Evolution, Revolution, and the Trouble with One-Size-Fits-All Education Theories

I almost deleted this.

Seriously—I was cleaning out my Google Drive, trying to reclaim some digital sanity, when I hovered over a file labeled CRLA Boston. It was a presentation my colleagues and I gave back in 2013, titled: “Evolution and Revolution: Transitioning to a Developmental Theory of Higher Education.”

That was over a decade ago. Ancient history, in education years. But as I skimmed through the slides, I realized—this still holds up. The questions we raised, the frameworks we explored, the tools we offered—they’re not just relevant. They might be more essential now than they were then.

So before I finally archive it, I thought someone out there might appreciate one last look.

Let’s be honest: most educators are cobbling together their practice from intuition, bits of research, a couple of frameworks they half-remember from grad school, and whatever survived last semester’s panic.

That’s not a complaint. It’s a miracle.

But if you’ve ever tried to help a student who’s overwhelmed, under-prepared, or just plain stuck, you know what it feels like to reach for something more structured. Some way to make sense of what’s going on. And that’s where theory is supposed to help.

But most theories aren’t built for real life. They’re clean, elegant, and usually written in language that makes your brain itch. Students, on the other hand, are chaotic systems of memory, identity, hormones, coping mechanisms, and Spotify playlists.

So the question becomes: How do we use theory without losing the human?

Leave a comment

In our CRLA session, we made the case that theories of student development are most useful not as diagnostic tools—but as navigation aids. They don’t tell you where a student will end up. They help you make sense of the terrain they’re traveling.

We anchored our session in two major frameworks:

• Chickering & Reisser’s Identity Development Theory — With its “Seven Vectors” of development, this model paints a picture of how students grow emotionally, socially, and intellectually over time. It’s not a checklist—it’s a compass.

• Schlossberg’s Transition Theory — This one’s about change: how people experience it, adapt to it, and what supports or hinders that process. It’s especially helpful for understanding how students navigate the move into (and through) higher education.

We also drew from Erikson, Perry, Knefelkamp, and Baxter Magolda—because if one theory can't capture the whole picture, five might get us closer.

Evans et al. put it perfectly:

“Development of the whole student is more complex than one theory or even a cluster of theories can explain.”

Exactly.

The challenge, of course, is translation.

Theories don’t apply themselves. If we’re not careful, they get turned into PowerPoint filler or personality quizzes. So we spent much of the session asking: How do you actually use these frameworks in practice—without flattening students into case studies?

Our answer:

• Use theory to generate better questions, not tighter conclusions.

• Adapt interventions to fit the student’s stage—not your workflow.

• Balance challenge with support. (Thanks, Knefelkamp.)

• Train others with the same humility you wish you’d been trained with.

To make it real, we gave attendees an activity packet full of exercises they could use with students or to train colleagues. It’s one thing to nod along with the theory. It’s another to see what happens when you try it on in your advising session or learning lab.

Share

We called the session “Evolution and Revolution” because that’s exactly what higher education needs. Not a firebombing of old models—but a thoughtful overhaul.

An evolution in how we think about development.

A revolution in how we respect complexity.

And a refusal to pretend that students are puzzles to be solved rather than people in motion.

Theories, when used well, help us move from reactive to responsive. From assuming to inquiring. From fixing to facilitating.

If you work in education, advising, tutoring, or mentoring—this stuff is for you. Not because it gives you control, but because it gives you language, pattern, and pause. It helps you show up a little smarter, a little slower, and a lot more attuned.

Are Schools Still Killing Creativity?

As a psychologist and educator with nearly 20 years in the field, I've witnessed countless trends come and go in the system. But one perspective has remained consistently relevant throughout: Sir Ken Robinson's revolutionary ideas on creativity in education.

If you found something useful here, you’re welcome to steal it, share it, or start a conversation with it. That’s how these ideas stay alive.

And if you’re one of the brave souls who attended our session back in 2013 and still remember it—thank you. You helped prove our point: that theory becomes real when it’s held in community, tested in practice, and never allowed to rest.

As for the presentation file?

Still in the Drive.
For now.

(Just kidding; I deleted it)