Learning Activities

Assignment Rationale 

Theory Work-Groups is a learning activity that supports students’ engagement with each of the Student Development Theory in Action (SDTiA) framework’s four interconnected components – i.e., (1) the sociopolitical contexts’s influence, (2) translation of formal/informal theory into action, (3) classroom and practice learning environmental considerations, and (4) theory building and practice assessments. At times, the formal theories/theoretical concepts introduced in this course can seem abstract or disconnected from lived experience. This interactive assignment is designed to help students think more concretely about Student Development Theory (SDT) by applying it to real-world examples. It emphasizes both critical engagement with theory and thoughtful representation of student lives. 

Assignment Overview 

Students will work in pairs to explore a selected SDT in depth. In addition to course readings, each pair will review two supplementary articles related to their chosen theory. Based on their research, pairs will identify an exemplar—a person, situation, event, or media artifact—that illustrates the theory or one of its components. The goal is not simply to match a theory to an example, but to complicate and critically explore how the theory interacts with real student experiences. Avoid exemplars that tokenize or oversimplify identities and narratives. 

Assignment Requirements 

a. Theory Work-Up (Written Submission) 

Each pair will upload a written “Theory Work-Up” and their exemplar prior to their presentation. The Theory Work-Up should be no more than one single-spaced page (excluding cover page and references), using the template provided by the instructor. In the Theory Work-Up, pairs will engage student development theory through a critical, reflective lens by: 

• Briefly outline the key assumptions or premises of the theory. 

• Critically reflect on the theory: 

• What aspects ring true? (reflecting on positionality/lived experiences) 

• What does not resonate? (reflecting on positionality/lived experiences) 

• What’s missing? (engaging in theory building) 

• Whose interests does the theory serve? (critiques of sociopolitical contexts) 

• To explain the connections between the theory and their chosen exemplar, students must grapple with the considerations below, posed by Duran et al., 2024: 

• Who Are College Students? How Do We Situate Their Journeys Within and Beyond College? 

• How Does Development Occur Within Larger Systems of Power and Oppression? 

• How Do Multiple Environments Influence College Students? 

• How Do We Challenge and Reimagine Developmental Trajectories? 

Duran, A., Abes, E. S., Stewart, D. L., & Jones, S. R. (2024). Looking back, moving forward, and everything in between: Revisiting student development’s relevance and enduring concepts. Journal of College Student Development, 65(2), 121-136. 

b. Presentation (In-Class Activity) 

Each pair will be given 15 minutes during class to: 

• Share their exemplar 

• Explain its connection to the theory 

• Facilitate a brief discussion or reflection, if time permits 

Schedule and Sign-Up 

Each pair will present times during the semester. A schedule of Theories/Concepts is offered below. Some Theories/Concepts are presented multiple times across theory groups (e.g., Yosso’s Community Cultural Wealth Framework), providing students the opportunity to showcase how theory can be applied across identity dimensions and classroom/practice learning environments. The forming of pairs and sign-up will be facilitated by the instructor. 

Sample Theory Work Group Schedule 

Module: Key Process of Student Development Theories/Concepts (poems/lyrics) 

1. Astin’s Theory of Student Involvement 
2. Tillapaugh’s Critical Praxis of Student Involvement And Engagement 
3. Marcia’s Ego Identity Statues
4. Josselson’s Theory of Women’s Development
5. Chickering’s Developmental Vectors

Module: Cognitive Development Theories/Concepts (case study/news clipping) 

1. Perry’s Theory on Intellectual and Ethical Development 
2. Belenky et al’s Women’s Ways of Knowing 
3. Black Feminist Thought 
4. Chicana Feminist Thought 
5. Kiyama’s Funds of Knowledge
6. Yosso’s Community Cultural Wealth Framework
7. Edward et al.’ Theory of Lifelong Learning

Module: Moral and Ethical Development Theories/Concepts (you create the diagram) 

1. Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development
2. Rest’s Theory of Moral Development
3. Rest’s Four Components of Morality
4. Gilligan’s Theory of Women’s Moral Development 

Module: Intercultural Maturity Theories/Concepts (portraiture or photo solicitation) 

1. Intercultural Maturity Model  
2. Refined Model of Intercultural Maturity 
3. Freire’s Critical Consciousness
4. Privileged Identity Exploration Model  

Module: Racial Identity development Theories/Concepts (video clips) 

1. Helms Model of White Identity Development
2. Cross & Fhagen-Smith’s Model of Black identity development
3. Porter’s Model of Identity Development of Black Undergraduate Women
4. Gallegos & Ferdman’s Model of Latina and Latino Ethnoracial Identity Orientations
5. Asian American Identity Development 
6. Middle Eastern and North African Identities 
7. VGT Model of Multiracial Identity Development   

Module: Ethnic & Nationality Identity Development Theories/Concepts (program/service idea) 

1. Linear Assimilation Model
2. Cultural Pluralism Model
3. Phinney’s Model of Ethnic Identity
4. Ferdman & Gallegos’s Model of Latinx identity development 
5. Torres et al.’s Lifespan Model of Latinx Ethnic Identity Development 
6. Ethnic Identity of Asian Americans
7. Ethnic Identity of Indigenous People
8. Middle Eastern and North African as Ethnicity
9. Ethnic Identity of African and Afro-Caribbean Americans
10. Social Identity Theory

Module: Adult learning Theories/Concepts (group choice) 

1. 

Module: Self-Authorship Theories/Concepts (poems/lyrics) 

1. Kegan’s Self-Evolution Theory
2. Baxter Magolda’s Self-Authorship Theory
3. Okello’s Self-Definition Theory

Module: Gender Identity Development Theories/Concepts (case study/news clipping) 

• Josselson’s Theory of Women’s Identity Development 
• Edwards & Jones College Men’s Gender Identity Development
• Sengupta & Upton’s Identity Development in College Women
• Ashton’s Self-Authoring Gender Outside the Binary
• Dolan & Garvey’s Emergent Model of Nonbinary Gender Identity Development
• Lange’s Model of Transgender College Students’ Identity Exploration Processes

Module: Sexuality Identity Development Theories/Concepts (you create the diagram) 

• Dillon et al.’s Unifying Model of Sexual Identity Development

Module: Disability and Social Class Identity Development (group choice) 

• Abes et al.’s Revised Model of Multiple Dimensions of Identity
• Liu et al.’s Social Class Worldview Model 
• Raferty et al.’s Maximally Maintained Inequality (MMI) 

Module: First Gen and Spirituality/Religious Identity Development Theories/Concepts (portraiture or photo solicitation) 

1. Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Theory
2. Yosso’s Community Cultural Wealth Framework 
3. Kiyama’s Funds of Knowledge
4. Fowler’s Stages of Faith Model 
5. Jones’s Reimagined Model 
6. Parks’ Theory of Faith Development in Young Adulthood 
7. Jewish College Student Identity 
8. Tajfel & Turner’s Social Identity Theory (SIT)
9. Berry’s Acculturation Model 
10. Peek’s Stage Model of Muslim Identity Development in College Students
11. Smith’s Atheist Identity Development Model

Module: Intersecting and Multiple Identities Theories/Concepts (group choice) 

• Jones & McEwen’s Model of Multiple Dimensions of Identity 
• Abes et al.’s Reconceptualized Model of Multiple Dimensions of Identity 
• Jones & Abes’s Intersectional Model of Multiple Dimensions of Identity 
• Porter’s Model of Identity Development of Black Undergraduate Women
• Linder’s Antiracist, White Feminist Identity Development 
• Duran & Jones’s Intersectional Model of Identity Exploration for Queer Students of Color 

Assignment Rationale 

The Informal Theory paper is a learning activity that supports students’ engagement with the translation of formal and informal theory component of the Student Development Theory in Action (SDTiA) framework. Each of us holds our own informal theories, beliefs, and assumptions about how and why students develop during college—what developmental challenges they face, and what areas of growth are essential for maximizing learning. According to the SDTiA framework, developing a critical awareness of your own growth and experiences  with privilege/oppression helps educators (e.g., instructors, supervisors, mentors, academic leaders, and student affairs educators) recognize the personal “informal theories” they use to understand others and their learning processes. This assignment encourages self-reflection to learners thoughtfully engage with the formal student development theories introduced in this course. 

Assignment Overview 

This is an individual assignment, where students will prepare and submit a reflection paper. Students are expected to use first-person voice, consistent with APA style guidelines for reflective writing. Students are not expected to share deeply personal information—and should include only what they feel comfortable disclosing. The submission will be read by the course instructor and the teaching assistant (TAs). 

Assignment Requirements 

Write a reflective paper (maximum 6 double-spaced pages, not including the cover page) that introduces you and responds to the following prompts: 

1. What changes contributed to those differences? 
2. How do you differ now, as a college senior, compared to your memories of yourself as a first-year student? 
3. What experiences—inside or outside the classroom (or lack thereof)—do you attribute those changes to? 
4. How would you summarize your student development journey throughout college? 
5. What advice would you give to students who want to make the most of their college experience? 

Grading Criteria 

Students’ papers will be evaluated based on: 

• The depth and thoughtfulness of your reflection 
• Clarity and coherence in articulating your ideas 
• Overall quality of writing and adherence to academic standards (no “correct” answers expected) 

Assignment Rationale 

The Formal Theory paper is a learning activity that supports students’ engagement with translating formal and informal theory within the Student Development Theory in Action (SDTiA) framework by helping them develop the theory-to-practice connections that deepen their understanding of college student development. Applying formal theory to their own real-life experiences deepens students’ understanding of how developmental processes unfold across classroom and practice settings in higher education, while also strengthening their theory-building and practice-assessment skills. 

Assignment Overview 

This is an individual assignment, where students will use formal theory to build on the analysis they presented in the Informal Theory Paper. 

Assignment Requirements 

Students must select one or more formal theories studied in this course to expand on the analysis they presented in the Informal Theory Paper. Specifically, the analysis presented in the Formal Theory Paper should: 

1. Connect the assumptions and core concepts of the selected theory or theories to your lived experience. 

2. Explain how specific elements of the theory or theories help account for your developmental growth during college. 

3. Evaluate the theory/theories by identifying any limitations or gaps in how well they explain your personal experiences. 

To support your expanded analysis, students are expected to conduct additional research beyond course readings. Students’ papers must cite a minimum of five (5) scholarly sources not assigned in class. These sources will help students more effectively situate their personal insights within relevant academic literature. 

The papers submitted for this assignment should be 10–12 double-spaced pages in length, excluding the cover and reference pages. Students can write in the first person, consistent with APA style guidelines for reflective and analytical writing. Papers will be reviewed by the instructor and the teaching assistant (TAs). 

Grading Criteria 

Students’ papers will be evaluated based on: 

• Alignment with all assignment guidelines 
• Clarity and coherence in presenting your ideas 
• Depth and insight in your analysis 
• Quality and correctness of academic writing 
• Integration and appropriate citation of scholarly sources 

Assignment Rationale 

Student Development: Site Observations is a two-part assignment designed to help students better understand how student development theory functions across various practice-based learning environments. By engaging in both dialogue and self-reflection, students will explore how educators (e.g., instructors, supervisors, mentors, academic leaders, and student affairs educators) use theory to support college students’ growth and development in real-world settings. In addition, this learning activity helps students strengthen their theory-building and theory-assessing practice skills—two inevitabilities of applying theory effectively within the Student Development in Action (SDTiA) framework. 

Part 1 Assignment Overview and Requirements: Conversation with Site Supervisor 

The goal of this component is to gain insight into the developmental goals of your assistantship/internship site or functional area. To do this, students will conduct a conversation with the site supervisor, guided by the following questions: 

• Who are the college students we serve? 
• What developmental outcomes (e.g., skills, attitudes, or forms of self-knowledge) do we aim to foster in these students? 

After your conversation, students must write a one-page, double-spaced reflective paper (excluding cover and reference pages) summarizing what they learned. The reflection should demonstrate thoughtful engagement with your supervisor’s perspective. Submissions will be read by the instructor and the teaching assistant (TAs). 

Part 2 Assignment Overview and Requirements: Self-Reflection 

This second part of the assignment encourages students to apply what they have learned about student development theory to their own practice. Their written reflection should: 

• Identify the developmental outcomes the student aims to foster in the students they serve 
• Highlight one or more formal theories that can help the student to support those outcomes 
• Demonstrate a deeper, more nuanced understanding of student development than what was presented in Part 1 

The reflection submitted should be no more than two double-spaced pages (excluding cover and reference pages). Submissions will be read by the instructor and the teaching assistant (TAs). 

Assignment Rationale 

This learning activity supports students engagement with each the Student Development Theory in Action (SDTiA) framework’s four interconnected components – i.e., (1) the sociopolitical context’s influence, (2) translation of formal/informal theory into action, (3) classroom and practice learning environmental considerations, and (4) theory building and practice assessments. The Video i-Blog assignment encourages students to traverse theory borderlands, apply intersectionality, and engage in contemporary theorizing by using video blogs to explore their personal identity development. 

Assignment Overview 

Over the course of the semester, students complete two individual Video i-Blog entries (5–7 minutes each). Each entry serves as a reflective journal in which students connect their lived experiences—either personal or professional—to  key concepts within student development theory. 

Assignment Requirements 

Students can use the video recording function on their phones or Zoom to record their Video i-Blogs. The Video i-Blog should be uploaded to a learning management system (e.g., Canvas) for their classmates and instructors/TAs to view.  

Students will respond to the following guided prompts in their Video i-Blog: 

• Prompt for their first Video i-Blog: 
  You might describe these lived experiences as developmental successes or struggles. Regardless, both developmental successes and struggles result in personal growth.  Reflect on one area of personal identity development (e.g., race, gender, gender identity, cognitive development, etc.). How might you use student development theory to explain your lived experience? Or, alternatively, how might you use your lived experience to challenge or expand on theory? 
   
• Prompt for their second Video i-Blog: 
  In what theory area are you observing a student you advise/supervise experience developmental success or struggle? How can theory inform your next steps with the student? In your response, be sure to highlight which developmental outcomes are priorities for this student to learn. 

In addition to vlogging about identity development, each student must comment on the video i-Blog entries of two different classmates, due in weeks _ and _.  Students’ reply comments should be the equivalent of one double-spaced page of text (approximately 320 words). Student reply comments should be as thoughtfully prepared as their initial entry. The prompts below are offered to assist them in preparing a well-crafted response. This is not an exhaustive list: 

1. What did I take away from my source material or the course materials that might offer an alternative point of view? 
2. How has this video i-Blog entry influenced my understanding of theory? 
3. How have I experienced what was offered in the video i-Blog entry in my own lived experience? 

Grading Criteria  

This assignment is assessed on completion, not on the personal content of students’ reflections or the quality of their video production. Students who meet the basic requirements will receive full credit. 

Criteria for Full Credit  

A submission receives full credit when it meets all of the following: 

1. Video Submission 
   • A video (5–7 minutes) is recorded and uploaded to the LMS by the deadline. 
   • The video responds to the required prompt for that i-Blog. 
2. Connection to Course Concepts 
   • The video demonstrates a good-faith effort to connect personal or professional experiences to student development theory. Students are free to expose theory’s limitations in their video i-Blog. 
3. Engagement 
   • The student comments on two classmates’ video i-Blogs. 
   • Each reply is approximately 320 words (about one double-spaced page). 
   • Replies show thoughtful engagement with the peer’s reflection and one or more of the guiding questions. 
      

Criteria for Partial Credit 

A submission receives partial credit when: 

• The video is submitted but is significantly underdeveloped, incomplete, or does not engage with the prompt or 
• Only one peer comment is submitted or 
• Peer comments are submitted but are substantially shorter than expected. 
   

Criteria for No Credit 

A submission receives no credit when: 

• No video is submitted or 
• The submission does not attempt the prompt at all or 
• No peer comments are submitted. 

Linked Resources 

Visit the Teaching Methods section of this site for more on how to use this with guest lecturers and watch two examples of video i-Blogs from former students with updated reflections on the assignment in the Further Resources section. 

Assignment Rationale 

Throughout this course, students will engage in case analysis using the chapter-based cases in our text. This assignment extends that practice by asking students to analyze a current higher education issue of their choice. The activity reinforces how theory choice influences what educators notice and prioritize when interpreting developmental outcomes. Consistent with the SDTiA framework, the assignment helps students learn to critically translate student development theory into practice and to design theoretically grounded interventions—such as teaching strategies, curricula, training, policy, and programs—that support college student learning and development. Through this case study analysis, students further strengthen their ability to build and assess theory–practice connections in deeper ways than the instructor-guided conversations inspired by the textbook case studies. 

Assignment Overview 

In Theory Work-Groups, students will identify a “real-life” exemplar (that occurred no more than 2 years ago) illustrating a developmental issue of interest. For instance, students may select an article from Inside Higher Ed, The EDULedger, or The Chronicle of Higher Education, or a short media clip from the Huffington Post. Once the Theory Work-Group selects an exemplar, members must identify a student development theory—or set of theories—that can help illuminate the significance of the developmental issue and prepare a case analysis to present to the class. 

Assignment Requirements 

Case analysis presentations should be no more than 40 minutes in length, with an additional 10 minutes allotted at the end for Q&A. Theory Work-Groups must share the exemplar (e.g., The EDULedger article with complete APA citation) with the class for review one week before their scheduled presentation. Because all students are expected to review the exemplar in advance, the presentation should focus exclusively on the Theory Work-Group’s analytical findings. 

The analysis must address at least two of the following questions: 

1. How might theory be used to explain the perspectives of students at the heart of this developmental issue? 

2. How might theory inform how educators respond to those most affected by this developmental issue? 

3. How might theory clarify the implications of this developmental issue for relevant campus partners? 

Finally, the presentation must conclude with a brief summary of any limitations regarding the utility of the theory or theories applied in the group’s analysis. 

Assignment Rationale 

Our SDTiA framework recognizes that the developmental needs of college students vary across sociopolitical and institutional contexts. This learning activity encourages students to deepen their understanding of the developmental issues that matter to them while also illustrating how theory itself is developed through the study of developmental processes and outcomes. In doing so, the Researching a Developmental Issue assignment supports students in stretching their informal, experience-based interpretations into more formal, theory-informed analyses. 

Assignment Overview 

The Research a Developmental Issue assignment asks students to examine a developmental issue affecting college students and to analyze how student development theory is used to study and understand that issue. Grounded in the SDTiA framework, the assignment highlights how developmental needs are shaped by sociopolitical and institutional contexts and how theory emerges–and evolves–through the study of developmental processes and outcomes.

Assignment Requirements 

This assignment works well for students to complete independently or as a group project. To complete this assignment, students must: 

1. Prepare an annotated bibliography with a minimum of 25 citations (peer-reviewed articles, periodicals, books, and/or documentaries), all published within the last 10 years. It is recommended that students begin the research process using a broad lens to identify a developmental issue (e.g., developing emotional maturity or developing financial literacy or spiritual development). Afterwhich, students may want to denote a particular institutional context or specific population to focus their literature search and refine their understanding of their developmental issue.  

2. Generate a single-page description of the chosen developmental issue. This one-page overview should: 
   • Describe the population(s) most affected by the developmental issue; 
   • Discuss how student development theory (SDT) has been used to study this issue; and 
   • Offer preliminary observations about how this developmental issue has been framed—or neglected—across the components of the SDTiA framework (e.g., the use of informal versus formal theory, the extent to which theory-to-practice translation is evident, and the degree to which sociopolitical and institutional contexts are explicitly considered in studying this developmental issue). 

Assignment Rationale 

The SDTiA framework strengthens theory-to-practice connections by empowering educators to design interventions that are intentionally grounded in student development theory. Consistent with this framework, this learning activity supports students in developing theoretically grounded classroom or practice-based interventions that move beyond prescriptive or deficit-oriented approaches. Specifically, the assignment encourages students to design interventions that “empower students rather than control their decisions, respond thoughtfully to the sociopolitical contexts shaping students’ lived experiences within their institutions, and illuminate the unique needs of student populations that have often been overlooked in how a particular developmental issue has been addressed on campus” (Chapter 1). By engaging theory as a generative tool for action, students will learn to translate conceptual knowledge into intentional, context-responsive practice. 

Assignment Overview 

The Develop an Actionable Classroom/Practice Intervention assignment builds on students’ prior analysis of a developmental issue by requiring them to design a concrete intervention informed by student development theory. Students will critically examine how theory can guide the design, implementation, and anticipated outcomes of a classroom or practice-based intervention situated within a specific institutional or sociopolitical context. Emphasis is placed on intentional alignment between theory, developmental goals, and practical strategies. Through this assignment, students will deepen their understanding of how theory informs practice and how interventions can be designed to support student development in equitable, responsive, and contextually grounded ways. 

Assignment Requirements 

The Develop an Actionable Classroom/Practice Intervention assignment may be completed individually or as a group project. In a 15-page, double-spaced paper, students must: 

1. Discuss the student development theory or theories that informed their understanding of the identified developmental issue, clearly explaining why these theoretical perspectives are appropriate for the population and context of interest.  
2. Develop a clear and concise purpose statement that articulates the aim of the proposed classroom or practice intervention and the developmental outcomes it is intended to support. 
3. Provide a detailed overview of the intervention, outlining its key components, structure, and implementation. This overview must clearly demonstrate how the elements of the intervention are grounded in and mapped onto the selected theory or theories and how the intervention is contextualized to address the identified developmental issue within a specific institutional or sociopolitical setting. Together, these components should demonstrate a coherent and intentional connection 

Assignment Rationale 

The Student Development Theory in Action (SDTiA) perspective views theory building as an inevitable outcome when educators (e.g., instructors, supervisors, mentors, academic leaders, and student affairs practitioners) are encouraged to critique, refine, and adapt theory in response to changing educational contexts. Accordingly, the Contemporary Theorizing Exercise is a learning activity that emphasizes embedding theory building and practice assessment within the process of translating theory into action, guiding students to move beyond application and actively shape theory in ways that respond to contemporary student realities and the ethical responsibilities of educators. 

Assignment Overview 

The Contemporary Theorizing Exercise builds directly on the Research a Developmental Issue and Develop an Actionable Classroom and/or Practice Intervention assignments. In the research phase assignment, students examined how a developmental issue has been studied, theorized, and framed within student development scholarship. Then, students designed an intervention, where they applied theory designing a classroom or practice-based response to that developmental issue. 

This assignment represents the next step in the learning sequence: moving from theory application to assessing theory in practice, supporting their engagement in theory building. Students are asked to reflect critically on what became visible—and what remained insufficient—when theory was applied, and to reimagine theory in ways that are responsive to contemporary student realities, sociopolitical contexts, and ethical responsibilities. 

Students will work in Theory Work-Groups to create: 

1. A visual diagram illustrating their proposed theory. 
2. A handout summarizing the theory and its implications. 
3. A 10-15 minute oral presentation explaining the theory and its rationale. 

Assignment Requirements 

The goal is not to produce a finalized theory, but to demonstrate intentional, critical, and ethically grounded engagement in theory building that bridges research, applied practice, and innovative theoretical thinking. To that end, Theory Work-Groups will complete the following: 

1. Visual Diagram 

The diagram should clearly depict the core components of the proposed theory and: 

• Demonstrate how it builds on, revises, or reimagines the original theory or theories from the intervention assignment. 
• Address limitations, gaps, or assumptions identified in prior research and theory application. 
• Provide a responsive and contextually grounded explanation of the developmental issue within contemporary higher education. 

2. Handout (1–2 pages) 

The handout should summarize: 

• The proposed theory and its key components. 
• How the theory addresses gaps, limitations, or assumptions in prior frameworks. 
• How the theory functions as a site of meaning-making and ethical responsibility in practice, by addressing at least one guiding question from Duran et al. (2024): 
  • Who are college students, and how are their identities, experiences, and needs understood? 
  • How are students’ developmental journeys situated within and beyond the college environment? 
  • How does development occur within larger systems of power and oppression? 
  • How do multiple environments influence student development? 
  • How can developmental trajectories be challenged or reimagined? 

3. Oral Presentation (15 minutes with 10 minutes of Q&A) 

The presentation should: 

• Present the visual diagram and summarize the proposed theory. 
• Explain how the theory emerged from prior research and theory application in practice. 
• Highlight how the theory engages meaning-making and ethical responsibility and addresses the selected guiding question(s). 

Grading Rubric (100 points) 

Category	Exemplary	Proficient	Developing	Needs Improvement	Points
Visual Diagram	Diagram clearly and creatively represents the proposed theory; shows how it builds on/revises original theory; relationships between components are explicit and logical.	Diagram represents the theory and revisions, but some connections or components lack clarity.	Diagram is partially complete or unclear; relationships between components are limited.	Diagram is missing, incomplete, or does not convey the theory.	20
Handout Content	Handout succinctly summarizes theory, identifies gaps/limitations in prior frameworks, and demonstrates critical engagement with research and intervention findings.	Handout summarizes theory and gaps/limitations but lacks depth or clear connections to prior research/practice.	Handout is incomplete or superficial; connections to prior research/practice are unclear.	Handout is missing or fails to summarize key elements of the theory.	20
Meaning-Making & Ethical Responsibility	Handout and presentation explicitly address how the new theory functions as a site of meaning-making and ethical responsibility; clearly engages at least one Duran et al. guiding question.	Meaning-making and ethical responsibility are addressed but with limited depth or specificity; engages at least one guiding question.	Minimal attention to meaning-making or ethical responsibility; engagement with guiding questions is unclear.	No evidence of meaning-making or ethical responsibility; guiding questions not addressed.	20
Oral Presentation	Clear, confident, and organized delivery; effectively explains theory, rationale, and connections to research and practice.	Delivery is mostly clear; explains theory and rationale but may lack full clarity.	Delivery is uneven or unclear; explanation of theory and rationale is limited.	Presentation is missing or incoherent; fails to explain theory or rationale.	20
Integration & Critical Thinking	Demonstrates strong critical reflection, synthesis of research, theory application, and intervention insights; theory building is well-reasoned, innovative, and grounded in context.	Demonstrates moderate critical reflection and synthesis; theory building shows some insight and connection to context.	Limited critical reflection or synthesis; theory building is underdeveloped or poorly connected to context.	Little to no critical reflection; theory building is missing or irrelevant.	20