Analysing student affairs research within higher education through Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological model lens
| dc.contributor.advisor | Wahl, W. P. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Holtzhausen, Sophia Maria | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-10-19T09:17:51Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-10-19T09:17:51Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020-07 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Through Bronfenbrenner’s Person, Process, Context and Time (PPCT) model lens, this study identified the most important student affairs research themes for transforming student (including postgraduate students) learning and development in higher education, as well as how these themes might be managed or implemented best by higher education institutions. In order to address these questions, this five-article doctoral journey is situated within the parameters of Higher Education Studies, Student Affairs, Student Development Theory, and Ecology of Learning. All these fields of study and theories play a fundamental role in accomplishing student learning and development. However, this study predominantly is positioned within the field of student affairs, with special reference to Jones and Asbes’ (2017:143) third student development theory category. The motivation for this is that the study specifically concentrated on the ecological aspects of student development, reinforcing the applicability of Bronfenbrenner’s (2005) bio-ecological systems theory (i.e. the PPCT model) as a theoretical lens. Mainly qualitative data generation methods were employed in this study. The research findings are put forth in the format of five articles, which present a kaleidoscope of research that focused on the historical interval of 2008-2019: In Article 1 four North American directives and Kuh’s High Impact Educational Practices provided a development trajectory of the student affairs profession. Although Bronfenbrenner’s PPCT model lens has signposted four historical movements (in loco parentis, service providers, out-of-class development officers, and multiple educators), the reader should note that these student affairs practitioners’ roles are evolutionary. This study also found that scholarly student affairs practitioners should be flexible and theory-based in their praxis. Also, because student affairs function under a contemporary umbrella with broad and diverse responsibilities, there is substantial scope for further development in this field. Article 2 explores the student affairs research position worldwide between 2008 and 2019 in the light of an extensive document analysis of 926 student affairs research articles published in 91 peer-reviewed journals. The thematic categorisation of the Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS) was used to determine nine prominent and five new international publication trends as derived from the document analysis (CAS 2019). Thereafter, Bronfenbrenner's PPCT model, particularly the chrono-system, provided critical insights in this study about how and why student affairs manifest in worldwide higher education. Article 3 established an increase in and emphasis on African student affairs research. This provoked the significance of mapping African student affairs research during the past interlude (2008-2019) through Bronfenbrenner’s lens. The document analysis of 121 articles (published in 34 selected academic journals) confirmed nine of CAS’s prominent African student affairs research trends, while four new local themes were observed. Finally, postgraduate programmes and services requiring future exploration to extend and promote student affairs as a field of research and studies in the African context were identified. Article 4 focused on the interrogation, namely: In what way can scholarly article style postgraduate studies specifically enrich the field of student affairs? In this qualitative research journey, taken through Bronfenbrenner’s theoretical microscope, higher education experts and supervisors agreed that well-defined institutional policies, faculty/departmental guidelines, and assessment are essential for success. Subsequently, article option training and support for postgraduate students, supervisors, and student affairs practitioners are essential. This study’s final, proposed outcome is postgraduate attribute indicators for quality assessment of article style postgraduate studies, which require extensive future exploration. Finally, in Article 5 the findings of a 360-degree circle reflection on the four intervention guideposts are presented and analysed (through Bronfenbrenner’s PPCT model). Lessons learned to promote postgraduate student development could serve as catalyst for further research. | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11660/11938 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.rights.holder | University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Thesis (Ph.D. (Higher Education Studies))--University of the Free State, 2020 | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Article-style postgraduate studies, assessment | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Higher education | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Person-process-context-time model | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Policy | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Student affairs (with special reference to the roles of the practitioner) | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Student learning and development, quality | en_ZA |
| dc.title | Analysing student affairs research within higher education through Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological model lens | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_ZA |