the sofitary se~, since theself is inherently communal in natire. horder to know something,we depend on the consensus of the community-a consensus sodeep that we often draw upon it unconsciously. (p. xv)

Spiritual development involves deriving meaning, pu~ose, and directionin one’s llfe.

Canda (1989) refers to spirituality as the basic human drive formeaning and purpose. The content of spirituality and the focus ofthe process of spiritual development is greater knowledge andgreater love (Chandler et d., 1992); it is knowledge and love thathelp provide meaning, purpose, and direction in one’s life. Heti-iak (1996) describes the directionality of spiritual development

The... openness of spirit is oriented in a partialar direction. Theided goal of spirit is bein~ afl that there is to be known (and loved).So the openness of spirit entails a movement toward that all. . . .Spiritis nature is continually to move, to reassess, to rework, untilit attains its ultimate goal, the complete and coherent appropriationof dl reality. This dynamism of spirit is behind the unending curios-ity and insatiable longings of the human heart. This dynamism isat the root of ongokg development in human beings. (p. 68)

h these postmodem times, knowledge relates not ody to a greaterworldview (Chandler et al., 1992), but to the recognition of the role ofpower, values, and assumptions on the fabrics of our communities.BenaMy (1994) explati that knowledge is spiritial according tothe Navajo philosophy of learning and pedagogy. The purposeof gathering knowledge, which must be internalized as guidingprinciples for life, is to “draw one closer to a state of happiness,harmony, and balance” @. 30). In the context of spirituality, loverefers to the Greek notion of agape. Agape is the unseEsh love ofone person for another, a love that reaches out to others withoutexpectation of return. It is the “acceptance of what is, and a motiva-tion to bring about change that results in the greater good. Togetherwith greater knowledge, this implies an evolving sense of Me pur-pose with its increasingly comprehensive and constructive systemsof ethics and values” (Chandler et al., 1992, p. 169). It is a “growth

366

Love, Talbot

5.

in good will toward one’s fe~ows” ~ones et d., 1986, p. 565). Loveprovides direction for the process of spiritual development and forthe spiritufly developed person. Most of our cognitive develop-ment theories fores on the process of meaning mtig; spiritualitygives focus and direction to those processes and a context in whichto apply one’s love, increasing kowledge, and advanced cogni-tive sWIS.

Spiritual development involves an inmeasing openness to emlorin~ a-. ,-relationship with an intangible and pemasive powfl or essence that exists

bqond human existence and rational human knowing.

Spirituality also relates to the relationship with and openness tothe !duence of forces that exist beyond oneself (Opatz, 1986).Related to transcendence, as one develops spiritudy there is agrowing recognition of a spirit or force larger than oneself; a forceaccessible ody through fai~, hope, love, and other nonrationalaspects of human experience. This spirit is often referred to+spe-cially in Western tradition and religions-as God, but its experienceand definition has varied throughout time and across titures. Forexample, Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism are profoundlyspiritial traditions, yet m~e no reference to God.

Kennedy (1997) cites EMs, Hedstrom, Hughes, Leaf, and Saun-ders’ (1988) description of individuals who are at advanced levelsof spiritual development:

These individuals . . . bow that there is more than what they cansee md that it is important to stay in touch with this other world.Spiritual individuals how that fife has meaning and that there isa purpose to their lives. ~ey have a sense Aat they need to accom-plish a mission or ti~ a destiny in their lives. Spiritual individualsbelieve that all life is sacred. They can find wonder in even ordinarythings. . . . Spiritual individuals are aware of the tragedies of Me.We this gives their lives a serious side, it dso m~es them seetheir lives as more valuable. Spiritual individuals have evidence ofspirituality in their lives. ~eir spirituality til affect their relation-ships with themselves and with everyone and everything aroundthem. (p. 7-8)

T&en together the five propositions describe spiritual developmentas an interrelated process of seehg se~-howledge and centeredness,transcending one’s current locus of centricity, being open to and embrac-ing community, reco@ing an essence or pervasive power beyondhuman existence, and having that sense of spirit pervade one’s fife.

367

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999

Spirituali~ and Student Development Theo~

b order to substantiate the assertion that spiritual development needsto be considered by student development theoreticians and practitioners,the work of psychosocial theorists Maslow (1971) and Chickening andReisser (~ckering & Reisser, 1993) is examined to highlight spiritidelements tieady present in tradition student development theory.MS examination provides support to the suggestion that introducingspirituality to the discussion and research of student development is notas big a leap as some might assume.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needsk Maslow’s (1971) hierarchy of needs the pinnacle of development isself-actutiation. mat is rarely mentioned is that Maslow differentiatedbetween “mere” self-actualization and self-actualization that is self-tran-scendent. h his work, he appeared to use the terms se~-transcendenceand spirituality synonymously. Maslow also identified non-seti-actud-tied individuals who had transcendent experiences, propostig that spiri-tuality is evident throughout the developmental process. h fact, humandevelopment is incomplete without consideration of spiritual develop-ment

me spiritial life is . . . part of the human essence. It is a definingcharacteristic of human nature, without which human nature isnot fl human nature. It is part of the Real Self, of one’s identity,of one’s inner core, of one’s specieshood, of full humanness. (p. 314)

Maslow addressed issues that have since come to be known as postmod-ern-rejection of the concept of “value-free” knowledge, the inabflity to“objectively” study and know somethti~ and the critical importance ofexamining subconscious culture-and linked these to spiritial develop-ment.

me value life and the animal fife are not in two separate retisas most religions and p~osophies have assumed, and as dassicd,impersonal saence has assumed. me spiritual tie . . . is withinthe jurisdiction of human thought and is attainable in principleby man’s own efforts. . . . Let me dso make quite explicit theirnptication that metarnotivation is species-wide, and is, therefore,supraculturd, common-human, not created arbitrarily by titire.. . . Cultire is definitely and absolutely needed for their actualiz-ation;but dso culture can fail to atialize them, and indeed this isjust what most known cdtires actually seem to do. . . . ~erefore,there is implied here a supraculturd factor which can criticize anyculture from outside and above that titure, namely, in terms

368

Love, Talbot

of the degree to wfich it fosters or suppresses self-actu~ation.(p. 3“14-15)

Therefore, spiritual development, Me student development, can eitherbe fosterecl or inhibited by the environmental context in which studentsEve, grow, and develop. Maslow (1971) dso spoke to the intentionaldevelopmat of the spiritual elements of the human experience. Wti-mately, Maslow ar~ed for an integration of spiritual development prac-tices into other aspects of our work focused on learning and development.

Chickening and Reisser’s VectorsWithin the vector of “Developing htegrity~ tickering and Reisser(1993) presented three interrelated aspects: humanizing values, personal-izing values, and develophg congruence. Much of the discussion ofhurn~tigvdues in Education and ~denti~ focused on issues and experi-ences related to religion and church. Again, it is important to distinguishbetween spiritual development and religious values, beliefs, and behav-iors. Pascmella and Terenzini (1991) found that most of the researchdone in tie area of religious attitude &ange fell into two categoriesgeneral religiosity and refigious activities. Most studies in the past 30years have shown significant declines in religious attitudes, values, andbehaviors. However, the specific practices ofien addressed are churchattendance, prayer, grace before reeds, identification with a partidarreligious denomination, and beliefs in a supreme being. We some ofthese, it maybe argued, relate to rejection of spirititity, most do notaddress issues of spirituality at all; they are merely external measuresor practices associated with religion.

G the other hand, changes in students identified in the literature of thepast 30 years not often associated wifi retigion, but congruent with theproposition related to spiritu~ty and spiritual development, include amovement toward greater altruism, humanitarianism, and social con-saence, more soaal, racial, etic, and pofiticd tolerance, greater supportfor the rights of tidividuals and for gender equdty, and increasingopenness and other-person orientation (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991).Each of these changes can be argued as being at least somewhat spiritualin nature.

Viewed from the lens of spirituality, Chickening and Reisser’s (1993)notion of Ilumanizing values takes on a distinctly spiritu~ tone

In the earlier developmental stages, moral rules and religioustea~gs are interpreted fiterally, But if the stories are seen tocontradict each other or if the teachings contradict fife experience,titeralism breaks down. New teachers maybe found, but sooner

369

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999

or later, interpreters are bound to differ. As students deal withtensions between anaent traditions and new ideas, conformityand questionin& guilt and freedom, self-interest and unse~ishness,they slowly recognize the need to take responsibility for definingtheir own positions, to commit to beliefs that ring true to theirdeepest selves, while remaining open and tolerant. (pp. 240-241)

~s description reflects the propositions presented earfier in that spiritu-ality, w~e developed within a community or tradition, is, ultimately,personal and idiosyncratic; it is a process, and it is punctuated by crises.

my these two brief examples of developmental fieories have beenviewed through a spiritid lens. k this case, they were both psychosocialtheories. Certtiy, additional insights can be gained by exarninin g thework of moral development theorists, such as KoMberg (1971) and Gflli-gan (1982), as we~ as the work of other cognitivestructurd theorists,through a spiritual lens. But beyond the examination of current theory,there is the need to explore the spiritual development of college stidentsas a primary focus.

Continuing the Exploration

me challenges of studying spirituality from a scholarly perspective aremany. As Collins et al. (1987) point out,

Spirituality does not lend itself to scientific study done.. . . Spiritu-ality requires different methods of consideration and investigationthan those used through scientific approaches in most subject areas.Spirituality rests on the balance of faith and experience, on bothrevelation and reason. @enness to traditional and nontraditionalapproaches to investigation and understanding must be consid-ered. (p. 275)

me time has come when nontraditional approaches to the stidy ofspirituality and spiritual development among college stidents is war-ranted. Qualitative research has moved from the periphery of socialscience methodologies to acceptance as a legitimate form of research.

Assumptions related to the epigenetic nature of development (Erickson,1968) maybe another obstacle to the study of spirituality. Wle a “groundplan” may be somewhat genetica~y predetermined for cognitive devel-opment and w~e mainstream and middle-class societal itiuences mayaffect the relative similarity of psychosocial and identity developmentamong college stidents, perhaps the variations in students’ spiritual

370

Love, Talbot

experiences make it diffidt to develop pasimotious theories of spiritualdevelopment. Another possible challenge to the study of spiritual devel-opment among college students is related to the nature of the co~egeexperience for traditiond-aged stidents (especidy those tiving at col-lege). With its movement away from family and comrmmity of origin,its challenges to previous ways of thinking and believin~ and its assaulton a variety of “authorities;’ going away to college maybe experiencedas a form of spiritual emergency or crisis, a time when “one is over-whelmed or preoccupied with spirituality” (Chandler et d., 1992, p. 170).We spiritual emergences, due to their overwhelming nature, oftencause a temporizing of spiritual development, they do provide the gristfor futie development.

Jones et al. (1986) argue that “spiritual development is no steady, regularadvance, but is punctuated by crises in which growth appears to havecome to a. stop for a time; old battles have to be refought and oldexperiences relived at a deeper lever’ (p. 566). As evidenced by ticker-ing and Reisser’s (1993) description of the crises faced by college studentsas they struggle to develop integrity, co~ege may be a time when for sometraditiond-aged students growth in spirituality may appear stopped, atime when beliefs need to be reexamined and prior experiences re~ved.The challenges to their current spirituality maybe overwhehtig. There-fore, in the case of some traditiond-aged college stidents, spiritiddevelopment may temporize md appear to be not occurring at dl oreven regresstig. FraWy, we just do not know, because we have notlooked at students’ experiences through the lenses of spirituality andspiritual development.

Implications for Practitioners

Despite the relative lack of knowledge or understanding of, as well asthe potential discomfort with, co~ege students’ spiritual developmentand the research that needs to be done, there are practical implicationsfrom the information presented. These impficatiom relate to incorporat-ing the recognition of spirituality into interactions with students

1.

2.

Student affairs professionals need to reflect on their own spiritualdevelopment. This means considering how they derive meaning,purpose, and direction in their lives, how they are growing inconnectedness with se~ and others, and how they are or are notgrowing toward a greater openness to a relationship with anintangi-ble and pervasive essence beyond human existence and rationalknoM7ing.

Student affairs professionals must be open to issues of spiritualdeve~opment in students. This may mean looking beyond issues of

371

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999

religion and differentiating between retigion and spirituality. It may*O entati the recognition of retigion as a manifestation of students’search for spirituality.

3. Student affairs professionals must recognize that emotional crisesin a studenfs life may have a spiritid element or, in fact, may bea spiritid emergency or crisis. Failure to recognize this possibilitymay restit in misdirected advice or counselin& or a misdirectedreferral.

4. Student affairs professionals need information and training relatedto spiritufity and spiritual development. Unti spiritual develop-ment is incorporated into the canon of student development theory,it maybe up to professional organizations to encourage this infor-mation dissemination through workshops and conference pro-grams.

implications for Researchers

me propositions have been structured in such a way as to encourageand focus research on the spiritual development of college students andcan be viewed as a starting point. Additional questions to aid in thisexploration include

mat is the relationskp between spiritual development and the role ofspirituality in development?

Mat are the processes of spiritual development?

Can spirititity be intentionally developed?

How is spiritual development stiar or distinct from faith development,cognitive development, moral development, or psychosocial develop-ment? How do these interact?

Can a student reach a higher level of cognitive, moral, or psychosocialdevelopment without having developed somewhat spiritedly?

Conclusion

~s article, like that of COWS et al. (1987) over 10 years ago, representsa call for a focus on the exploration of students’ spiritual development.At a time when co~ege students are faced with more challenges thanever before, continuing to neglect this aspect of development makes us

372

Love, Taibot

less effedive as educators. As a profession, however, we need to knowmuch more about spiritual development. ~ promises to be a ri~ andvaluable exploration.

References

American Council for Education (1937, 1949). The student personnel pointof vim. Washington, DC: Author.

Allen, R. J., & Yarian, R. A. (1981). The domain of health. Health Education,12(4), 3-5.

Banks, R. (1980). Health and the spiritual dimension: Relationships andimplications for professional preparation programs. Journal of School Health,50, 195-202.

Benally, H. J. (1994). Navajo philosophy of learning and pedagogy.Journal of Navajo Education, 12(1), 23-31.

Benner, D. G. (1988). Psychotherapy and the spiritual 9uest, Grand Rapids,~ Baker Book House.

Blunt, D. H. (1992). Cults on campus: Awareness is key. AGB Reports,34(l), 31-33.

Bokan, L . G., & Deal, T. E. (1995), Leading with the soul: An uncommonjourney of the spirit. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Booth, L. (1992). The stages of religious addiction. Creation Spirituality,8(4), 22-25.

Cancla, E. R. (1988). Spirituality, religion, diversity, and social workpractice. Social Casework: The Journal of Contemporary Social Work, 69, 238-247.

Canda, E. R. (1989). Edward Canda’s response. Social Casework: TheJournal of Contemporary Social Work, 70,572-574.

Chandler, C. K., Holden, J. M., & Kolander, C. A. (1992). Counseling forspiritual welhess: Theory and practice. Journal of Counseling and Development,71(2), 168.175.

Chickening, A., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identi~ (2nd Ed.). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Collins, J. R., Hurst, J. C., &Jacobsen, J. K. (1987). The blind spot extended:Spirituality. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28(3), 27476.

E&ins, D. N., Hedstrom, L. J., Hughes, L. L., Leaf, J. A., & Saunders,C, (1988). Toward a humanistic-phenomenological spirituality: Definitions,description, and measurement. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 28(4), 5-17.

Erickson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York Norton.Farber, P. (1995). Tongue tied: On taking religion seriously in school.

Educational Theory, 45(l), 85-100.Ferrucci, P. (1982), tit we may be: Techniques for psychological and spiritual

growth thvough psychosynthesis. Los Angeles Jeremy P. Thatcher.Fowler, J. W. (1981). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development

and the quest for meaning. San Francisco: HarperCollins.Fox, M. (1983). Original blessing. Santa Fe, NM: Bear & Co.Fraker, A., & Spears, L. (1996). Seeker and servant. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

373

NASPA JOURNAL,Vol. 37, no. 1, Fall 1999

Harofian, F. (1972). Repression of fhe sublime. New York psychosynthesisResearch Foundation.

Hawks, S. R. (1994). Spiritial health Definition and theory. WellnessPerspectives, 10, 3-13.

Helminiak, D. A. (1996). Tk human core of spirituality: Mind as psyche andspirit. Abany, W: SUNY Press.

Henderson, K. J. (1989). Dying, God, and ange~ Comforting throughspiritual care. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing, 27(5), 17-21, 31-32.

Hinterkoff, E. (1994). Integrating spiritual experiences in counseling.Counseling and Values, 38, 165-175.

hgersoll, R. E. (1994). Spirituality, religion, and counselkg Dimensionsand relationships. Counseling and Values, 38, 98-111.

Jacoby, B., & Associates. (1996). Service-1earning in higher education:Concepts and pracfices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Jones, C., Wainwright, G., & Yarnold, E. (1986). The study of spirituality.New York: Oxford University Press.

Kennedy, D. B. (1997). Spiritual development. Unpublished manuscript.Kent State University, Ohio.

Kohlberg, L. (1971). Stage of moral development. In C. M. Beck, B. S.Crittenden, & E. V. Sullivan (Eds.), Moral education (pp. 23-92). Toronto:University of Toronto Press.

Kramni&, I., & Moore, R. L. (1996, November/December). The Godlessuniversity. Academe, 82, 18-23.

Krohn, B. (1989). Spiritual care: The forgotten need. NSNA/Imprint, 36(l),95-96.

Lankard, B. A. (1995). SeYvice leayning: TYends and issues alerts.

Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. ERIC

reproduction number—ED 384737.

Leean, C. (1984). Spiritual and psychological life cycle tapestry. ReligiousEducation, 83(l), 45-51.

Maher, M. F., & Hunt, T. K. (1993). Spirituality reconsidered. Counselingand Values, 38, 21-28.

Maslow, A. H. (1971). The fayfher Yeaches of human nafure, New YorkPenguin Books.

McGill, F. N., & McGreal, I. P. (Eds.) (1988). ChYistian spiyifuality: Theessential guide to the most in~uenfial spiyifual wrifings of the Christian tradition,San Franasco: Harper & Row.

Moberg, D. O. (1971). Spiritual well-being: Background. Washington, D. C.:

White House Conference on Aging.

Opatz, J. P. (1986). Stevens Point A longstanding program for stidents

at a Midwestern university. American journal of Health Promo fion, 1(l), 60-67.Palmer, P. J. (1993). To know as we are known: Education as spirifual journey.

San Francisco: Harper.Pascarella, E., & Teremini, P. (1991). How college aflects sfudents. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of in fellecfual and ethical development in the college

years: A scheme, New York Harcourt Brace Javanovich College Publishers.Piles, C. (1990). Providing spiritial care. Nurse Educator, 15(1 )., 3641.Sermabeikian, P. (1994). Our clients, ourselves: The spiritial perspective

and social work practice. Social Work, 39(2), 178-183.

374

Love, Talbot

Sims, C. (1977). Spiritual care as part of hofistic nursing. NSNA/Imprint,24(4), 63-65.

Tart, C, T. (1990). Adapting Eastern spiritual teachings to Westernculture. journal of T~anspersonal Psychology, 22(2), 149-166.

Tierney, W. G., & Rhoads, R. A. (1993). Postmodernism and criticaltheory in higher education Implications for research and practice. In J. C.Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook for theoy and research, vol 9 (pp. 308-343). New York: Agathon.

Tillich, P. (1959). Theology of culture. New York Oxford University Press,Wal~;-Michaels, G, (April, 1996). The spiritual and educational

dimensions of the New Science movement. Paper presented at the annualmeeting o:f the American Educational Research Assoaation, New York. E~Creproduction number—ED 394822.

Wittmer, J. M. (1989). Reaching toward wholeness: An integratedapproach to we~ being over the life span. In T. J. Sweeney (Ed.), Adleriancounseling: A practical approach for a new decade. Muncie, IN: Accelerated Press.

+:+

375