SUPPORTING UNDERGRADUATE SPIRITUALITY: COLLEGE-RELATED
FACTORS EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN STUDENTS PERCEIVE AS AFFECTING
THEIR WORKING THROUGH SPIRITUAL STRUGGLE WHILE ATTENDING A
PUBLIC UNIVERSITY
By
Steven Christopher Argue

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education–Doctor of Philosophy
2015

ABSTRACT
SUPPORTING UNDERGRADUATE SPIRITUALITY: COLLEGE-RELATED
FACTORS EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN STUDENTS PERCEIVE AS AFFECTING
THEIR WORKING THROUGH SPIRITUAL STRUGGLE WHILE ATTENDING A
PUBLIC UNIVERSITY
By
Steven Christopher Argue
Undergraduate experiences of spiritual struggle on campus are common and
indeed necessary for personal spiritual development and holistic maturity, but they are
often unseen or misunderstood by universities, leading to a lack of their support and even
detrimental effects on the students; experiencing that struggle. The purpose of this study
is to understand Evangelical Christian undergraduates’ descriptions of factors that
contribute to their spiritual struggle and the resources they accessed to work through that
struggle. Understanding what these students see as supportive resources, relationships,
and experiences available to help them work through spiritual struggle can offer
additional insights to public colleges and universities they can apply to support students’
spiritual and holistic development. Thirty-nine interviews were conducted with twenty
undergraduates in a qualitative study at a major Midwestern university. While students’
descriptions of the factors that contributed to their spiritual struggles and the resources
they accessed to work through those struggles remained consistent with previous
literature descriptions, this study extends the research on undergraduate spiritual struggle
by focusing on Evangelical Christian undergraduates; further classifying students’
spiritual struggle descriptions by adopting Parks’ (2000) spiritual development
framework; and introducing a separating-integrating continuum to describe students’
views of their campus and how these may influence the kinds of spiritual struggles they

encounter and the resources they will access to work through that struggle. By providing
richer descriptions of Evangelical undergraduate spiritual struggles, public universities
will be more aware and better prepared to support these students as they work through
their spiritual struggle experiences.

Copyright by
STEVEN CHRISTOPHER ARGUE
2015

I dedicate this dissertation to Jen–your love perpetually gives me courage and hope; and
to Kara, Elise, and Lauren–my three most incredible inspirations. I love you.

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Dr. Ann Austin, you have made me a better thinker, writer, and person. Your
examples of academic scholarship and compassionate friendship have shaped me as a
scholar, husband, and father. Dr. John Dirkx, I never heard any other professor speak of
the “the dark night of the soul” in learning. When you shared this view with me, I knew
what I needed to pursue. Dr. Matt Wawrzynski, your concern for students and your
relentless questions forced me to narrow my interests and channel my idealism, and saved
me. Dr. Cary Roseth, my experiences in your classes always reminded me that learning’s
best motivator is love. Thank you all.
To countless family and friends who took the time to ask me about this project,
your love and interest kept this extrovert inspired through the solitary hours of writing–
thank you Mom and Dad, Pat and Ken, Dave and Linda, and Lisk. Also, thank you
Chris, who celebrated my entrance into the doctoral program and would undoubtedly
celebrate my completion if cancer had not taken you. To my colleagues in both religious
and academic contexts, thank you for encouraging me to bridge and embody both
remarkable worlds.
Finally, to the students who shared their lives with me for this study. My hope
was to give voice to your stories. This was only possible because you risked sharing your
spiritual journeys with me. I am deeply inspired by your honest and transparent sharing
that invited me into the sacred spaces of your lives. Thank you for taking these risks.
Always remember that your voices and your journeys do matter very much.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... xiii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ xiv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
Statement of Problem and Its Rationale .......................................................................... 1
Research Questions.......................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................ 8
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 8
Terminology and Definitions........................................................................................... 8
Undergraduate .............................................................................................................. 9
Emerging Adulthood .................................................................................................... 9
The Terms “Religious” and “Spiritual” ..................................................................... 10
Religious ......................................................................................................... 11
Spiritual ........................................................................................................... 12
The Relationship Between the Religious and the Spiritual ........................................ 14
Spiritual Development ............................................................................................... 15
Spiritual Struggle ....................................................................................................... 18
Emerging Adult Spiritual Development ....................................................................... 20
Undergraduates Bring their Spirituality to Campus ..................................................... 22
Undergraduate Spiritual Lives a “Blind Spot” and “Hidden” on Campus ................. 25
The blind spot ................................................................................................. 25
Hidden lives .................................................................................................... 26
Varied Descriptions of Undergraduate Spirituality .................................................... 27
Evangelical Undergraduates ....................................................................................... 27
Undergraduate Spiritual Struggle .................................................................................. 29
General Observations Regarding Spiritual Struggle ................................................. 30
Spiritual Struggle As Knowing, Dependence, and Community................................. 30
Spiritual struggle in the form of knowing ....................................................... 31
Spiritual struggle in the form of dependence .................................................. 31
Spiritual struggle in the form of community................................................... 32
Spiritual Struggle and College-Related Support ........................................................ 33
Gaps in the Literature on Undergraduate Spiritual Struggle ......................................... 33
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 38
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 38
Research Question ......................................................................................................... 38
The Research Paradigm ................................................................................................. 39
Phenomenography ...................................................................................................... 41
Critical Realism .......................................................................................................... 42
Critical Realism and Phenomenography .................................................................... 44
vii

Research and the critical realist perspective ................................................... 45
The phenomenographic method ...................................................................... 46
A Conceptual Framework Drawn from the Literature .................................................. 46
The form of Knowing................................................................................................. 49
The form of Dependence ............................................................................................ 49
The form of Community ............................................................................................ 50
Spiritual Development and Spiritual Struggle ........................................................... 50
Study Participant Selection ............................................................................................ 52
Upperclassmen ........................................................................................................... 52
Evangelical Christian Undergraduates ....................................................................... 53
Study Site Selection ....................................................................................................... 54
Data Collection .............................................................................................................. 55
Reflective Memo and Lay Summary ......................................................................... 56
Connecting With Campus Religious Group and Church Leaders.............................. 57
Interview Protocol ...................................................................................................... 59
The Interviews ............................................................................................................ 60
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................. 60
Transcription and Coding ........................................................................................... 61
Validity ....................................................................................................................... 62
Full Consideration of Human Subjects ...................................................................... 63
Participant Sample ..................................................................................................... 64
Student Backgrounds and Campus Involvement ........................................................... 68
Family Background and Its Influence ........................................................................ 68
Parents and home-life elements ............................................................................ 68
Church involvement .............................................................................................. 69
Advice received for attending a public university ................................................ 70
Campus Involvement ................................................................................................. 71
Campus Religious Group (CRG) involvement ..................................................... 72
Church involvement .............................................................................................. 72
Involvement in non-religious groups .................................................................... 72
Summary of Student Backgrounds and Their Campus Involvement ........................ 73
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS ................................................................................................ 75
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 75
Examples of Struggle that are Uniquely Spiritual ........................................................ 75
Spiritual Struggle Examples ....................................................................................... 76
Non-Spiritual Struggle Examples .............................................................................. 78
On-Campus and Off-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle ............................... 81
On-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle ...................................................... 81
Educational and classroom experiences................................................................ 81
Faith and science ................................................................................................ 82
Accepting and engaging others .......................................................................... 83
Spirituality versus academic studies ..................................................................... 83
Finding friends and connecting relationally ........................................................ 84
Dating, sex, and romantic relationships ................................................................ 85
Philosophical/theological topics ........................................................................... 85

viii

Intellectual topics ............................................................................................... 86
Other worldviews ............................................................................................... 86
Substance abuse or destructive behaviors ............................................................. 87
Assault................................................................................................................... 87
Campus religious groups....................................................................................... 88
Women, faith, gender, and feminism .................................................................... 88
Off-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle ..................................................... 89
Family death/illness .............................................................................................. 89
Going home ........................................................................................................... 89
Assault................................................................................................................... 90
Summary of On-Campus and Off-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle...... 90
Resources Named Relevant to Undergraduate Spiritual Struggles .............................. 91
On-Campus Resources Helping With Spiritual Struggle ........................................... 91
Friends on campus ................................................................................................ 91
Classmate friends ............................................................................................... 91
CRG friends ....................................................................................................... 92
Roommate friends .............................................................................................. 93
Friendship summary........................................................................................... 93
CRGs and CRG leaders/mentors .......................................................................... 93
Faculty and class resources ................................................................................... 94
Summary of on-campus resources ........................................................................ 95
Off-Campus Resources Helping With Spiritual Struggle ......................................... 96
On their own ......................................................................................................... 96
Parents/family ....................................................................................................... 96
Counselors/therapists ............................................................................................ 97
Church ................................................................................................................... 97
Summary of off-campus resources ....................................................................... 98
Summary of Resources for Spiritual Struggle Named by Undergraduates ................ 98
Spiritual Struggle within Spiritual Development .......................................................... 98
Spiritual Struggle within the Form of Community ................................................... 99
Separating struggle................................................................................................ 99
Seeking struggle .................................................................................................. 100
Contributing struggle .......................................................................................... 101
Spiritual Struggle within the Form of Dependence ................................................. 102
Negative feelings ................................................................................................ 103
Positive feelings .................................................................................................. 103
Spiritual Struggle within the Form of Knowing ...................................................... 104
Doubting struggle................................................................................................ 105
Adjusting struggle ............................................................................................... 106
Integrating struggle ............................................................................................. 107
Summary of Students’ Spiritual Struggle within Spiritual Development ................ 109
Student Spiritual Struggle and Their Perceptions within the Separating-Integrating
Continuum .................................................................................................................. 111
The Separating Perspective ..................................................................................... 111
College climate ................................................................................................... 112
Interacting with “others” ..................................................................................... 112

ix

Spirituality and education ................................................................................... 113
Reflections on the interview experience ............................................................. 114
The Integrating Perspective...................................................................................... 115
College climate ................................................................................................... 115
Interacting with “others” ..................................................................................... 116
Spirituality and education ................................................................................... 116
Reflections on the interview experience ............................................................. 118
Summary of Students Perceptions along the Separating-Integrating Continuum .... 119
Undergraduates’ Perceived Purpose, Expectations, and Recommendations
in Light of the Separating-Integrating Continuum ...................................................... 120
Undergraduate Descriptions of Purpose................................................................... 120
Purpose expressed as a separating perspective ................................................... 120
Purpose expressed as an integrating perspective. .............................................. 121
Purpose expressed between separating and integrating perspectives ................ 122
Undergraduates’ Expectations and Recommendations for Higher Education ......... 122
Freshmen expectations and advice for future freshmen ..................................... 123
Recommendations for faculty ............................................................................. 125
Be approachable and accessible ....................................................................... 126
Be enthusiastic, inspiring, creative, and organized .......................................... 126
Be able to connect material to real life and personal ideas .............................. 127
Smaller, discussion- oriented, input- inviting classrooms matter .................... 127
Faculty do not need to talk about spirituality to attend to spirituality ............. 128
Undergraduates’ impressions of campus religious groups (CRGs) ................... 129
CRGs and the university have a legitimate connection ................................... 129
Reasons that students join CRGs ..................................................................... 130
CRGs support of higher education ................................................................... 131
CRG theology and outreach ............................................................................. 132
CRGs and gender ............................................................................................. 133
Summary of undergraduate expectations and recommendations........................ 133
Summary of Spiritual Struggle within Spiritual Development ................................... 134
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION .......................................................................................... 135
Overview of Study ....................................................................................................... 135
Problem and Rationale ............................................................................................. 135
Research Questions ................................................................................................. 135
Key Literature .......................................................................................................... 136
Spiritual development ......................................................................................... 136
Spiritual development and emerging adults ........................................................ 137
Spiritual development and undergraduates ......................................................... 137
Undergraduate spiritual struggle ......................................................................... 138
Evangelical undergraduates and spiritual struggle ............................................. 138
Gaps in the literature on undergraduate spiritual struggle .................................. 139
Design Summary ...................................................................................................... 139
Summary of Key Findings ........................................................................................... 141
Student-Described Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle ........................................... 141
Student-Described Resources for Addressing Spiritual Struggle ............................ 142

x

Spiritual Struggle within the Realm of Spiritual Development ............................... 142
The Separating-Integrating Continuum and Student Perspectives ........................... 144
Students espousing a separating perspective ...................................................... 144
Students espousing an integrating perspective ................................................... 145
Discussion of the Results ............................................................................................. 146
Religious Tradition Affects Evangelical Undergraduates’ Spiritual Struggle ........ 146
Student-described On-Campus and Off-Campus Factors of Spiritual Struggle ...... 148
Student-described factors affecting spiritual struggle......................................... 149
Student-described resources for addressing spiritual struggle ............................ 151
Student Descriptions of Spiritual Struggle will Vary per Spiritual Development
Forms and Maturity .................................................................................................. 152
Spiritual struggle is experienced relationally ...................................................... 152
Spiritual struggle is experienced emotionally ..................................................... 153
Spiritual struggle is experienced intellectually ................................................... 154
Student Perspectives Affect How They View Spiritual Struggle Factors ................ 155
Students’ separating-integrating perspectives affect their views of college ....... 156
Students’ separating-integrating perspectives affect their relationships
with Campus Religious Groups (CRGs) ............................................................. 157
Additional Questions and Observations ................................................................... 158
Can students change from a separating to an integrating perspective? .............. 158
What is the role of CRGs on campus? ................................................................ 159
If the campus is “hostile,” why do Evangelical students attend public
universities? ........................................................................................................ 160
What is the relationship between spiritual struggle and a major of study? ........ 160
Further Considerations ................................................................................................ 161
Public University Considerations ............................................................................. 161
Faculty and Classroom Considerations .................................................................... 162
CRG Considerations................................................................................................. 163
Parent Considerations............................................................................................... 163
Student Considerations............................................................................................. 165
Struggle is normal ............................................................................................... 165
Students are not alone ......................................................................................... 165
Part of working through spiritual struggle is seeking new resources ................. 166
Leave church, but find community .................................................................... 166
Find ways to reflect on your spirituality ............................................................. 167
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research ........................................... 167
Concluding Remarks ................................................................................................... 171
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ 173
Appendix A: Researcher Identity Memo ..................................................................... 174
Appendix B: Reflective Memo .................................................................................... 177
Appendix C: Lay Summary ......................................................................................... 180
Appendix D: Interview Protocol.................................................................................. 182
Appendix E: Student Descriptions of Their Personal Purposes within the SeparatingIntegrating Continuum ........................................................................... 184
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 185
xi

xii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Participant Sample Characteristics ..................................................................... 65
Table 2. Participating Students’ Structured,
Non-Academic Involvement ............................................................................... 67
Table 3. Kinds of Struggle Described within the Form of Community.......................... 102
Table 4. Kinds of Struggle Described within the Form of Dependence ......................... 103
Table 5. Kinds of Struggle Described within the Form of Knowing .............................. 108
Table 6. Student Struggle Descriptions within Spiritual
Development Forms .......................................................................................... 110
Table 7. Student Places on the Separating-Integrating Continuum ................................ 119
Table 8. Literature Comparisons for Student Descriptions of Struggle.......................... 151

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Spiritual development and spiritual struggle ..................................................... 48
Figure 2. Spiritual development and kinds of spiritual struggle ....................................... 51

xiv

CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
Statement of Problem and Its Rationale
Significant work in the mid-1990’s by Barr & Tagg (1995), Marsden (1994), and
Eck (1993) arguably signaled, in concert, a renewed interest and focused research effort
for understanding the religious and spiritual lives of undergraduates. Subsequent
research projects pertaining to the religious and spiritual lives of undergraduates then
sought to extend learner-centered pedagogical implications, ensure more holistic (vs.
fragmented) student development, and understand the plurality of religious and spiritual
beliefs that students were bringing to campuses. Educators have since explored this topic
further in an ongoing quest to better prepare students for their learning and meaningmaking, holistic development, and global citizenship.
Some educators have argued that studying the spiritual perspectives of
undergraduates offers yet another useful way to achieve better understanding and
encourage the development of the whole student during this crucial time in a young
person’s life (Astin & Astin, 2003; Astin et al., 2003; Cherry, DeBerg, & Porterfield,
2001; Chickering, Dalton, & Stamm, 2006; Fowler, 1995; Lindholm & Astin, 2008;
Palmer, Zajonc, & Scribner, 2010; Rue, 1985; Tisdell, 2003). This holistic development
takes into account “exterior” behavior lives of students and their “interior” inner lives,
both of which relate to their personal “values, spirituality, identity, purpose, and
meaning” (Braskamp, Trautvetter, & Ward, 2006, p. 2). Educators further nurture
holistic development helpfully when they acknowledge undergraduates as complex
humans who embody many different and complex layers of meaning and work further to

1

understand students’ multiple and integrated perspectives to include race, ethnicity,
gender, orientation, religion, and spirituality (Astin, 2004; Braskamp et al., 2006;
Chickering et al., 2006; Dirkx, 1997; Haynes, 2006; Manning, 2001; Palmer, 1998).
While still considerably diverse, a majority of undergraduates do report that they
value religious and spiritual perspectives and believe in God, a Higher Power, or a Life
Force, thus raising important questions for those in higher education to consider what
such beliefs mean for their students’ educational experiences (Astin & Astin, 2003;
Bryant, Choi, & Yasuno, 2003; Smith & Snell, 2009). Additionally, students for whom
spirituality is important want their colleges to help them integrate their spirituality into
their actual ongoing educational experiences (Astin, 2004; Astin, Astin, & Lindholm,
2010; Astin et al., 2003; Kazanjian & Laurence, 2000; Lindholm, 2007; Tisdell, 2003).
Spiritual development, which is part of more general holistic development,
attempts to capture this integration, but it has yet to be fully understood by educators.
Supporting students’ spiritual development appears to be especially crucial during times
of spiritual struggle. Spiritual struggle is common and also often necessary. Fowler
(1981) described spiritual struggle as the space between epistemological
frames/frameworks that is associated with suffering, doubt, learning, and despair. Parks
(2000) offered the view that struggle often takes one by surprise, launching a young
person into a key time of searching. Hill & Pargament (2003) and Raper (2001)
suggested that this struggle represents pivotal moments in life that may lead individuals
to positively continue onward or negatively digress off their current path of development.
Bryant & Astin (2008) equated struggle with undergraduates’ feeling a sense of crisis or
“shipwreck” as they suddenly encounter ideologies very different than their own. There

2

is thus a need for more research to understand this phenomenon that affects a “sizable
proportion of college students” (p. 20).
Bryant and Astin (2008) observed that spiritual struggle manifests as forms of
doubt, feelings of being unsettled and disillusioned about one’s religious background, or
working through concepts of evil, suffering, and death. Fisler et al. (2009) reported that
the spiritual struggle for the students they studied was common, painful, and confusing.
While spiritual struggle experiences will vary based on students’ religious backgrounds,
gender, and major in school, Bryant & Astin (2008) observed that spiritual struggle was a
reality for many college students and thus called for higher education institutions to “ask
difficult questions regarding their role in supporting students whose lives are complicated
by existential dilemmas” (p. 23). They suggested that these “difficult questions” included
asking whether campuses are supportive environments that provide the most effective
support for students’ character development and resolution of their personal spiritual
struggle.
Students do experience spiritual struggle when they try to integrate their learning
and lives with the college environment. Often they will need to adjust their spiritual
beliefs, as they gain new knowledge and more experience. This personal struggle to
integrate and adjust spiritual beliefs can manifest itself in positive, but also negative
ways. Positively, spiritual struggle helps students critically reflect on their beliefs,
thereby promoting greater development and a more mature understanding of themselves,
others, and their place in the world. This process can lead to further growth in personal
responsibility, compassion, and more openness toward those who are different from
them. Negatively, students who encounter spiritual struggle often report experiencing

3

stress, anxiety, and even fear. They feel pressure to conform to family or religious group
expectations, which can lead to oppression by those in authority and isolation from those
with diverse perspectives. Spiritual struggle has also been reported to have positive and
negative effects on academic studies, relationships, and even personal health (Astin et al.,
2010; Bryant & Astin, 2008; Fisler et al., 2009; Pargament, Murray-Swank, Magyar, &
Ano, 2005; Rockenbach, Walker, & Luzader, 2012).
There is further evidence that suggests that students rarely navigate through
spiritual struggle on their own (Clydesdale, 2007; Parks, 2000; Rockenbach et al., 2012;
Smith & Snell, 2009). Students will experience spiritual struggle when they feel pressure
to conform to religious expectations, fulfill academic demands toward getting a degree
and then a job, while still managing a range of daily life experiences that often distract
them from addressing the internal spiritual struggles they are feeling. Students then
simply “remain faithful” or “lose their faith” altogether, not necessarily because they
have matured, but often because they have not taken the time or do not know how best to
critically reflect on their own spiritual and religious beliefs and the questions that have
appeared about those beliefs (Clydesdale, 2007; Fisler et al., 2009; Magolda & Gross,
2009; Pargament et al., 2005; Smith & Snell, 2009). The value of spiritual development
in higher education, therefore, is not to mandate spirituality. Rather, the value rests in the
informed opportunities that colleges can provide their undergraduates who desire or even
need to develop their spirituality in concert with their education, especially during times
of personal spiritual struggle. More awareness and understanding of undergraduates’
spiritual development and struggle by faculty and staff in higher education venues can
provide these students with effective support and help them to move toward complete

4

meaning-making, holistic development, and solid preparation for being global citizens
(Astin, 2004; Astin et al., 2010; Chickering et al., 2006; Palmer et al., 2010).
Understanding the spiritual lives of students is challenging, as their inner lives
often are “hidden” from most faculty and staff (Chickering et al., 2006; Collins & et al.,
1987; Dalton & Crosby, 2007; Rue, 1985). Further, most of the studies on undergraduate
religious and spiritual perspectives have “decontextualized” students, not taking into
account their unique cultural backgrounds or religious contexts, thus resulting in more
generalized descriptions that often lack specific understanding (Mayrl & Oeur, 2009, p.
271). Few studies have sought to understand students’ descriptions of the factors that
support or impede their working through such spiritual struggle (Bryant & Astin, 2008;
Dalton & Crosby, 2007; Rockenbach et al., 2012). More researchers have thus called for
these specific studies so as to better understand the spiritual experiences many
undergraduates have in the context of their personal religious traditions and the context of
their college experiences (Astin & Astin, 2010; Astin et al., 2010; Astin, Astin, &
Lindholm, 2011; Bryant & Astin, 2008; Fisler et al., 2009; Rockenbach et al., 2012).
Students come to college from a broad range of religious and non-religious
traditions. One of the religious traditions that undergraduates identify with is
“Evangelicals,” and it is this group that is the focus of this current study. Evangelicals
are theologically conservative, Protestant Christians who emphasize personal piety and
often come from fundamentalist, neo-evangelical, “seeker-sensitive”, or Pentecostal
congregations (Putnam & Campbell, 2010). While Evangelical students typically will
have on campus the most available and most attended religious groups, they are also a
population that tends to integrate less with other campus groups. Further, Evangelical

5

students report more spiritual struggle at college than, for example, Mainline Protestant
Christians (Astin et al., 2010; Bryant, 2007; Bryant & Astin, 2008; Jacobsen & Jacobson,
2008; Magolda & Gross, 2009). For these reasons, Evangelical students and their
perceptions of college-related factors that either support or impede their working through
their spiritual struggle is the focus of this study
This project will contribute to the knowledge of undergraduate spiritual
development by examining what college-related factors Evangelical students perceive as
supporting or impeding them, as they work though their personal spiritual struggles.
Understanding what these students perceive as supportive resources, relationships,
experiences during their undergraduate experience can offer additional new insights for
public colleges and universities to apply as they seek to support student meaning-making,
educational development, and preparation for global citizenship.
Research Questions
The following overarching guiding research question and sub-questions frame this
study:
From the perspective of undergraduate students who have come from the
Evangelical Christian tradition, what factors support or impede their experiences when
working through spiritual struggle while at college? The sub-questions for this study then
are:
a) What does spiritual struggle mean for Evangelical undergraduates?
b) For those Evangelical undergraduates who have experienced spiritual struggle,
what do they view as the particular sources or issues that relate to that struggle? What
personally brought the struggle on for them?

6

c) What factors do undergraduates perceive as affecting the process of how they
handled their struggle? Specifically, what college-related factors (resources,
relationships, experiences) do these undergraduates perceive as affecting how they
handled their struggle? Which helped and which impeded them as these students
managed their spiritual struggle and in what ways?
d) How have the experiences of undergraduates who have worked through
spiritual struggle affected and influenced other areas in their lives (major/career
decisions, relationships, interests, beliefs, religious practices, etc.)?
e) What recommendations can Evangelical undergraduates offer to their higher
education institutions for ways to better support them as they experience and manage
spiritual struggle?

7

CHAPTER 2:
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This section defines the terminology used in this study and reviews the literature
relevant to undergraduate spiritual development, specifically student spiritual struggle at
college. The “Terminology and Definitions” section establishes the terms used
throughout this study and addresses the ongoing challenges of “religious” and “spiritual”
usage, including how these terms actually relate to each other. The “Emerging Adult
Spiritual Development” section highlights the literature that has focused on spirituality
during this particular period of the human lifespan.
The “Undergraduates Do Bring Their Spirituality to Campus” section describes
what is known of undergraduates and the spiritual perspectives they bring to college and
acknowledges that there are “blind spots” and “hidden” aspects of student spirituality that
can be better understood. Specifically, this section proposes focusing on public
university students from a single religious tradition–Evangelical Christians. The
“Undergraduate Spiritual Struggle” section focuses specifically on undergraduates’
spiritual struggle at college, leading to the final section that identifies the gaps in the
research on undergraduate spiritual struggles and focuses specifically on the literature
already in place on Evangelical college students.
Terminology and Definitions
One of the challenges associated with addressing any religious and spiritual
concept in higher education is the varied definitions offered in the literature on this topic.
This section thus establishes precise definitions for certain key terms referred to in this

8

study and also provides a rationale for the definitions and the relationships that exist
between “religious,” “spiritual,” “spiritual development,” and “spiritual struggle.”
Undergraduate
While undergraduate students vary in age and the duration of their program
participation, the terms “undergraduate” or “student” in this study refer to the more
traditional undergraduate student, ages 18-22. References to freshman, sophomore,
junior, or senior students thus will assume the traditional progression through an
undergraduate program.
Emerging Adulthood
Emerging adulthood is a phrase coined by Arnett (2004) that describes a unique
stage of development for those 18 to 26. Emerging adults–those who no longer consider
themselves adolescents, but have yet to see themselves as adults– predominantly live in
post-industrial societies where the cultural norms for marrying, having children, or
entering a career are delayed. This identified developmental period has emerged in the
research more recently, as young people have reported needing more training to enter the
workforce and thus delaying marriage, a choice that affords them more options and
autonomy during this period of their lives. Developmentally, emerging adults report not
feeling like adults and being somewhat resistant to the constraints associated with
adulthood (Arnett, 2004). Arnett (2004) has identified five main features of emerging
adulthood: 1) the age of identity exploration, trying out various possibilities, especially in
love and work; 2) the age of instability; 3) the most self-focused period of life; 4) the age
of feeling in between, in transition, and neither adolescent nor adult; and 5) the age of
possibilities, when hopes flourish and when these individuals have an unparalleled

9

opportunity to transform their lives and focus them more specifically. While
undergraduates typically inhabit the earlier years of the emerging adult age-range,
research on this developmental stage has useful implications for the current research and
is often referenced by those researchers who study undergraduate spirituality.
The Terms “Religious” and “Spiritual”
One of the challenges acknowledged in most of the research on religious,
spiritual, and spiritual development concepts in higher education is the difficulty of
defining these two terms. The first colleges in America were created and solidly rooted
in Christian and denominational contexts (Geiger, 2005; Thelin, 2004). Later,
Enlightenment influences, empiricism, and positivism deemed religion and spirituality as
irrelevant, even detrimental, to higher education (Raper, 2001; Thelin, 2004).
Eventually, the growing awareness of a metaphysical void in higher education brought
forth new questions for how colleges and universities should address affective elements
in student learning and development, including those religious and spiritual issues long
discarded, especially in the public context (Astin, 2004; Speck, 2005). The initial
solutions sought to separate the spiritual self (the internal, affective, and mystical) from
the religious self (influenced by dogma or control from which one should be liberated
(Love & Talbot, 1999; Nash, 2001; Speck, 2005).
Polarization of one’s religion and one’s spirituality created a false dichotomy,
culturally reinforced by a privatized spirituality that short-circuited critical self-reflection
and diminished public dialogue on spiritual and religious topics (Johnson, Sheets, &
Kristeller, 2008; Speck, 2005). More recent approaches by educators have now
acknowledged the unique, yet interdependent, relationship of one’s religion and

10

spirituality (Chickering et al., 2006; P. C. Hill et al., 2000; Nash, 1999). For the purposes
of this study, the definitions and the relationships between these terms are given here.
Religious. Marty & Moore (2000) suggested that religion provides a structure to
use to organize one’s daily spirituality. Common characteristics of all religions include:
1) a focus on matters of ultimate concern related to the meaning and purpose of life; 2) a
sense of community, a place where one can gather, celebrate, mourn, and offer behavioral
injunctions on how to live; 3) myths (narratives) and symbols that tell a single ultimate
truth through allegory, story, metaphor, or art; and 4) ritual and ceremony that celebrate
within the community all of life’s most important transitions, such as birth, entry into
adulthood, love or marriage, and death and final transition (pp. 8ff). One’s religiosity
also involves participation in the particular beliefs, rituals, and activities of traditional
religion (Elkins, Hedstrom, Hughes, Leaf, & Saunders, 1988).
Eck (1993) observed that whether one’s religion is a major world religion,
agnosticism or atheism, or something else, each “religion” has a cultural aspect that gives
a specific context to one’s background and life endeavors. Religion attempts to provide a
framework for general human meaning, and offers meaning-making language to help
individuals interpret their experiences and organize their day-to-day conduct. According
to Geertz (1973), “the force of religion in supporting social values rests, then, on the
ability of its symbols to formulate a world in which those values, as well as the forces
opposing their realization, are fundamental ingredients” (p. 131). If, at its best, religion is
a stabilizing influence that creates a framework for life’s meaning for individuals, then it
also has the potential to nurture one’s spiritual development (Geertz, 1973; P. C. Hill et
al., 2000; P. C. Hill & Pargament, 2003). Nash (1999) suggested that religion is a

11

fundamental part of human existence, and students cannot understand history or politics
without reflecting on the role of religion in producing both good and evil in the world.
Further, he concluded that excluding religion from learning results in an illiberal
education “because students only get half the story” (Nash, 1999, p. 4). Nash (1999) also
offered that religion is such a fundamental part of human existence that students cannot
appreciate history or politics without understanding religion’s positive and negative
influences on and within societies. Therefore, the religious perspectives that people hold
are not merely cognitive assents or intellectual blinders. They are cultural lenses
informed by and edited through one’s race, ethnicity, culture, family, ritual, and inherited
worldview. Individuals are thus faced with the task of critically reflecting on their
backgrounds, while graciously and tolerantly learning to understand others and their
backgrounds, as they revisit their own frameworks of meaning.
For the purposes of this study, one’s “religion” (whether theistic, atheistic, or
agnostic) describes the cultural background and worldview narrative of an individual that
contributes to the way that person creates meaning and defines and describes his or her
daily experiences and practices. Religion affects people’s spirituality by framing their
spiritual behaviors and language, connecting them with others with similar traditions (via
discussion, ritual, gathering, etc.), and help them express their views respectfully to
others of different religious perspectives (in discussion, dialogue, or debate).
Spiritual. All persons can experience spirituality, and the concept is not the same
as religiosity, if by “religious” one means actual participation in particular beliefs, rituals,
activities or traditional religion (Elkins et al., 1988; Kass, Friedman, Leserman,
Zuttermeister, & Benson, 1991; Parks, 1991). Some have attempted to broaden the

12

concept of spirituality by viewing it as more than an internal belief or a mode of knowing
and instead seeing it as more of a quality of life that moves beyond the self into the outer
world (Gotz, 1997). Others refer to this concept as “faith” (Fowler, 1981; Parks, 2000).
Spirituality, a term that comes from the Latin word, spiritus meaning “breath of life,” has
been expressed as a way of being and experiencing that comes about through the
awareness of a transcendent dimension characterized by certain identifiable values with
regard to the self, others, nature, life, and whatever other entity one considers to be the
Ultimate (Elkins et al., 1988).
The characteristics of spirituality are understood to include an ongoing quest for
meaning/purpose in life, which often does include the Sacred or a higher power, an
ability to find peace in the midst of challenge or hardship, an ability to look beyond
oneself toward the beauty and needs of the world, a sense of identity with and
responsibility toward making the world a better place, and an openness to other people’s
perspectives to create deeper relationships and commitment to community (Astin &
Astin, 2003, 2010; Astin et al., 2010, 2011; Astin et al., 2003; Elkins et al., 1988; Love &
Talbot, 1999). Spirituality also encourages having a personal commitment toward
“something,” the telos (goal) that reaches beyond mere personal fulfillment (Nash, 1999;
Speck, 2005).
One’s spirituality describes personal meaning-making and the internal work an
individual undertakes to make sense of his or her beliefs, sometimes with or without an
actual formal religious background. Although more personal in nature, spirituality is best
worked out through an ongoing dialogue in a mutually supporting community (Love &
Talbot, 1999). Thus, for the purposes of this study, “spirituality” is defined as one’s

13

meaning-making efforts that inform the way one lives in and relate to the world and
others, transforming and encouraging that person to move toward the telos (goal) of
having a more mature, congruent, and faithful way of living.
The Relationship Between the Religious and the Spiritual
My attempt thus far has been to address some of the ambiguities associated with
various religious and spiritual definitions used in the literature and to offer clarity on how
this study will apply these same terms. However, seeking to bring a precise focus to
these terms only addresses part of the challenge. Another element of the ambiguity found
in the literature is revealed in the way “religious” and “spiritual” as terms are used in
relation to one another. Thus, further clarity on the definitions of “religious” and
“spiritual” and how these concepts relate can affect how educators perceive the religious
and spiritual lives of all people, including undergraduates. Hill (2000), and further,
Smith & Snell (2009) argued for the inseparability of one’s spirituality and religiousness.
Aligning with Smith & Snell (2009), this study assumed that most students frame their
spirituality with a religious framework of terms and meanings, thus reframing a
commonly held assumption often assumed by educators, that undergraduates are
“spiritual, but not religious” (Cherry et al., 2001; Colby, 2003; Johnson et al., 2008;
Love, 2001).
It is more likely that any separating of one’s religiousness and spirituality is a
form of spiritual struggle where, due to the varied transitions students are managing in
their lives, their religious framework when considered in relation to their spiritual
experiences becomes temporarily suspended or even contradictory (Clydesdale, 2007;
Smith & Snell, 2009). Emerging adults and their declining religious practices may reflect

14

their attempts at gaining autonomy and to draw clear differentiation from their parents
and family, largely motivated more by developmental factors than epistemological ones
(Arnett, 2004; Arnett & Jensen, 2002).
Smith & Snell (2009) concluded that the majority of emerging adults are more
accurately described as conventional spiritual followers who are trying to fit in rather
than as detached spiritual seekers, and indeed, hold that “spiritual but not religious”
assumptions rarely do apply to emerging adults. Similarly, Bryant et al. (2003) observed
that spirituality and religiousness are highly correlated concepts, while Clydesdale (2007)
noted that most incoming freshman who describe themselves as spiritual, typically
express their spirituality in conventional religious terms.
Thus, this study takes into account that the religious backgrounds of
undergraduates do affect the way they understand, talk about, and express their
spirituality. It also acknowledges that one’s religious background likely does affect the
ways that many students experience spiritual struggle and also the ways they attempt to
work through and understand and apply that struggle to their learning experiences.
Spiritual Development
Spiritual development, which is part of holistic development, is one way of
understanding the spiritual changes people experience as they mature in their meaningmaking. Researchers have argued that spiritual development fosters students’ well-being
(Temkin & Evans, 1998), contributes to an interdisciplinary foundation (Inayatullah &
Gidley, 2000; Love & Talbot, 1999), acknowledges personal “conversion” or
transformation (Fowler, 1995; Vella, 2000; Zinnbauer & Pargament, 1998), encourages
greater authenticity and a more integrated self (Kazanjian & Laurence, 2000; Love &

15

Talbot, 1999; Murphy, 2005; Stewart, 2005; Tisdell, 2003), and is about meaning-making
as a way that individuals can construct their knowledge and integrate their lives
(Jablonski et al., 2001; Keeling & Dungy, 2004; Tisdell, 2003). Spiritual development
affects people’s understanding of themselves, their relationships with others, and their
ongoing pursuit of meaning-making
Spiritual development assumes a personal commitment toward “something,” the
telos (goal) of spirituality beyond mere personal fulfillment (Hamilton & Jackson, 1998;
Nash, 1999; Speck, 2005). This process of spiritual development occurs gradually or
abruptly, as people’s current understandings of their own worlds are challenged. Such
challenges may be due to newly realized information or dramatic events (whether
positive or negative) that cause disorienting experiences and compel a person to seek to
recover a sense of epistemological equilibrium (Fowler, 1981, 1995; Loder, 1998;
Mezirow, 2000). This search for equilibrium often brings about purging or purification,
which can be stressful as that person realizes that he or she is unable to assimilate the
new experience or add information into one’s current way of being and must thus begin
the process of accommodation and change.
Through this change, one reaches illumination as that person reorients to a new
perspective that then brings personal change and a conversion of sorts. Finally,
equilibrium returns, as one finds unification and a form of homecoming, a connection
with the transcendent, or even the sacred (Clark, 2001; Loder, 1998; Zinnbauer &
Pargament, 1998). While this process has aspects of stage-like development, most
consider the process to be more spiral in nature where as one moves forward in
development, one also must circle back periodically to create new meaning out of old

16

events, symbols, and experiences that have already shaped his or her spiritual journey,
life journey, and identity (Cranton & Roy, 2003; Fowler, 1995; Kegan, 1994; Tisdell,
2001; Wilber, 1996).
Parks (2000) has suggested that spiritual development happens as one matures in
one’s forms of knowing, dependence, and community. This development tends to be the
most dramatic during an individual’s attendance at college. One’s form of knowing
within spiritual development matures during that time, as meaning-making integrates new
knowledge and experiences toward a reframed worldview. It involves an internal process
of seeking personal authenticity, genuineness, and wholeness in both thinking and living
(Love & Talbot, 1999; Rogers & Love, 2007). The process also involves the active
pursuit of meaning-making through self-reflection, spiritual identification, and learning
from having or witnessing both good and bad experiences (equanimity) (Astin et al.,
2010, 2011; Capeheart-Meningall, 2005; Gotz, 1997; Parks, 1991).
One’s form of dependence within spiritual development matures as people derive
what is true for them increasingly less often from external authorities (parents, teachers,
religious leaders, etc.) and more often from their own internal convictions (Parks, 2000).
It inspires a continual personal pursuit or quest to derive meaning, construct knowledge,
and expand understanding (Astin et al., 2010, 2011). This process prepares persons to be
open to new ideas, value the perspectives of others, and view themselves as less central
and a part of something bigger (Capeheart-Meningall, 2005; English, 2000; Gotz, 1997;
Love & Talbot, 1999; Parks, 1991).
One’s form of community within actual spiritual development matures as the
sense of connection with that community broadens and becomes more inclusive and more

17

engaging (Parks, 2000). A person becomes aware of a unique interconnectedness with
the world, values relationships, feels connected with a community (Love & Talbot,
1999), and develops a stronger sense of self further nurtured through interaction with
others (English, 2000). This connection calls on the individual to look beyond ego
toward others, know and reach out to them, and ultimately discover interdependence with
them (Capeheart-Meningall, 2005; English, 2000; Gotz, 1997). It recognizes that
development comes through interpersonal, social, and cultural components that become
broader, more inclusive, and more compassionate over time (Astin et al., 2010, 2011;
Parks, 1991, 2000). Love and Talbot (1999) remarked that this element of spiritual
development is also a paradox, as spiritual development is both personal and unique and
yet finds its fullest manifestation in the context of and the contact with an everbroadening and mutually supporting community.
Therefore, for this study, spiritual development names the maturing process that
individuals go through to understand, integrate, and express their spirituality in light of
their current forms of knowing, dependence, and community. Spiritual development also
pertains to spiritual and religious perspectives that often inform and influence students’
academic, social, and emotional well-being (Bryant et al., 2003). The intensity of
spiritual development thus is often most evident in pivotal moments that can be described
as spiritual struggle.
Spiritual Struggle
One of the most challenging parts of spiritual development appears when a
person leaves old paradigms behind to embrace new, truer ideas that support that personal
meaning-making (Bryant & Astin, 2008; Fisler et al., 2009; Fowler, 1981; Pargament et

18

al., 2005; Parks, 2000). These crucial periods have been described as suffering, betrayal,
doubt, questioning, struggle, anger at God, despair, crisis, the “dark night of the soul,” a
disorienting experience, pivotal moment, shipwreck, or conversion (Bryant & Astin,
2008; Fowler, 1995; P. C. Hill & Pargament, 2003; Mezirow, 2000; Parks, 2000). Terms
presented across most of the literature to explain this part of spiritual development
describe these defining moments as spiritual or religious struggle. Based on the often
overlapping or synonymous uses of “religious struggle” and “spiritual struggle,” in the
literature and the assumption, as stated previously, that each person’s spirituality is often
informed by religious background, this study uses the term “spiritual struggle” to
describe those critical moments that people experience when they realize that their
spirituality must change to accommodate new experiences or new information.
Suggesting that spirituality is not a separate or private characteristic but an
integrated part of the whole person and therefore, an important aspect of students’
learning and development, raises challenges for distinguishing spiritual struggles from
more common forms of human struggles (Dirkx, Mezirow, & Cranton, 2006). It is
important to understand how students make sense of their inner worlds in relationship to
their externally expressed lives. Spirituality and spiritual struggle described in this study
attempt to name what Dirkx, et al. (2006) called a “backdrop,” “matrix,” or “context”
through which persons’ lives play out. Careful attention is needed, as it is possible for
some people to over-spiritualize their human struggles and, for others, to grapple with
language that expresses the challenges they encounter which may, in fact, have spiritual
elements. Other researchers who have attempted to understand spiritual struggle have
noted that spiritual struggle includes not only immanent aspects of everyday life, but also

19

transcendent elements associated with persons’ experiences that make their struggles,
spiritual struggles (Fisler et al., 2009; Rockenbach et al., 2012; Zinnbauer & Pargament,
1998).
Emerging Adult Spiritual Development
Some of the life-span research pertaining to spiritual development has included,
but not necessarily focused on, understanding emerging adults who are also traditional
college undergraduates (Fowler, 1981, 1984, 1995; Fowler, Keen, & Berryman, 1978;
Fowler & Loder, 1982; Loder, 1989, 1998). These studies have acknowledged that
spiritual development, while having some aspects of religiousness, refers to a human
quality where people, regardless of religious orientation, seek to create meaning in light
of their epistemological assumptions. They report on those people having experienced
spiritual change and frequent challenges over their life spans, as they revisit their spiritual
viewpoints and then move on toward more reliable and congruent beliefs.
Other researchers who have focused primarily on the emerging adult life-stage
have included, but not necessarily focused, on undergraduates (Arnett, 2004; Arnett &
Jensen, 2002; Arnett, Kloep, Hendry, & Tanner, 2011; Parks, 1991, 2000; Smith & Snell,
2009). They have agreed with other life-stage theorists that emerging adults do
experience a unique and challenging period in life and report that spirituality is one
element that shapes and is shaped by emerging adult experiences (Arnett, 2004; Arnett et
al., 2011). “Something changes” in these emerging adults’ spirituality, as they search to
make their spirituality “more true,” interpret and reinterpret their experiences, and
reframe their beliefs to integrate with their ever-growing exposure to a diversity of
worldviews (Arnett, 2004). As these emerging adults reorient their spiritual viewpoints,

20

they are known to suspend religious practices, an act that may not be an indicator of their
leaving their original spiritual convictions as much as simply re-imagining them
(Clydesdale, 2007; Smith & Snell, 2009). Still, these personal changes in religious
behaviors have resulted in adults and educators’ misunderstanding emerging adults’
attitudes and behaviors regarding religion and spirituality (Arnett, 2004; Clydesdale,
2007; Fisler et al., 2009; Lee, 2002; Nash, 1999; Uecker, Regnerus, & Vaaler, 2007).
While religious attendance of emerging adults declines during college, Smith &
Snell (2009) argued that this change is not a new phenomenon. Emerging adult actions
are as much about differentiating themselves from their parents and their past, as they are
a part of each student’s spiritual journey. Although their religious participation and
outlooks may be changing, life-stage theorists and those studying the emerging adult life
stage have argued that emerging adults in America remain predominantly theistic,
generally have a positive view toward religion, are fairly conventional/traditional in the
way they talk about religious and spiritual topics, and see spirituality as an important
aspect. However, these espoused views remain more situated in the background of their
daily lives (Arnett, 2004; Arnett & Jensen, 2002; Clydesdale, 2007; Smith & Snell,
2009).
What has remained unclear, however, is what is actually happening to emerging
adults that causes their spiritual viewpoints to change during this stage of life. Studies on
emerging adult spirituality have called for a closer look at emerging adults in various
contexts, including those who are undergraduates and attending colleges (Arnett, 2004;
Barry & Nelson, 2005; Braskamp et al., 2006). In terms of the opportunities for
emerging adults to develop their personal beliefs in a safe and supportive environment,

21

Arnett (2004) has suggested that the “American college is the emerging adult
environment par excellence” (p. 140).
Undergraduates Bring Their Spirituality to Campus
Thus far, I have defined the terms “religious” and “spiritual” and their interrelatedness to both spiritual development and spiritual struggle. I have also noted that the
period in the life-span called emerging adulthood has unique characteristics associated
with spiritual development that still require more specific and clearer understanding. It is
important to apply these concepts now to the study of undergraduates.
The religious and spiritual perspectives of students have gained attention, as
several studies have reported that a majority of undergraduate students do bring their
religious traditions and beliefs to campuses (Astin, 2004; Astin & Astin, 2003; Astin et
al., 2003; Jablonski et al., 2001; Lindholm, 2007; Love, 2001; Tisdell, 2001). Recent
studies have also reported that a majority of undergraduates who enter college have a
high interest in spiritual ideas and involvement and have expectations that their college or
university will support their further spiritual development (Astin et al., 2003; Lindholm,
2007). While still diverse, a majority of students who come to college do believe in God,
a Higher Power, or a Life Force. These findings invite further consideration of what
these students’ beliefs mean for their ongoing college experiences (Astin & Astin, 2003;
Bryant et al., 2003; Smith & Snell, 2009). Further, those undergraduates who do value
their spiritual or religious perspectives report wanting more ways to be available to
develop or integrate their religious and/or spiritual selves with their academic selves.
They believe that people are spiritual beings, have pondered the challenging questions of
suffering, evil, and death in the world, and desire to integrate their spiritual lives into

22

their whole lives (Astin, 2004; Astin & Astin, 2010; Astin et al., 2010; Astin et al., 2003;
Bryant et al., 2003; Lindholm, 2007).
Astin et al. (2003), Astin (2004), Astin, Astin, & Lindholm (2010), Lindholm
(2007), Braskamp (2008), and Magolda & Gross (2009) all refer to the findings of the
Higher Education Research Institute that drew from survey data collected in 2003 from
112,232 students attending a national sample of 236 colleges and universities. Of those
undergraduates entering college, 83% believed in the sacredness of life; 80% were
interested in spirituality; 76% were searching for the meaning/purpose of life; 74%
discussed life philosophies with friends; 69% looked to their religious beliefs for
guidance; 64% viewed spirituality as a source of joy; 79% said they believed in God;
81% attended religious services; 69% prayed on a regular basis; 69% wanted their school
to help them develop their personal values; and 48% said explicitly that they wanted their
college experience to encourage their personal expressions of spirituality. These same
researchers referred to the college experience as a time when undergraduates try to make
up their minds about their religious and spiritual perspectives. In the words of Braskamp
(2008), “Entering college students not only bring their faith to campus with them; they
expect to grow in their religious and spiritual lives while in college” (p. 125).
In their follow-up study done in 2007, Astin & Astin (2010) identified a number of
college experiences that affected students’ spiritual development. These included faculty,
type of major, curricular and co-curricular experiences, and peers. Faculty who
encouraged questions about meaning and purpose or engaged students in discussions on
religious and spiritual matters or who promoted introspective activities as part of their
courses were identified as being supportive of their students’ spiritual development.

23

Students who majored in education, fine arts, the health professions, biological sciences,
or social sciences showed positive growth in spirituality, while those in engineering,
mathematics/statistics, physical sciences, or technical fields showed negative growth.
Curricular experiences, such as service learning, interdisciplinary courses, study abroad
and co-curricular experiences like leadership training, had positive effects on spirituality.
Where students resided, such as living in a residence hall (versus living at home), also
positively affected their spiritual perspectives. Braskamp (2008) concluded that “Faith
and learning can go hand in hand” (p. 117).
Lee (2002) observed that half of undergraduates reported no change in their
religious values between their freshman and senior years with only 14% reporting a
decline and 38% reporting that their religious convictions strengthened. There is
speculation that undergraduates’ religious beliefs do not dramatically increase or decrease
as much in college as they are simply being reframed by their spiritual development. In
other words, people may remain connected to their religious traditions and practices for
various reasons, depending on where they are currently sitting in their spiritual
development (Bryant et al., 2003; Lee, 2002; Smith & Snell, 2009).
Although general college domains have been identified as affecting students’
spiritual experiences, less is known about the specific ways these domains support or
specifically impede students’ spiritual development and spiritual struggle in particular
ways. Bryant, et al. (2003) offered that, “[b]ecause spirituality is something that clearly
many students want in their lives, it makes sense that we develop practices to attend to
this need” (p. 740).

24

Undergraduate Spiritual Lives a “Blind Spot” and “Hidden” on Campus
Astin (2004) stated that, “[m]ore than anything else, giving spirituality a central
place in our [higher education] institutions will serve to strengthen our sense of
connectedness with each other, our students, and our institutions” (p. 41). Still,
undergraduates’ inner and spiritual lives have been identified as a blind spot and hidden
from most faculty and staff.
The blind spot. While many undergraduates value spirituality, some have called
spirituality in higher education a “blind spot” that needs more understanding (Collins &
et al., 1987; Palmer et al., 2010; Rue, 1985; Temkin & Evans, 1998). Calls for colleges
and universities to better attend to undergraduates’ whole selves and inner lives have
raised questions pertaining to those students who have religious and spiritual beliefs.
Higher education has been committed to better understanding undergraduate perspectives
in light of their varied and multiple identities, including their gender, race, ethnicity,
Socioeconomic Status (SES), and sexual orientation. Similarly, efforts to understand the
varying spiritual perspectives of students can produce additional support for student
learning, development, and engagement with others (Braskamp et al., 2006; Chickering et
al., 2006; Collins & et al., 1987; Parks, 2000).
Fowler (1981) has stated that faith, classically understood, cannot be separated
from life or compartmentalized spirituality. It is an orientation of the total person, giving
full purpose and goals to hope, strivings, thoughts, and actions. However, recognizing
the relevance of spiritual development seems to be a blind spot for too many educators.
In fact, even “seeing” this “blind spot” proves to be difficult, as some researchers have

25

reported that the interior lives of undergraduates have become today even more “hidden”
from faculty and staff than they were earlier.
Hidden lives. Dalton & Crosby (2007) argue that the “hidden” inner lives of
undergraduates may be caused by five factors. They explain that peer culture is difficult
to track because it exists as a parallel world alongside an “official” college culture that is
unseen and unknown by adults. Next, most faculty and staff who interact with students
during the day, are absent during “night campus,” those non-class interactions and
activities (both helpful and detrimental) where these students work out their most
pressing personal queries. Also, the inner lives of college students are typically eclipsed
by the emphasis higher education places on the cognitive aspects of learning, thus placing
less priority on students’ inner development. Further, understanding the diverse
backgrounds of students’ identities is limited due to generalizations and discrimination
that fails to take into account the uniqueness of individual student identities. Finally,
technology has redefined the way that students interact with each other and with faculty,
often creating more distance between the two. Dalton & Crosby (2007) emphasized that
knowledge of these factors can help staff and faculty be more aware of what they know
and what they do not know about their students. After identifying these issues, some
educators are calling for greater attention to be paid to students’ spiritual development
and have advocated for making more opportunities available for students to explore their
“inner lives” as well as their “outer lives” within the college environment (Astin & Astin,
2003; Astin et al., 2003; Cherry et al., 2001; Chickering et al., 2006; Lindholm & Astin,
2008; Palmer et al., 2010; Rue, 1985; Tisdell, 2003).

26

Varied Descriptions of Undergraduate Spirituality
The challenge of studying the spirituality of undergraduates has produced studies
that offer a wide range of descriptions of student spiritual development. Undergraduates
are described in many ways: Less religious, spiritual but not religious, more spiritual
seeking than religious dwelling, conventional, non-interested or overwhelmed, spiritually
growing, or spiritually disinterested (Astin, 2004; Astin & Astin, 2003; Astin et al., 2011;
Clydesdale, 2007; Holcomb & Nonneman, 2004; Lindholm, 2007; Lindholm & Astin,
2008; Love, 2001; Love & Talbot, 1999; Parks, 2000; Rogers & Love, 2007; Small,
2009; Smith & Snell, 2009; Welch & Mellberg, 2008; Zinnbauer & Pargament, 1998).
Thus, it still remains, it seems, a certain ambiguity among researchers as to what the
spiritual lives of undergraduates actually are and what undergraduates who do want to
develop spiritually actually need. Enhancing universities’ understanding of students who
consider their spiritual development as important, and in particular, universities’
understanding how these students experience and work through spiritual struggle will
help faculty, student affairs, college staff, and campus religious leaders all better support
undergraduates while they are in college.
Evangelical Undergraduates
This current study focuses on students from a single faith tradition–those who
identify as Evangelical Christians. Evangelicals are theologically conservative
Protestants who emphasize personal piety and often come from fundamentalist, neoevangelical, “seeker-sensitive”, or Pentecostal congregations (Putnam & Campbell,
2010). They hold to supernatural truth, namely the Bible as being both inspired and
authoritative, and prioritize the need for forgiveness of sins, personal spiritual conversion,

27

eternal life, and evangelism (Nash, 1999). Evangelicals come from a conservative,
“fundamentalist” Christian Protestant tradition and generally hold to a “fundamentalist
narrative” that is “a powerful counter-discourse that is appealing to those disenchanted
with the false promises of modernism and secularism” (Nash, 1999, p. 57).
Students who share a common religious viewpoint often seek connection with
other students who share their beliefs by joining campus religious groups (Astin et al.,
2010; Lee, 2002; Magolda & Gross, 2009; Temkin & Evans, 1998). Some reports claim
that of all the religious groups on campuses, the most numerous are Evangelical, and they
have the most involvement (Astin & Astin, 2003; Cherry et al., 2001; Lugo et al., 2008).
Still, Evangelical campus groups are reported as being the least open to dialogue with
other groups, and Evangelical students are more susceptible to spiritual struggle (Bryant,
2006a; J. P. Hill, 2009; Magolda & Gross, 2009). Bryant (2006) studied an Evangelical
campus group climate and posture and found that these members encouraged separatism,
resisted dialogue, and promoted conservative gender roles among students. Magolda &
Gross (2009), while studying a particular Evangelical group on a public campus over two
years, observed that this group related to society as an oppositional subculture, choosing
to identify and separate from the mainstream and a secular culture and engage it only
through recruiting and proselytizing. Evangelical undergraduates also gravitated toward
religious organizations in their quest for community and avoided perceived
marginalization (Baxter Magolda, 2000; Smith, 1998). While this religious group
promoted student involvement and co-curricular activity, it also perpetuated potentially
harmful ways of relating to others on campus through isolationism, separatism, sexism,

28

minimal dialogue with those different than themselves, and anti-intellectualism (Magolda
& Gross, 2009).
Magolda & Gross (2009) have stated that the “academy remains largely ignorant
about the intricacies of Evangelical organizations and uncertain how to meet the unique
needs of evangelical students while remaining true to core, secular institutional values”
(p. 11). They suggested that higher education leaders must clarify the role of religion and
faith on campus, forge alliances with para-churches (campus religious
groups/organizations that are not churches) based on differences, challenge campus
religious groups to expand their worldviews, move beyond simply conformity, and
encourage evangelical students to see differences as positive opportunities for selfreflection and dialogue. While the students associated with these various groups could be
studied, this study focuses specifically and only on Evangelical students.
Undergraduate Spiritual Struggle
So far, those studies that have sought to understand spiritual struggle in college
students include Parks (2000), Astin, et al., (2003), Bryant & Astin, (2008), Fisler et al.
(2009), Astin, Astin & Lindholm, (2011a, 2011b), and Rockenbach et al. (2012). From
their findings, certain general observations about spiritual struggle can be made. More
in-depth descriptions of students’ spiritual struggles can be explored in depth by
classifying their spiritual struggles according to Parks’ (2000) forms of spirituality:
Knowing, dependence, and community. Following the recommendation of Rockenbach,
et al. (2012), Parks’ (2000) forms of spirituality were adapted to frame the methodology
of this current study.

29

General Observations Regarding Spiritual Struggle
Generally, spiritual struggle appears to be a reality for many college students
(Astin et al., 2010; Bryant & Astin, 2008; Chickering et al., 2006; Fisler et al., 2009;
Rockenbach et al., 2012). If spiritual development is a process that moves individuals
toward a more mature way of holding their spirituality, then spiritual struggle must be
expected. Even though it is stressful and disorienting, spiritual struggle can also become
an open portal toward obtaining a truer spirituality (Parks, 2000; Rockenbach et al.,
2012). This struggle centers on the daily lives of students, potentially impacting their
academic, social, and emotional well-being (Bryant & Astin, 2008; Rockenbach et al.,
2012). Chickering, et al. (2006) indicated that without healthy space or dedicated time on
campus for students to explore their identities through personal spiritual development,
students are driven to be involved in a “night campus” where the same struggle is
worked through in detrimental ways that produce unhealthy and risky behaviors too often
associated with alcohol consumption, sexual activity, and video games (Astin et al., 2010,
2011; Chickering et al., 2006; Freitas, 2008). Spiritual struggle can be a necessary
element in one’s total spiritual development and serve as a valuable catalyst to help
students address the spiritual issues they may be facing while in college (Bryant & Astin,
2008; Fowler, 1981; Parks, 2000; Rockenbach et al., 2012).
Spiritual Struggle As Knowing, Dependence, and Community
Parks (2000) has suggested that spiritual development has three essential forms–
knowing, dependence, and community. These forms offer a useful way to understand
undergraduate spiritual struggle descriptions and provided a useful conceptual framework
for this study.

30

Spiritual struggle in the form of knowing. Parks (2000) described the form of
knowing as the cognitive part of faith (or spiritual) development and postulated that
knowing brings fear, curiosity, doubt, and anxiety. Bryant & H. Astin (2008) observed
that those who encountered spiritual struggle questioned their religious/spiritual beliefs,
felt unsettled, wrestled with issues of evil, suffering, and death, felt angry with God, or
struggled with their past upbringing. Students experienced crisis or what Parks (2000)
referred to as a “shipwreck” when they encountered ideas or experiences that were
different from their own. Fisler et al.’s (2009) descriptions of this struggle appear to
relate to the way undergraduates think about their spirituality. Undergraduate critical
thinking is stimulated by classroom assignments and discussions with faculty and peers
that often leads to students’ experiencing spiritual conflict, confusion, and pain as they
reexamine their beliefs and worldviews (Fisler et al., 2009).
Spiritual struggle in the form of dependence. Parks (2000) described the form
of dependence as the affective part of spiritual development where undergraduates
reconsider their locus of authority (in self, others, traditions, etc.) that evokes emotional
responses. As undergraduates depart from their inherited beliefs, they do not always
have the emotional support needed to help them navigate toward the new territory they
are seeking (Bryant & Astin, 2008; Loder, 1998; Smith & Snell, 2009). Spiritual struggle
was also reported to increase during the undergraduate junior year than during the
freshman year, as students by then have more experiences and more maturity they can
use to reflect on their beliefs (Astin et al., 2011; Clydesdale, 2007). Spiritual struggle
over one’s dependence evoked in many undergraduates the feelings of unsettled

31

emotions, disillusionment, anger, distress, low self-esteem, pain, and confusion (Bryant
& Astin, 2008; Fisler et al., 2009).
Spiritual struggle in the form of community. Parks (2000) described the form
of community as the relational part of faith (spiritual) development when undergraduates
search for belonging. Students relationships and interactions with past and present
communities and contexts may evoke such spiritual struggle (Astin et al., 2011). Some
experienced struggle because of the tensions they felt between their loyalty toward family
or their religious community at home and their new transforming spiritual viewpoints at
school. Often, those from minority religious preferences, such as Buddhism, Hinduism,
Islam, and Unitarian Universalism, experienced greater struggle (Bryant & Astin, 2008).
Other factors found to affect spiritual struggle included being female, attending a
religious college, and majoring in psychology, humanities, the fine arts, or social
sciences. Fisler et al. (2009) reported that students believed that people (friends,
roommates, peers), organizations, campus environments, and organized religion both
helped and impeded their quest for resolution of their struggle. Fisler et al. (2009)
emphasized the importance of the campus climate and suggested that more qualitative
research be undertaken on how relationships and environments both help and impede
student spiritual development.
Spiritual struggle varies by college type and peer group. Religious colleges often
report more struggle among their students, likely because faith is more readily discussed
in that environment (Bryant & Astin, 2008). Bryant & Astin (2008) noted that
undergraduates from public colleges are more likely to experience struggle through their
encounter with a variety of worldviews. Further, those undergraduates who experienced

32

struggle were often the same persons who highly engaged in religious activities with their
peers. Some peers opened up about their own questions and doubts, and others felt more
comfortable sharing their own struggles (Bryant & Astin, 2008). Astin et al. (2011b)
suggested that in light of the communities in which students participate, spiritual struggle
often becomes “contagious” (Astin et al., 2003, p. 105). Hence, if one struggles, one’s
friends may struggle as well.
Spiritual Struggle and College-Related Support
Astin et al. (2011b) argued that a public university is an ideal place for students to
explore their spiritual commitments, as there is no official dogma there and more room to
explore different beliefs and values. Of the studies that researched spiritual struggle,
Parks (2000) emphasized the need to have a mentoring community as a safe harbor for
those seeking to own their spirituality and not shipwreck their faith. Fisler et al.’s (2009)
study is the only research that explored what that support looks like to undergraduates.
They reported that undergraduates found support from roommates, family, friends,
ministers, counselors, student organizations, and peers. Interestingly, these same people
and groups were also responsible for producing spiritual struggle. Other undergraduates
referred to the campus setting as both helping and hurting their journey through their
spiritual struggle. Some referred to campus groups as places of support, while others
lamented that campus religious groups were hard to access because they appeared to be
exclusive and separatist (Bryant, 2007; Magolda & Gross, 2009).
Gaps in the Literature on Undergraduate Spiritual Struggle
Bryant & Astin (2008) remarked that, based on their work on undergraduate
spiritual struggle, “struggles of a spiritual nature are a reality for college students” (p.

33

23). Spiritual struggle is a known source of challenge for a “considerable portion of
college students”, thus bringing spiritual conflict within the person (Rockenbach et al.,
2012, p. 55). Undergraduate spiritual struggle is a necessary part of students’ spiritual
development and does need understanding and support since it affects everyday learning
and meaning-making (Baxter Magolda & King, 2004; Chickering et al., 2006; Dirkx,
1997; English, 2000; P. C. Hill & Pargament, 2003; Love, 2001; Palmer, 1998; Parks,
2000).
So far, spiritual struggle has been identified in both theory and observation by
only a few studies, and more research is needed to understand the actual college-related
factors that support and/or impede students who are working through their spiritual
struggle. None of the studies on undergraduate spiritual struggle have considered the
specific religious backgrounds of undergraduate participants, although struggle is often
rooted in students’ critical reflections on the inherited beliefs and values acquired from
their families and their religious traditions. Most studies, although purposeful, are still
random or intentionally diversified in terms of identifying religious backgrounds.
While spiritual struggle is described in general terms, Parks’ (2000) work
challenges educators to consider the more precise intellectual, affective, and relational
types of spiritual struggle that undergraduates are experiencing. Richer descriptions of
undergraduate spiritual struggle can help colleges learn how to support these students
more effectively. Rockenbach et al. (2012) provided the first study that described a more
specific “texture” of the spiritual struggles of students in the Southeast, and in so doing,
the authors recommended further research on other college campuses (p. 62).

34

While higher education creates opportunities for students to engage in critical
thinking, little has been learned about how faculty or classroom experiences have
supported students throughout their spiritual struggle. Although students have reported
an interest in spiritual dialogue, they have also voiced the difficulty of actually accessing
such opportunities on campus. Also, faculty have acknowledged the difficulty of
addressing the ambiguity and diversity of student spirituality (Lindholm, 2007).
Lindholm (2007) offered that, “[e]ven when we are equipped with the information that is
available, bridging the gap between student interests and college practice requires
thoughtful consideration” (p. 16). Thus, there are still more areas of student life to
explore for how faculty and classroom experiences can better support students as those
same students work though their personal spiritual struggles within their education.
Also, universities may wonder what they can assume or expect of students
regarding their spiritual development maturity. Fisler et al. (2009) seemed surprised that
undergraduates did not have their spiritual commitments worked through by their senior
year in college. However, spiritual development is likely to be an ongoing process that
continues beyond the undergraduate experience, and further spiritual struggle within
spiritual development is likely to keep recurring throughout life. Revisiting the
expectations that educators have for undergraduates and more research to understand the
exact qualities of spiritual development and struggle is necessary.
While attention has been given to students’ leaving the traditional beliefs of their
family and religion, little study has been undertaken to consider whether participation in
religious campus groups helps or impedes students’ spiritual struggle and development.
Studies of campus groups have found that some groups can be oppressive, separatist, and

35

resistant to the values usually associated with a liberal arts education (Bryant, 2006a;
Magolda & Gross, 2009). More research is thus needed to examine undergraduates’ full
and clear perceptions of the presence and effects that campus religious groups have on
them.
Most observations of students’ religious and spiritual perceptions have been
conducted by researchers who admit to having no theological training and/or limited
understanding of particular religious traditions. The absence of theological training and
an unfamiliarity with certain religious traditions likely produced limitations regarding
their knowledge and also their analysis of students’ spiritual struggle descriptions.
Perhaps, further research applied by those who have education in both spiritual
development and theological training will provide an additional layer of analysis of the
descriptions of these students’ spiritual struggles. In addition, those projects that have
studied spiritual struggle have all encouraged further qualitative research in unique
campus environments with students from particular religious backgrounds (Bryant &
Astin, 2008; Fisler et al., 2009; Rockenbach et al., 2012).
Undergraduate inner lives have been largely hidden from educators for a variety
of reasons. Knowledge of the spiritual development and struggles of these
undergraduates, however, can help campus leaders and faculty better support student
learning and their holistic development. Thus, the overarching research question to be
addressed by the proposed study is: From the perspective of undergraduate students who
have come from the Evangelical Christian tradition, what factors support or impede their
experiences when working through spiritual struggle while at college? This study gathers
these students’ descriptions of their spiritual struggles and attempts to understand their

36

meaning in light of their college context, religious background, and spiritual
development.

37

CHAPTER 3:
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This project contributes to the knowledge of undergraduate spiritual development
by examining what college-related factors Evangelical Christian students perceive as
either supporting or impeding them as they work though their spiritual struggles at a
Midwest public university. The organization of this chapter includes a restating of the
research question, an overview of the methodology, the research paradigm, the
participant sample, site selection, data collection, data analysis, data validity, and a
precise consideration of the chosen human subjects.
Research Question
In this study addresses the following research question: From the perspective of
undergraduate students who have come from the Evangelical Christian tradition, what
factors support or impede their experiences when working through spiritual struggle
while at college? The sub-questions are:
a) What does spiritual struggle mean for Evangelical undergraduates?
b) For those Evangelical undergraduates who have experienced spiritual struggle,
what are the particular sources or issues do they view as being related to that struggle?
What factor or factors brought that spiritual struggle to bear?
c) What factors do undergraduates perceive as affecting the process of how they
handled their struggle? Specifically, what college-related factors (resources,
relationships, experiences) do these undergraduates perceive as affecting the process for
how they handled the struggle? Which of these factors helped and which impeded the

38

process as these students experienced and managed their spiritual struggle and in what
ways?
d) How have the experiences of undergraduates who have worked through
spiritual struggle affected/influenced other areas in their lives (major/career decisions,
relationships, interests, beliefs, religious practices, etc.)?
e) What recommendations do Evangelical undergraduates offer to their higher
education institutions for better ways to support them and others as they experience and
manage their spiritual struggles?
The Research Paradigm
Keeling & Dungy (2004) have suggested that, “all institutions should establish
routine ways to hear students’ voices, consult with them, explore their opinions, and
document the nature and quality of their experience as learners” (p. 28). Concerns over
previous research that has only “decontextualized” undergraduates and their spiritual
perspectives have inspired further calls for more qualitative studies that focus on the
spiritual development of unique populations of students in particular college contexts
(Astin et al., 2010; Bryant & Astin, 2008; Lindholm, 2007; Mayrl & Oeur, 2009).
Qualitative researchers typically seek to understand “how people interpret their
experiences, how they construct their worlds, and what meaning they attribute to their
experiences” (Merriam, 2009, p. 5). These researchers focused on trying to understand
the phenomena associated with participants’ perspectives, not their own (Merriam, 2009).
Interactions with participants, therefore, simply assume that participant realities are
constructed, complex, and also changing (Glesne, 2006). The goal of qualitative research
is to rely on participants’ views instead and the way that participants construct meaning

39

for the topic being studied by collecting open-ended, emerging data with the intent of
identifying themes gleaned from that data (Creswell, 2002). Ultimately, qualitative
researchers will seek to ask the question, “What’s going on here?” Qualitative studies are
useful for understanding how participants interact with their world (how they feel, what
they believe, what they perceive) within a particular segment of their lives (Creswell,
2002, p. 96).
Merriam (2009) has noted that “the researcher is the primary instrument for data
collection and analysis” (p. 15). Maxwell (2012) suggested that researchers should be
viewed as valuable components of qualitative research. Aspects of a researcher’s life and
the actual research also can offer a unique “source of insights, hypotheses, and validity
checks” (Merriam, 2009, p. 45). The researcher can be responsive and adaptive to the
collection of data and very attentive to nonverbal information that may offer a fuller
description of the participants’ responses. Merriam (2009) also suggested that even
though researcher biases cannot be eliminated, it is still important to identify and monitor
these biases for how they may shape the data collection or its interpretation or both
scenarios. Maxwell (2012), like Merriam (2009) stated that the researcher “is the
instrument of research” (p. 45). The challenge for each researcher then, is to not eliminate
bias to attain a “God’s eye view,” but rather carefully identify the perspectives of the
researcher and the researcher’s background (Merriam, 2009, p. 46). Maxwell (2013) also
suggested that researchers can reflect better on their own biases by creating a Researcher
Identity Memo to explore their own expectations, beliefs, and assumptions that are
associated with the research study on which they have embarked (Maxwell, 2012;
Merriam, 2009). This process is an intentional way to identify certain values and beliefs

40

as one’s own, rather than projecting them onto other people or circumstances during the
data gathering (Maxwell, 2012). To carefully reflect upon and identify my own
perspectives, I created a Researcher Identity Memo, which is articulated in detail in
Appendix A.
Phenomenography
Phenomenographic research is the qualitative method of inquiry used for this
study as the method has the potential to collect appropriate data pertaining to research
questions. Marton (1981) has stated that researchers can approach questions about
learning by either orienting themselves toward the world to make statements about reality
or by orienting themselves toward their research participants’ ideas and their experiences
of that world. The former is the study of the phenomenon. The latter is the study of how
people experience that phenomenon and is the focus of phenomenography. In this study,
a phenomenographic method helped me understand what factors supported or impeded
the participants’ experiences while working through their own spiritual struggle during
college.
Phenomenography indicates that experience is the “subject” of a study and tries to
understand the ways people seek to make sense the phenomena around them (Marton,
1981). Phenomenographic research is designed to interact with participants to better
understand how they perceive, think about, and conceptualize their experiences that
pertain to the specific phenomenon of study (Booth, 1997). Therefore,
phenomenographic research studies the conceptions of a particular group regarding a
particular phenomenon and does so primarily through interviews. The method identifies
similarities and differences in people’s conceptions and faithfully articulates those

41

descriptions (Entwistle, 1997; Svensson, 1997). The goal in phenomenographic research
is to identify the categories of description drawn from the participants’ conceptions and
experiences of a phenomenon. As these descriptions are established, the research
approach seeks to capture the underlying meanings and relationships between them
(Entwistle, 1997; Marton, 1981). It is a method often used in studies pertaining to higher
educational and in those related to religious and spiritual topics (Åkerlind, 2008). Marton
(1986) explained that phenomenography is “an empirical research tradition that was
designed to answer questions about thinking and learning” (p. 28).
One of the critiques directed toward phenomenography is that it is rooted in
foundationalist assumptions where, from a constructivist perspective, it is impossible to
categorize themes across interviews, as the researchers unconsciously assess their own
constructed categories (Richardson, 1999). While phenomenography may have certain
foundationalist characteristics, it also holds constructivist views, thereby aligning well
with the basic theory of critical realism.
Critical Realism
The caution that constructivists have raised regarding phenomenography is also
an epistemological tension that I personally worked to navigate when considering an
appropriate research method. I had certain reservations with the epistemological
assumptions of both foundationalism and constructivism. Foundationalism holds that
there is one external reality that becomes known through use of objective methods, but it
fails to consider the layers of perspectives that people infuse into how they individually
look at the world. Research on race, culture, gender, and orientation have exposed the
biases of majority cultures and their “objectivity,” and rightly cited the dangerous results

42

of those who use this claim on objectivity to oppress others. Constructivism holds that
reality is not simply “out there” but rather is constructed through individual and shared
constructions (Maxwell, 2013). Thus, an individual knowledge of reality is a social
construction that is “constituted by human mental categories, discursive practices,
definitions of situations, and symbolic exchanges [and] then sustained as ‘real’ through
ongoing social interactions that are in turn shaped by particular interests, perspectives,
and, usually, imbalances of power” (Smith, 2010, p. 122).
Criticism of constructivism (especially its strongest versions) comes from the
argument that it is intellectually self-defeating, as there is no true way to judge what is
absolutely real. This perspective undermines all the research, including the researcher’s
results as mere constructions of the researcher who has no authority to observe, assess, or
recommend reliable ways forward. Strong forms of constructivism are also critiqued as
being morally self-defeating, as there can be no real moral standards. Judgments,
therefore, on others’ perspectives are impossible, as all moral claims made are mere
social constructions. In the end, the purest forms of constructivism are both selfdefeating and isolating. Soft constructivism, on the other hand, has merit, but it is better
expressed through critical realism (Maxwell, 2012; Smith, 2010).
Critical realism offers an alternative approach to foundationalism and
constructivism. It is rooted in both ontological realism and epistemological
constructivism. Ontological realism, like foundationalism, holds that there is a real world
that exists independently from people’s perceptions, theories, or constructions of that
world. Because we live in an independent individual reality, we experience certain
aspects of it, but not its entirety. Epistemological constructivism holds that our

43

understanding of the world is constructed from our perspectives of the shared world we
live in although our perspectives of that world, especially from our own different points
of view, remain still limited and thus incomplete. Therefore, critical realists believe
(contrary to constructivists) that there are not multiple realities of the world. There is
only one reality; however, they also deny (contrary to foundationalism) that anyone can
actually have an “objective” view of the world.
Instead, critical realists hold that there is one reality and multiple perspectives of
this reality that indeed need to be continually tested. Critical realism allows for varying
perspectives so as to emphasize common themes that may provide greater insights to a
broader reality. At the same time (in concert with postmodernity), critical realism
continues to emphasize that differences in perspectives exist, and that these differences
allow for critiques of our individual understandings of reality (Maxwell, 2012; Smith,
2010). Smith (2010) stated that “[c]ritical realism explicitly advocates the fallibility of all
human knowledge (but without sliding into relativism) and, therefore, [motivates]
ongoing engagement, inquiry, and debate” (p. 143). He posited that critical realism
encourages our search for “the best human account of truth about the real” that is drawn
from our “scientific humility, open considerations of plausible alternative viewpoints, and
reliance on persuasion as evidence to influence minds” (p. 143).
Critical Realism and Phenomenography
Qualitative research done from a critical realist perspective using the
phenomenographic method supports the goals of this study, which are to contribute to the
knowledge of undergraduates’ spiritual development by examining what college-related
factors that Evangelical Christian students perceive as supporting or impeding their

44

experiences of working through spiritual struggle at a public university. This goal
assumes that students’ perceptions are important and also relevant for understanding what
they describe as the factors affecting spiritual struggle and the resources they access for
working through that struggle. The potential for clarifying, affirming, or discovering
themes that support and/or impede students’ spiritual struggle experiences offers the
potential for more discourse and increasingly better practices (Smith, 2010). Further, the
assumptions described herein take into account the value and the limitations of the
researcher as an individual who interacts, reflects upon, and attempts to capture both the
common and the contradictory themes that can emerge within and across such qualitative
interviews (Marton, 1981, 1986).
Research and the critical realist perspective. Research from a critical realist
approach assumes that meaning (beliefs, reasons, motives, etc.), although not accessible
to direct observation, is still real and offers a valid explanation for individual actions.
Instead of a dualism that rests between the metaphysical and the physical, critical realism
holds that people’s meanings affect their actions, and their actions then affect the
meaning (Maxwell, 2012). Maxwell (2012) has suggested that the strategies useful for
causal explanation in qualitative research include long-term involvement, collecting
“rich” data (a description of participant thinking and behaviors), and using the narrative
approach (Maxwell, 2012). In solidarity with postmodern perspectives that reject
universals and emphasize the complex and multiple tensions regarding individual
perspectives, a critical realist perspective assumes that research not only identifies
similarities, but also exposes differences within those similarities. An emphasis on

45

similarity alone fails to capture the unique diversity that is present in any phenomenon
and may indeed allow for overstatement of its interpretation (Maxwell, 2012).
The phenomenographic method. Entwistle (1997) offered that when
phenomenographic studies in higher education gather data from interviews, questions
must be posed that allow participants, namely, students, to express their perceptions
through their own frame of reference rather than having one imposed on them by the
researcher. He suggested that it is better to conduct questioning that moves “from actions
to experience and from concrete to abstract” (p. 132). Descriptive categories should also
be presented with enough sufficient extracts to capture their full meaning and contextual
relationships. Summaries of descriptive categories should reveal the salient features that
distinguish these categories from other categories. Care must also be taken to establish
categories that reflect each participant response fairly. Once these categories have been
established, phenomenography can then seek to understand the relationship between
those categories (Entwistle, 1997).
A Conceptual Framework Drawn from the Literature
While spiritual struggle has been described generally in the literature, there are
also calls for richer narratives to determine what struggle actually means to
undergraduates (Rockenbach et al., 2012). The developmental model offered by Fowler
(1980, 1994) and built further by Parks (2000) offers a helpful lens for interpreting
undergraduates’ personal understanding of their spiritual growth. Parks (2000)
recognized that individual spiritual development is comprised of three essential elements:
The form of knowing (intellectual), the form of dependence (affective), and the form of
community (relational). Using the work of Fowler (1981), Parks (2000) focused

46

specifically on what Arnett (2004) has called the emerging adult period (late teen to midtwenties). Within that emerging adulthood period, Parks (2000) identified three stages of
spiritual development–Adolescent/Conventional, Young Adult, and Tested Adult. Parks
(2000) emphasized the need for educators to be particularly aware of undergraduates in
these stages of spiritual development, who experience crises or “shipwreck,” and who
need support to navigate those stressful periods.
Past studies have recognized Parks’ (2000) framework as helpful for
understanding participants’ perceptions of their spiritual development and support. Fisler
et al. (2009) suggested that a strength of Parks’ (2000) theory is “the recognition of
cognitive, affective, and social influences on spiritual development” (p. 269). Spiritual
struggle will occur when students experience their spirituality as being betrayed,
challenged, threatened, or found wanting because of new information or different life
experiences. They are compelled to step away from the familiar cognitive, affective, and
social ways for how they have understood their spirituality and enter into unknown
territory to seek a more congruent spirituality that can hold and support the new
information and experiences they have recently encountered. Thus, understanding
students’ perspectives regarding what supports or impedes their working through spiritual
struggle requires offering and expressing a sensitivity to their unique stage of spiritual
development and also the type of struggles they are experiencing during that stage.
(Fowler, 1981, 1995; Parks, 2000).
Figure 1 describes the kinds of spiritual struggle students may experience,
depending on the form of that struggle and the maturity of spiritual development.

47

Note in Figure 1, that spiritual struggle occurs in between stages of equilibrium, will
likely happen more than once, and may be experienced intellectually, emotionally, and/or
relationally. Placing more specific attention on where and what kinds of spiritual
struggle undergraduates experience, creates opportunities for a more refined
understanding of the struggle that the students describe. The kinds of struggle labeled in
Figure 1 will be explained in light of Parks’ (2000) spiritual elements, namely, knowing,
dependence, and community.
Forms of
Spiritual
Development
and Struggle
Forms of
Knowing
(Cognitive)
Struggle within
Knowing
Forms of
Dependence
(Affective)

Adolescent
Authority
Bound
Dualistic

Young Adult

Unqualified
Relativism

Doubting struggle

Forms of
Community
(Relational)
Struggle within
Community

Probing Commitment
Tested Commitment

Articulating
struggle

Dependent/
Counter-Dependent

Struggle within
Dependence

Integrating
struggle

Fragile InnerDependence
Negative feelings

Conventional

Mentoring
Community

Diffuse

Separating struggle

Tested Adult

Seeking struggle

Confident
Inner-Dependence
Positive feelings

Self-selected Class/Group
Contributing struggle

Figure 1. Spiritual development and the kinds of spiritual struggle. Adapted from Parks’
(2000) depiction of spiritual development where spiritual struggle can be experienced at
various phases and in various forms. Labels for the kinds of struggle possible are my
own and designed for easier description and reference.

48

The form of Knowing
Within the form of knowing, spiritual struggle occurs as undergraduates begin to
critically reflect on their beliefs and worldviews, often questioning what those in
authority have taught them. Doubting struggle, occurs when students reconsider their
inherited (Authority Bound Dualistic) beliefs in light of new information and
experiences. Students express doubt or feel challenged when they address existential
questions of evil, death, war, disparity, etc. In doubting struggle, students articulate more
emphatically what they do not believe, and their thinking can be easily influenced by
contexts and relationships (Unqualified Relativism). Next, articulating struggle, occurs
as students embark on a quest to test and try out new belief systems or worldviews, often
experiencing a “divided self” by attempting to synthesize what they already know and
accept along with what they are learning or experiencing (Probing Commitment).
Integrating struggle, occurs as young people take responsibility for their own thinking
and knowing and seek to live in a way that is both committed to and congruent with their
emerging beliefs (Tested Commitment) (Parks, 2000).
The form of Dependence
Within the form of dependence, undergraduates wrestle with the affective
elements that are associated with spiritual struggle. Negative feelings, ensue as students
seek to develop their spirituality less from external (religious leaders, adults, parents)
influences (Dependent/Counter-Dependent) and more from an internal locus of authority
wherein they are making their spirituality their own (Fragile Inner-dependence). People
during this period of negativity may experience feelings of guilt, shame, insecurity,
betrayal, rebellion, sadness, or anger. As they work through their negative feelings, some

49

continue to internalize and own their beliefs for themselves and experience positive
feelings, where they find comfort, confidence, congruency, and peace with the person
they are becoming spiritually (Confident Inner-Dependence) (Parks, 2000).
The form of Community
Within the form of community, undergraduates reconsider their loyalties and
relationships to the people or groups with whom they associate. Separating struggle,
emerges as young people move from an uncritical loyalty to a group that is “just like us”
(Conventional) and then question the assumptions that divide “us” from “them,” which
can then lead them to separating themselves from a group, a family, or relationships
(Diffuse). Next, seeking struggle occurs as students search for a community that
welcomes, supports, or encourages their evolving perceptions of a more inclusive group
(Mentoring Community). Beyond attending a community, students may experience
contributing struggle to try and find their place or role within the same or a different
community that they selected, which also respects and acknowledges their new, varying
perspectives (Self-Selected Class/Group) (Parks, 2000).
Spiritual Development and Spiritual Struggle
Spiritual struggle described within spiritual development and the form of
spirituality provides a framework that helps one delve deeper into students’ descriptions
of their struggles. Figure 2 summarizes the ways these kinds of struggle have been
described to try and provide a more articulate lens for viewing and understanding
students’ described spiritual struggles.

50

Elements of
Spiritual
Development
Forms of
Knowing
(Cognitive)
Struggle within
Knowing

Adolescent
Authority
Bound
Dualistic

Unqualified
Relativism

Doubting struggle
Doubting what has
been taught them;
asking questions on
the problem of evil,
pain, suffering,
injustice; existential
questions, etc.;
articulating what they
don’t believe
anymore.

Forms of
Dependence
(Affective)

Struggle within
Community

Tested Adult

Probing Commitment

Tested Commitment

Articulating
struggle
Attempting to
articulate one’s
own beliefs;
seeking to offer
alternative
rationales for
what they
assumed or
were taught.

Dependent/
Counter-Dependent

Struggle within
Dependence

Forms of
Community
(Relational)

Young Adult

Integrating
struggle
Growing
confidence in
articulating their
own
beliefs/worldview;
learning to accept
both/and new
categories rather
than either/or.

Fragile InnerDependence
Negative feelings
Experiencing feelings
of guilt, shame,
anger, confusion,
unfaithfulness,
betrayal

Conventional

Mentoring
Community

Diffuse
Separating struggle
Questioning community
assumptions, norms,
biases, etc.; experience
conflict,
misunderstanding, loss
and home no longer
being “home.”

Seeking struggle
Seeking or searching
for a place to belong
to, be accepted,
search, quest

Confident
Inner-Dependence

Positive feelings
Discovering a
sense of being at
peace with oneself
and others

Self-selected Class/Group
Contributing struggle
Searching for one’s role
within the new community; discovering the
value and challenges
associated with an
interdependent
community.

Figure 2. Spiritual development and descriptions of spiritual struggle. Adapted from
Parks’ (2000) depiction of spiritual development where spiritual struggle can be
experienced at various periods and in various forms. Descriptions show generally how
each form of struggle is typically explained.
51

Study Participant Selection
Maxwell (2012) suggested that the guiding principle for selecting participants in a
qualitative study is not to ensure representativeness or comparability, but rather to
“identify groups, settings, or individuals that best exhibit the characteristics for [the]
phenomena of interest” (p. 94) and also, to “select those that are most accessible and
conducive to gaining the understandings you seek” (p. 94). He calls this method
“purposive sampling” and adds that, in such a sampling, one must include participants
who can speak relevantly to the theory being studied. This current study thus uses a
purposive sampling approach to identify those participants that hold the particular
characteristics closely related to this study’s research questions. Participants thus
qualified for the sample when they met the following criteria: 1) they were junior or
senior college students; 2) they identified as Evangelical Christian; 3) they reported
experiencing some form of spiritual struggle (“shifts or changes” in their spiritual or
religious beliefs or practices) while at college; and 4) they were students’ attending the
public university chosen for this study.
Upperclassmen
Focusing on junior and senior undergraduates acknowledges what the previous
research findings have indicated, namely, that younger undergraduates are not likely to be
aware of or engaged in critical thinking about their own spiritual development
(Clydesdale, 2007; Fisler et al., 2009). Younger undergraduates are more likely to
remain conventional in their inherited beliefs, while older undergraduates have had more
time to experience challenge, change, and take ownership of their own spirituality.
Further, upper classmen have more of a historical perspective and can look back on their

52

college careers and thus speak precisely to the questions addressed in this study (Barry &
Nelson, 2005; Fisler et al., 2009; Lindholm, 2007).
Evangelical Christian Undergraduates
In an attempt to remain focused on one perspective of religion and spirituality,
this research focused specifically on undergraduates who identified as “Evangelical
Christian.” Evangelicals are theologically conservative Protestants who emphasize
personal piety and often come from fundamentalist, neo-evangelical, “seeker-sensitive”,
or Pentecostal congregations (Putnam & Campbell, 2010). Arnett & Jensen (2002)
categorized Evangelicals as “Conservative Christians” who express a belief in traditional
Christian dogma, for example, that Jesus is the Son of God and the only path to salvation.
They may mention being saved or refer to an afterlife of Heaven and Hell and say that
Christianity is the only true faith. The PEW Research Foundation described “Evangelical
Protestant Churches” by using similar characteristics to those used by Arnett & Jensen
(2002), which includes the use of “born again” language to describe one’s spirituality
(Lugo et al., 2008).
Smith & Snell (2009) noted that the majority of emerging adults who identify as
“Christian” retain the religious tradition they had as teenagers and still have positive
feelings toward their religion. Still, an emerging adult identification with a particular
denomination can sometimes be less defined. Putnam & Campbell (2010) have identified
many young people as “liminals” or those who may have a religious tradition, but do not
have any exclusive commitment to one denomination (p. 136). In this study, I tried to be
sensitive to “liminality” in terms of the ways that undergraduates defined their religious
identity, taking into consideration that at times no self-identification was clear-cut. I thus

53

took into account students’ religious upbringings and the language they used to describe
their Christian perspective. Some studies have treated Historically Black Protestant
Churches as a separate category, although still admitting there is some overlap with the
Evangelical category (Lugo et al., 2008; Putnam & Campbell, 2010). For this study,
however, Historically Black Protestant Churches that hold Evangelical perspectives were
considered as being also Evangelical.
Study Site Selection
This study was undertaken at a Midwest public university. Unlike religious
colleges or smaller colleges where there is likely to be more homogeneity, a public
university is tasked with the challenge of acknowledging and understanding the many
diverse perspectives of its diverse student body. The literature points to public
universities today becoming increasingly aware not only of the spirituality of their
students, but also the diverse spiritual perspectives their students may encounter (Bryant,
2006b; Cherry et al., 2001; Eck, 1993; Miller & Ryan, 2001; Nash, 2001; Patel, 2007;
Raper, 2001; Speck, 2005; Wuthnow, 2005). As Tisdell (2003) observed, each type of
higher education institution has challenges and opportunities associated with serving their
students, as these students encounter varying perspectives that will affect their personal
religious and spiritual assumptions.
All the students interviewed for this study attended the same Midwest, public
university. The school is a Research 1, land grant university with a student body of
approximately 50,000. According to the university’s 2013 Statistical Report, 7,161
international, undergraduate and graduate students from 131 countries attended the
university in the fall of 2013. According to their 2011-2012 Annual Progress Report on

54

Diversity and Inclusion, approximately 79% of the student population was white, with
19% being students of color and international students. The percentage of undergraduate
women and men equally distributed at 50%. Over 150 majors are offered to
undergraduates. On their website, the university reports having more than 550 campus
groups. Of these groups, approximately 50, or close to 10%, are listed as Christian
campus religious groups with a third of these groups (15) having an Evangelical outlook.
In addition, there are approximately 10 churches near the campus that have reported
reaching out to students who are attending the university.
Data Collection
Maxwell (2012) stressed that the “relationships that the researcher creates with
participants in the research are real phenomena; they shape the context within which the
research is conducted, and have a profound influence on the research and results” (p.
100). This study interviewed 20 participants, asking each to reflect on their spiritual
struggle as undergraduates who are attending a public university. Participants were
juniors or seniors, self-identifying as Evangelical Christians who have experienced a shift
or change in their spiritual or religious beliefs or activities while attending college. Two
rounds of interviews were scheduled with the participant group. The first round of
interviews each lasted 60 to 90 minutes. The second interviews were 30 to 60 minutes in
duration. After collecting and analyzing the first round of interviews, a second round was
held with the same participants. The second round of interviews gave students more
opportunities to reflect on their initial interviews and also to become more at ease in
talking with me about their spirituality. Additionally, the second interviews allowed for

55

the opportunity to member check, clarify themes, and delve more deeply into the more
predominant themes that these students revealed in their first interviews.
Reflective Memo and Lay Summary
Maxwell (2012) further stressed the importance of establishing mutually
productive and equitable relationships throughout the interview process. One way to
address this dynamic is to create a “reflective memo” that asks questions about the kind
of relationship the researcher wants to establish, while also anticipating how the
researcher will be perceived by those with whom he or she is interacting, then deciding
on what agreements will be made regarding collecting and reporting results, and
anticipating any ethical problems that might arise (Maxwell, 2012, pp. 102-103). My
reflective memo for this study is articulated in Appendix B.
While the reflective memo is a document addressing the reflexivity of the
researcher, the “lay summary” is a document that can be presented to the participants.
Glesne (2006) indicated that a lay summary explains to study participants who and what
the researcher is doing, thus preparing the participants for the data collection (p. 40). Lay
summaries establish who the researcher is, what the researcher is doing and why, what
will be done with the results, how the study site and participants were selected, any
possible benefits or risks to the participants, the promise of confidentiality and anonymity
given to the participants, the site, the frequency of interviews, the length of each session,
and a request for permission to record observations and the words of the participants by
either recording or writing the words down or doing both (Glesne, 2006). My lay
summary for this study is articulated in Appendix C.

56

Connecting With Campus Religious Group and Church Leaders
In the Spring 2014 semester, I contacted 16 campus religious groups and local
church leaders by email. Of these, 10 leaders responded to my invitation to talk in person
or by phone. My intent was to introduce myself and explain my research project, so they
would understand the purpose of the project and the spirit in which it was conducted.
Generally, I received positive feedback. Many leaders were very interested in the
research topic and eager to pass along my request to students who might fit my
participant requirements. Some leaders raised certain concerns over confidentiality for
their students and anonymity of their organizations, but they felt satisfied once I
explained my process. From January 2014 through February 2014, I met with campus
and church religious leaders and provided them information about the project via
electronic and hard copy that they could then pass along to potential students. The
leaders then promoted my request for participants through email, Facebook, and personal
conversations. One group leader invited me to a group meeting, and I was able to
announce my study there, but other groups did not permit me to address their groups.
Resistance to my addressing groups ranged from scheduling conflicts to their in-place
policies regarding announcements. From February 2014 through March 2014, students
responded to my participant requests. Students contacted me via email or text messages
to express interest in participating in my study. I confirmed with them that they met the
study’s participant characteristics, and then set up interviews.
Throughout my first round of interviews, I used snowball sampling, asking
participants to consider passing along information to others who might fit the study’s
participant requirements. By the end of March, the majority of the 20 first scheduled

57

interviews were completed, and I even had to turn away some students who had offered
to be participants.
Using Doodle, an online scheduling tool, I arranged follow-up interviews with 19
of the 20 participants and had a 100% return rate from all I invited back for the second
interviews. I completed those interviews by the end of April 2014. One participant who
completed the first interview proved to be unable to articulate the spiritual experiences he
had, so I determined that I had received all the relevant information I needed from him in
the first interview and, therefore, had no need to invite him to a second interview. Except
for this one participant, I completed two interviews for each participant.
Throughout this process, I achieved the important goals I had set for the process. I
sought to meet with, listen to, and honor the religious leaders I met. During the
participant search, I sent these leaders updates on my progress and thanked them for
getting the word out on my behalf. Many leaders thanked me for these updates, and some
even emailed me to inquire how I was progressing. I worked to complete my research in
the Spring 2014 semester, as I wanted to meet with the students before their summer
break. Further, I was very surprised by the number of students willing to participate and
did not expect to be in a position to turn away willing participants. Finally, I was
impressed that I was able to experience a 100% response rate from the first-interview
participants who I contacted about returning for their second interview. While students
may have been motivated by the incentives of the Amazon gift cards I offered, their
remarks during their interviews suggested that they indeed valued our conversations and
saw their investment in the interviews as also beneficial for them personally.

58

Interview Protocol
As these interested students responded, we communicated via email wherein I
offered a brief lay summary of my study and invited them to participate. To encourage
participation, I offered incentives of a $15 Amazon gift card for the first interview and a
$25 Amazon gift card for the second interview. Interested students who said they met the
study’s criteria were scheduled for their first interview. I arranged by email to meet them
at a public, yet quiet, spot on campus of their choosing. Typically I gave them options of
a nearby coffee shop, the on-campus food court, or the student union. Before the
interview, I reviewed the IRB consent form with them, asked them to sign it, and offered
them a copy. Due to the nature of student spirituality often being a particularly personal
topic, I was particularly committed to creating a safe and conversational environment,
relying primarily on recording the conversations for later transcription and limiting the
amount of writing I did in front of the participant. After the interview, I thanked them for
their investment of time and explained that they could expect me to contact them for a
follow-up, second interview.
The first round of interviews allowed me to do an initial analysis and find crosscutting themes. The second interview was intended to create more familiarity and rapport
with each participant and provide additional space and time for each student to speak
more freely about his or her experiences. It also gave me the opportunity to follow up by
asking clarifying questions that I had gleaned from the first round of interviews
(Maxwell, 2013).

59

The Interviews
I conducted a pilot study to practice my interview and observation techniques and
ensure that the questions, approach, and process undertaken in the actual interviews were
the most effective. I interviewed three participants for the pilot study and recorded my
observations and any adjustments to that process to prepare well for the study (Glesne,
2006; Maxwell, 2012). These students did not attend the public university where I
conducted my actual study, but their ages and experiences matched the type of student I
sought, and my interviews with them helped me fine-tune my preparation for the
interview process for the actual study. For the first and second interviews, I used a semistructured interview protocol to explore the research questions. Appendix D precisely
frames that interview protocol.
All participants gave me permission to record both interviews, and all interviews
were transcribed. After I transcribed the participant’s first interviews, I reflected on our
conversations and used the data to plan my follow-up questions for the second interview.
As anticipated, each first interview lasted 45-90 minutes, and every second interview
lasted 20-45 minutes. I compiled the transcriptions and notes from both interviews for
each participant and uploaded the data to Dedoose, an online, qualitative research tool.
Using Dedoose, I categorized the participants and coded the data, saving it in an online,
password-protected format. In place of the participants’ real names, I used pseudonyms
in order to protect their identities.
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed using what Maxwell (2012) describes as categorizing and
connecting strategies. The categorizing of strategies is based on the similarity of

60

relationships between observations that are independent in time and space. They are data
connections based on comparison rather than actual connection and done through coding.
The connecting of strategies analyzes data by “identifying key relationships that tie the
data together into a narrative or sequences” (Maxwell, 2012, p. 115). Attention to both
categorizing and connecting of strategies provides more sensitivity to undergraduates’
spiritual experiences and their spiritual development journey and its narrative. These
strategies for analysis were implemented through transcription, data categorization, and
data connection in this instance.
Transcription and Coding
Following Creswell’s (2009) levels of data analysis, the data was prepared by
organizing and preparing it via transcribing the audio-recorded interviews, typing field
notes, and arranging the data. Next, the data was reread to gain a general sense of the
information and its overall meaning. Then, a detailed analysis of the coding was
completed. Following coding, general themes were developed for further analysis by
considering both the categories and the chronology. Finally, interpretations of the data
were offered (Creswell, 2002; Maxwell, 2012).
Coding as a categorization strategy was completed and organized using Dedoose,
an online, qualitative data analysis application. I followed Maxwell’s (2012) types of
categories for coding, namely, organizational, substantive, and theoretical categories.
Organizational categories capture the broad issues established prior to data collection,
often used as abstract “bins” for re-sorting data later (p. 112). Substantive categories are
descriptive and include the participants’ concepts, beliefs, and personal words. They can
be useful in developing a general theory for what is happening. Theoretical categories

61

place coded data into a general framework established by the researcher. In this instance,
I used the data collected to identify key themes for the specific factors that affected
undergraduates’ spiritual development.
Validity
From a critical realist perspective, theories offer the potential of letting us better
understand reality. Validity is important, as it helps ensure the quality of the generated
theories. Maxwell (2012) stated that, the “main challenge for a realist approach to
validity is to explain how, if our understandings are inevitably our own fallible
constructions rather than ‘objective’ perceptions or interpretations of actual phenomena,
one can possibly have any basis for making validity judgments that go beyond procedures
and attempt to engage with these real phenomena” (p.131). He argues that validity is not
based merely on the methods used, but also on how those methods affect the conclusions
that are drawn. Maxwell (2012) also suggested that establishing validity also involves
utilizing descriptive validity, interpretative validity, theoretical validity, and
generalizability.
Descriptive validity pertains to factual or descriptive accuracy for what the
researcher saw or heard. It refers to specific events and situations and where, in theory,
matters of inter-subjective agreement from the gathered data can be achieved.
Interpretive validity is concerned with what the collected data mean to the participants.
Researchers seek to comprehend what meanings participants are giving to the topic being
studied. These include beliefs, intentions, or concepts that are either used by the
participants or merely believed by them (e.g. theory-in-use vs. espoused theory)
(Maxwell, 2012).

62

Theoretical validity is the theoretical construction that the researcher brings to
analyze the data. Theoretical validity includes the validity of the concepts applied to the
phenomena studied and the way that those concepts are brought together to interpret
those phenomena (Maxwell, 2012). With these elements of validity fully in mind, this
study incorporated some of the strategies suggested by Cresswell (2003), including
member checking, rich/thick description, clarifying the biases of the research, and using a
peer debriefer.
Generalizability refers to the extent that one can connect findings to other
situations or populations. Maxwell (2012) suggests there are two types of
generalizability–internal and external. Internal generalizability refers to generalizing
within a setting, group, or institution. External generalizability refers to generalizing
outside that group to other groups, settings, or institutions. Internal generalizability is
more important for qualitative researchers, as they rarely make external generalizability
claims (Maxwell, 2012). Still, the uniqueness of the interviewing process often does
limit the way that one generalizes findings. Care must be taken not to make inferences
that overstep the data that is collected from unique interviews (Maxwell, 2012).
Full Consideration of Human Subjects
In compliance with Michigan State’s University Committee for Research
Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS), I completed an online application for the
UCRIHS. Further, I ensured the quality of my interaction with all the participants in light
of what has previously been described here, including, and especially related to the
reflexive memo offered in Appendix B (Maxwell, 2012).

63

Participant Sample
Maxwell (2012) suggested that “purposive sampling” involves inviting the
participants to help the researcher accomplish what he or she wants to know. To
accomplish this goal, I sought out those who could help direct me to potential
participants, including campus religious organization leaders and local pastors. Through
face-to-face conversations, phone calls, and emails, I communicated the project’s goals
and sent leaders soft and hard copy materials for them to pass along to their students. For
those students who responded, I scheduled and conducted first interviews. I used
snowball sampling by asking students to share my project with other friends who might
fit the designated participant characteristics of the study (Merriam, 2009). Nineteen of
twenty participants completed their second interviews. Merriam (2009) noted that a
sample size should be large enough to maximize the information sought by the research
questions. Thus, the appropriate size of a sample is reached when there is redundancy in
participant responses and no new information is being reported from them. Upon
completion of the second round of interviews, totaling 39 interviews from 20 students, I
felt comfortable that I had reached Merriam’s (2009) “redundancy” definition in terms of
my participant responses.
Of the 20 students interviewed, 11 were males, and 9 were females. The racial
make-up of the sample included 16 White, 2 Asian, 1 Black/African American, and 1
Hispanic/Latino. Of the sample, 11 were juniors and 9 were seniors. Regarding their
majors of study, 14 were in professional/applied majors (Engineering, Animal Science,
Social Work, International Relations, Education), 4 were in humanities majors (History,
Religious Studies, Communications, English), and 2 were in formal science majors

64

(Mathematics, Human Biology). Of the sample, 12 students were involved in a Campus
Religious Group (CRG) and 8 were not. Those who were not attending a CRG either
never attended this kind of group or had stopped attending one. Regarding church
attendance, 8 attended a church that was similar to the one they grew up in, 8 attended a
church that was different than the type of church they grew up in, and 4 did not attend
church at all. Table 1 summarizes the demographics of the study participant sample.
Table 1
Participant Sample Characteristics
Name

Gender

Race/ Ethnicity

Year

Academic
Major

CRG
Attendance

Church
Attendance

Aaron

Male

Asian

Junior

Human Biology

Yes

Attended similar
church

Andy

Male

White

Senior

Computer Science

Yes

Attended similar
church

Brenda

Female

White

Junior

Elementary Education,
Spanish

No

Attended
different church

Cassandra

Female

Hispanic/Latino

Senior

No

Attended
different church

Education and Chinese
Colleen

White
Female

Junior

Kinesiology

Yes

Attended
different church

James

Male

White

Senior

Mathematics

No

Did not attend
church

Jenny

Female

White

Senior

Elementary Education

Yes

Attended similar
church

Jodi

Female

White

Junior

Social Work

No

Attended
different church

John

Male

White

Senior

Biomedical
Engineering

Yes

Attended similar
church

Joseph

Male

White

Senior

English

No

Did not attend
church

Karen

Female

White

Senior

Education and
Psychology

Yes

Attended
different church

Mara

Female

White

Junior

Human Development,
Family Studies

Yes

Attended similar
church

65

Table 1 (cont’d)
Matt

Male

White

Junior

Religious Studies and
Psychology

No

Did not attend
church

Mike

Male

White

Senior

History Education

Yes

Attended different
church

Mitch

Male

White

Junior

Applied Engineering
Sciences

Yes

Attended different
church

Simon

Male

Asian

Junior

Dietetics

Yes

Attended similar
church

Therese

Female

Black/African
American

Junior

Animal Science
Yes

Attended similar
church

Tom

Male

White

Junior

International Relations

No

Did not attend
church

Trevor

Male

White

Senior

Communications

Yes

Attended different
church

Trisha

Female

White

Junior

No
Bio-systems Engineering

Attended similar
church

Outside of student academic activities, 17 of the 20 participants reported investing
time in spiritual activities, averaging 9 hours per week (ranging from 2 to 2 hours); 11 of
20 reported working at a job or internship, averaging 12 hours per week; 6 of 20
participants volunteered outside their religious group averaging 6 hours per week; 4 of
20 reported being involved with a non-religious campus group or athletics, averaging 10
hours per week. Not surprisingly, those who were more invested in their CRGs, had less
time available for other groups and volunteering, and vice versa. Table 2 summarizes the
students’ non-academic involvement.

66

Table 2
Summary of Participating Students’ Structured Non-Academic Involvement
Spiritual/
Religious
Investment
(hr/week)

Volunteer
(hr/week)

Work/
Internship
(hr/week)

Campus
Org/Sports
(hr/week)

Total
Hours/
Week

Name

CRG

Church

Aaron

Yes

Yes/
Similar

10

0

0

0

10

Andy

Yes

Yes/
Similar

20

0

10

0

30

Brenda

No

Yes/
Different

7

4

10

0

21

Cassandra

No

Yes/
Different

5

0

15

0

20

Colleen

Yes

Yes/
Different

10

10

0

0

20

James

No

No

0

0

0

0

0

Jenny

Yes

Yes/
Similar

10

5

20

0

35

Jodi

No

Yes/
Different

6

0

0

4

10

John

Yes

Yes/
Similar

10

0

0

0

10

Joseph

No

No

0

0

7

12

19

Karen

Yes

Yes/
Different

10

4

13

0

27

Mara

Yes

Yes/
Similar

10

5

15

0

30

Matt

No

No

5

0

0

0

5

Mike

Yes

Yes/
Different

10

0

15

0

25

67

Table 2 (cont’d)
Mitch

Yes

Yes/
Different

9

0

15

0

24

Simon

Yes

Yes/
Similar

10

4

0

2

16

Trisha

No

Yes/
Similar

2

0

0

20

22

Therese

Yes

Yes/
Similar

8

0

5

0

13

Tom

No

No

0

0

12

0

12

Trevor

Yes

Yes/
Different

10

0

0

0

10

Student Backgrounds and Campus Involvement
Beyond students’ self-identifying as coming from an evangelical or a conservative
religious background, I asked the participants to describe their lives leading up to college
and also to describe their current campus involvement. This information let me better
understand the students’ backgrounds as to where they came from and how their home
lives may have influenced their college activity choices beyond academics.
Family Background and Its Influence
To get a sense of the students’ backgrounds and thus where their beliefs may have
shifted or changed, I asked them to tell me about their families and religious lives prior to
attending college. Three background factors surfaced: parents and home life; home
church involvement and experiences; and advice that those from home gave students
prior to their attending the university.
Parents and home-life elements. Most students described their parents as people
who attempted to live their daily lives congruently with their religious convictions. They
regularly attended church as a family and often incorporated Bible reading and/or prayer
68

into their family activities. Most students had parents who were still married to each
other, though a few had divorced parents. One had a father who had died with the mother
remarrying. Most described their parents as being supportive and desiring to pass along
their religious beliefs to their children. Tom explained: “My dad went to a Christian high
school. My mom did, too. My grandparents all went to Christian Schools. All my
brothers went to Christian schools.” Therese described her religious heritage: “I grew up
in a Pentecostal-Apostolic household. My dad’s a Deacon, my mom is a Sunday School
teacher. My grandpa was a trustee in his church. I’m part of a long line of PentecostalApostolic Christians.” Jodi identified her family as “conservative”: “My grandparents
are Christians on both sides. It’s in my heritage. We were pretty conservative. When I
saw your flyer, and it said ‘Conservative,’ I thought, ‘Well, that fits!’ John appreciated
his parents’ spiritual influence:
I grew up with very faithful parents who were consistent in encouraging me to
love the lord. They were good examples. They are the people in my life that
have had the most lasting impact. It started with them praying with me when I
was young.
Church involvement. Most students described positive experiences of attending
church and/or youth group in high school. Jodi commented: “I had a regular youth group
experience. It was good. I enjoyed it.” Mitch described his consistent involvement: “I
was heavily involved in my youth group. More or less, I was a leader in youth group. It
was kinda small. I went every week. I felt I was growing. I was being discipled [i.e.
mentored] by the church pastor.” Simon offered: “I grew up in a Chinese-American
church. I’ve been around Christian disciples my whole life.” Mara credited her high

69

school religious involvement for shaping who she is now: “I know that if I hadn’t had my
background in middle school and high school, going to church, being a Christian, I
probably wouldn’t have turned to God.”
Not all of the students’ experiences were positive, as some described their family
changing churches or witnessing changes within churches that felt disruptive. James
indicated his parents were no longer going to church:
I’m not too sure why they stopped. I didn’t complain much. I never liked getting
up going to church. I was older, though, and I was at the point where I, and my
peers, could make those choices on their own. There was more freedom. I think
my parents tried a few different churches during the transition. But they don’t go
to church anymore.
Advice received for attending a public university. During the interviews, I
realized that students had specific impressions about their university. It occurred to me
that some of their impressions were not their own ideas, but rather views that they had
chosen to adopt. Pursuing this point, I asked students about any advice those from home
(parents, church leaders, family, adults) had offered them before they came to college.
The most frequent piece of advice students indicated they received was to be prepared to
defend their faith from an otherwise non-Christian or anti-Christian, public university
environment. Karen said, “I remember during my [high school] senior year, my religion
teacher teaching us about apologetics [a subject on how to argue for and defend one’s
own faith], and I remember him telling us that we needed to be prepared to defend our
faith.” James also recalled the advice he was given:

70

No one directly warned me, but I heard it generally that, “When you go out into
the world, your views are going to get challenged.” And they would say that it
was possible that, if you went to a secular institution, you would have professors
who would call you out and call you stupid and try to convert you [by] turning
you atheist, which is ironic, because now I’m atheist! But I don't feel that that’s
what happened at all.
Therese remembered one of her church scholarship essay questions: “One of the
scholarships I applied for was through my church. One of the essays asked ‘How will
you maintain your Christianity when you go to a secular campus.’” Aaron described how
the advice about college impacted him: “My church had this idea, once you go to college,
everyone becomes a non-Christian, or it becomes really hard to stay a Christian. That
might have been me by the mindset I had coming into college.”
Summarizing the students’ family backgrounds and influences, I observed that the
majority of participants in this study came from fairly stable homes with parents who
intentionally tried to model and pass along their religious beliefs to their children. Most
said that they were invested in their home churches and/or youth groups and found
connections there. Also, the most frequent advice students described receiving before
they attended the university was to be prepared for it to be a hostile environment that
would challenge their faith.
Campus Involvement
Campus factors refer to the ways that students, beyond their academics and dorm
life, spend their time. In this study, I observed that many students invested their time in
campus religious groups (CRGs), church, and non-religious activities, such as

71

volunteering, paid work, internships, and athletics. This section documents where
students reported spending their non-academic time and is grouped as: CRG involvement,
church involvement, and involvement in nonreligious groups.
Campus Religious Group (CRG) involvement. Of the 20 participants
interviewed, 12 said that they were involved in a CRG. Each of those students reported
spending at least 9-11 hours per week in spiritual investment (attending church, CRG
meetings, and personal disciplines such as prayer or scripture reading). Of the 8 students
who were not currently involved in a CRG, most indicated that they were not part of such
a group because they didn’t feel it fit them. Jodi chose to be involved in a church college
group in lieu of a CRG. Trisha had athletic commitments that did not allow her to
connect with a CRG, nor did she feel that kind of group fit her. James became an atheist,
so he felt no desire to join. Tom struggled to connect with the CRG meeting format and
style. Brenda found most students there to be younger than she was and couldn't relate to
them.
Church involvement. The 12 students involved in a CRG all said they attended
church with 5 attending churches different than their home churches and 7 attending
churches similar to their home churches. Of the 8 students who were not involved in
CRGs, 4 did not attend church, 3 attended churches that were different from their home
church, and 1 attended a church similar to their home church.
Involvement in non-religious groups. Students also described being involved in
groups or activities beyond churches and CRGs. Some were involved in athletics. Trisha
competed athletically at the university level and dedicated 20 hours a week to her sport.

72

Joseph was an assistant coach for one of the university teams and played the sport at the
club level, requiring a high time commitment and travel on the weekends.
Four students invested their time in volunteering. Beyond their involvement with
a CRG or a church, Jenny volunteered at a clinic, Simon volunteered at a hospital, and
Colleen volunteered at a rehab center. Brenda was not involved in a CRG group, but
attended church, served as a substitute teacher and led a Boy Scout troop.
Some students worked jobs. Jenny, Mitch, and Brenda worked as Resident
Assistants. Karen worked a student job campus. Jenny was a receptionist at a local
business. Mara worked at a local coffee shop and was also a part-time youth worker at a
local church. Therese worked at a local vet clinic. Andy had an internship associated
with his major. Joseph was a Teaching Assistant in his department.
Summarizing their non-academic student involvement, students described being
involved in CRGs, church, work, other school activities, or volunteering. The range of
their participation was zero to 30 hours per week. On average, the students invested 18
hours a week in non-academic, structured activities. These junior and senior students
generally described themselves as both busy and involved.
Summary of Student Backgrounds and Their Campus Involvement
Evangelical students, who bring their spirituality to college reported coming from
fairly stable homes where parents and other influential adults were committed to
practicing and passing along their religious tradition to their children. The advice
students received from home painted the university as threatening to their faith and
students were encouraged to find support on campus, especially through CRGs. More
than half of the participants attended CRGs. Others that did not attend CRGs cited a lack

73

of fit with such groups. Almost all students described themselves as invested and busy
with academic and non-academic activities.

74

CHAPTER 4:
FINDINGS
Introduction
The main question of this study focuses on understanding how Evangelical
Christian students described spiritual struggles they encountered while attending a public
university. The first section of this chapter offers examples of spiritual struggle, as
distinguished from more general human struggles. It will show how, at times, students’
usage of spiritual language can both cloud and clarify their spiritual struggle descriptions.
The second section of this chapter identifies the on-campus and off-campus factors that
the students described as affecting their spiritual struggles. Further, I describe the oncampus and off-campus resources, relationships and practices the students accessed to
work through their spiritual struggles. Adopting the conceptual framework from Parks’
(2000) model on spiritual development, the third section identifies more specifically the
spiritual struggles students described, and the meanings they placed on their experiences.
These observations surfaced descriptive patterns reported in the final section that,
informed by what I will introduce as students’ separating and integrating perspectives,
affected how they viewed themselves, their integration of education and spirituality, their
views of spiritual faithfulness, and their purpose in life.
Examples of Struggle that are Uniquely Spiritual
This section addresses the sub-question: What does spiritual struggle mean for
Evangelical undergraduates? The challenge is to try to distinguish spiritual struggle from
what might be common human struggle that most students experience during their
college careers such as feeling lonely, looking for friendships, trying to fit in, dealing

75

with failure, searching for a major, etc. Following the spiritual struggle definition
provided in the literature review chapter and previous projects from researchers like
Dirkx et al. (2006), Fisler et al. (2009); Rockenbach et al. (2012); and Zinnbauer et al.
(1998), who referred to the transcendent elements students ascribed to their meaningmaking, this study sought to identify the uniquely spiritual elements of students’
described struggles. At the onset of the participant selection, students who participated in
this study self-identified as having experienced a shift or change in their religious or
spiritual beliefs or practices while at college. Thus, the factors associated with the
struggles they described had, according to them, somehow affected their perceptions of
the transcendent such as how they viewed God, held their identity as “Christian,” and/or
the way they related to others. Of course, not every struggle that students described
constituted spiritual struggle. Referring to the literature reviewed and definitions given in
this study, spiritual struggle evokes the need to change one’s spiritual or religious
perspectives to accommodate new information or experiences. Some students, however,
spoke of their experiences using religious language that either reinforced previously held
views or lacked references to any shifts or changes in the meaning they ascribed to the
transcendent, such as God, themselves as spiritual beings, or their place in the broader
world. This section offers some examples of student descriptions that were classified as
spiritual struggles, and other examples of students’ descriptions that were, likely, more
common human struggles than spiritual struggles.
Spiritual Struggle Examples
As noted in the next section pertaining to on-campus and off-campus factors that
students perceived as affecting their spiritual struggles, the factors described are

76

relatively common experiences. Still, students who struggled spiritually shared how
some of their college experiences uprooted their assumptions about their religious beliefs,
their lives as Christians, or the ways they related to others within and outside the
Christian faith. For example, Simon recognized a shift in his outlook, as he claimed to be
more liberal in his theological perspectives. His reflection highlights his renegotiating
his previously held views affecting his perceptions of and connection with his
relationships back home:
I’m definitely more liberal now. Back at home everyone is more conservative.
Both my parents are conservative. I grew up in a conservative environment. I’m
here now. I don’t have that influence. I’m learning things on my own.
Conservatives, they’re stuck in their mindset, what they believe in. I want to be
open to other things. I don’t think it’s fair to not give other beliefs or theories a
chance.
Jodi explained how she struggled to view those she called “non-Christians”
differently. This struggle went deeper than just getting along with others or making
friends. For her, it was a major shift in how she saw them as people and, how she
perceived God saw them:
I know I struggled with having friends who weren’t Christians or only having
them to convince them to become Christians. And now it’s like I’m your friend
because I really like you as a person. They’re not just a “non-Christian;” they
have all these qualities, great personalities, we get along great. They are no
longer my projects. I want them to know God, but when we hangout, I don’t feel
pressure to convert them. We just hang out. So that’s changed a lot.

77

Matt explained that his change in beliefs alienated him from some his friends
back home, which made him question his view of God and some of the foundational
assumptions he had about church:
I had numerous conversations with people and I’d feel like I as being ganged up
on, accused. It scarred me a bit. Pretty hostile. I felt hurt. I backed away. I had
tons of questions. My mind raced, searching for ideas about God. Questioning
everything. It was overwhelming.
What is notable about these descriptions was that these common struggles over
changing beliefs, changing views toward people, or hometown expectations were viewed
by students as having transcendent elements affecting their views of God, their Christian
identity, or the way they related to other people. These experiences often challenged the
way students assumed the world worked and how they thought God acted, evoking
epistemological, relational, and identity challenges.
Non-Spiritual Struggle Examples
As mentioned previously in the Literature Review chapter, this study proposed
that there appeared to be a connection between one’s religious background and the ways
a person articulates one’s spirituality. Because Evangelical students’ religious
backgrounds have a cultural component to them (rituals, language, etc.), students often
used religious language to describe their experiences, but this did not necessarily mean
that their struggle experiences were spiritual struggles. Later in the discussion of
findings, a section is devoted to students who experienced significant crisis that they said
got them back on track with life and God. The examples, though significant for those
students, were not necessarily spiritual struggles as much as traumatic experiences that

78

brought them back to religious and spiritual ideas that were familiar to them. For
example, Trevor had a dramatic story about being in a car crash, framing the experience
through his already-held spiritual perspectives. The experience seemed to wake him up
to his poor choices, but it did not necessarily challenge his views of God or the way he
viewed himself as a Christian:
I got involved with drugs. Ended up getting in a car crash when I was drunk and
high. Somehow I walked away with no scratches. I thought, there’s no way I
could be okay. I should be dead. God saved my life and there was no way I
should be alive. I went home, got down on my knees, weeping, and said, ‘I’m
giving my life to you. My life is yours.’ That was the turning point.
Trisha expressed the loneliness she felt at school as people different from her
“pretty much just do what they want.” Her feeling uncomfortable with those holding
different lifestyles, however, had less to do with her spiritual outlook as much as her own
limited experiences with making new friends:
Honestly I didn’t meet anyone other than my roommate. I was so overwhelmed
with classes and swimming, I basically slept in my dorm room. The next year, we
lived with all girls from the swim team. I’m not that social. I stick with my close
friends.
Andy shared how certain activities with his campus religious group inspired him.
These kinds of experiences seemed important to him because they validated his spiritual
outlook and gave meaning to his college experience but they did not seem to challenge
his spiritual convictions. Instead, he seemed excited to have an experience that
encouraged and reinforced his beliefs:

79

The experience from that was cool… the stories… some guy came up and was
worshipping with my friends, and another guy walked by as we were reading his
favorite Bible verse. Cool little stories like that. It got me a little more back on
track. It re-energized me.
John said he had to work through his convictions regarding the role of women in
the church with his fiancé. However, he described “working through” the topic as
helping his fiancé coming to see his perspective. John was a thoughtful and sensitive
person, but it was evident from this example that he was not experiencing spiritual
struggle as much as he was seeking to fit his experiences into his existing spiritual and
religious constructs.
Jenny told of her courageous story of working through some tough experiences at
college. It did not appear that her spirituality changed as much as it served as a positive
way forward through the challenges she faced:
So I decided I wanted to give my life to Christ again. And I wanted God to woo
me because I wanted God to be my first love. And he did. He opened my eyes to a
kind and gentle love that is extreme. God showed me how special I am and how
radical he wants me to be, to tell others.
These examples and non-examples of spiritual struggle highlight the careful work
that was needed to listen carefully to how students used religious language to describe
their spiritualty and struggles. The advantage, it seems, for students having religious
language was that they had some terminology to explain the transcendent struggles they
experienced. The caution with some Evangelicals, however, is that religious language is
used so regularly in their common discourse that their descriptions of struggle can sound

80

like spiritual ones but are often common human struggle experiences expressed with
religious terminology. The next section attempts to capture students’ descriptions of
spiritual struggle experiences affected by on and off campus factors.
On-Campus and Off-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle
This section addresses the sub-question: For those Evangelical undergraduates
who have experienced spiritual struggle, what do they identify as the particular sources or
issues that relate to that struggle? What brought their struggle on? I attempt to answer
this question by first reporting on students’ responses from two main categories-- oncampus and off-campus factors affecting spiritual struggle. On-campus factors pertain to
the students’ lives as lived on campus (e.g. academic, fellow students, or groups on
campus). Off-campus factors identify elements beyond campus life that brought struggle
into these students’ lives (e.g. family crisis, home life, getting arrested, or other crises).
On-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle
Evangelical students reported eight on-campus factors that brought on spiritual
struggle for them: educational and classroom experiences; finding friends; dating, sex,
and romantic relationships; and philosophical or theological topics. Additional, but less
frequent factors described by the students were substance abuse or destructive behaviors,
sexual assault, and campus religious groups (CRGs).
Educational and classroom experiences. Evangelical students described course
assignments and classroom settings as factors affecting spiritual struggle. More
specifically, students struggled with the contradictions they felt or found between their
faith and science classes; between accepting and engaging others who held different
perspectives from themselves; and between investing their time between spiritual and

81

educational commitments. Women, in particular, struggled with religious teachings and
feminism. Thus, these struggles were more than academic. The subject matters seemed
to challenge students’ views on the Bible as the source of truth and Christianity as the
religion that faithfully interprets that truth.
Faith and science. Overwhelmingly, the students reported struggling with
subjects pertaining to evolution and older earth theories. They felt conflicted between
what they had been taught in their church at home or by their parents, and what they were
learning in their classes. Jenny’s attempt to integrate these two viewpoints serves as an
example of what many students expressed:
I think evolution and Christianity could be connected, but I believe in a young
earth, not what the evolutionists say. I don’t know. I believe in microevolution.
Not macro. I think Christians get nervous when it comes to evidence versus faith.
Science uses evidence. Christians can’t do that.
Therese expressed the struggle her friend had with holding belief and new
learning, raising her own questions: “I have a friend who is a Zoology major, and [she]
said, ‘How do I integrate this major and be a witness for God? How am I supposed to
integrate this?’ And when she said this, it got me thinking about me. How does that
work?” Mike expressed his need to reevaluate his own spiritual assumptions: “Recently
I’ve been challenged that there may be some things that rely on certain interpretations.
I’m reevaluating if I need to have an opinion on that.” Tom admitted that changing one’s
opinion may mean changing many things in his life: “You start thinking, if I was wrong
about this or I have a different perspective on this, what else am I wrong about? You
change your opinion on one thing and it affects everything else.

82

Accepting and engaging others. Students felt spiritual struggle when they met
people, especially in the classroom, who held very different views than their own. Mara
described one of her experiences:
In my class, the teacher was Turkish, and there were gay people in the class.
There were international students from China and Saudi Arabia and there were
just white people like me, normal … no, not normal, obviously. It was the most
diverse class I’ve ever been in.
Jodi explained how she was challenged to be more open to other perspectives: “I
think my major has played a bit of a part of it. Just taking social work classes and
learning about the different places people are.” Matt described how he was exposed to a
much broader range of perspectives than from home: “In terms of religion, studying in
class and out of class, there’s more out there than what I knew before–the beliefs that I
held, the beliefs that I had been taught.”
Spirituality versus academic studies. Evangelical students said they struggled
with how to be both faithful Christians and good students at the same time. John told of a
student that he tried to counsel: “I dealt with one student who was so focused on school
he didn’t focus on anything else. School is great. You need to focus on school. That
doesn’t mean you shouldn’t focus on God.” Aaron described the tension he felt:
Sometimes I feel judged for putting school ahead of my Campus Religious Group
participation, and I’m told my priorities are a little skewed. That may be true, but
I came to school, not to serve this fellowship, but to be a student and help people
grow in God. I want to finish school first and then help people grow. Some
people have different thoughts about that. I sometimes question myself too.”

83

Finding friends and connecting relationally. Evangelical students described the
challenges they experienced in finding friendships and being relationally connected at
college. While both males and females described these struggles, females mentioned this
factor twice as often as males. Notably, students reported struggling spiritually when they
lacked good friendships, had little in common with their roommates, or longed to connect
with a group. Students reported this struggle occurring especially during their freshman
year as they sought to find friendships that would help them remain faithful, as well.
“Not fitting in” and feeling “over my head” were common expressions. They felt
anxiety, doubted God, and experienced loneliness. Colleen described her experience as
follows:
I got here. I felt very thrust into this secular world. I’m like, “I’m in over my
head.” I’d go home and visit my friends at a Christian college and they had all
these friends, because everybody was like them. It was easy for them to make
connections with people. It was so small. Everybody knew each other. I would
visit, and then go back to my university and cry, realizing, “I have no friends.”
Mara explained the challenge she had with finding friends and how it affected her
spirituality:
I started to get really bitter with God, asking God why He isn’t providing me with
a community? Why can’t I find any Christians to hang out with who don’t party
and drink on the weekends? All first semester, my freshman year, I was really
angry and bitter, and going into second semester I was done. I was like, “Well, I
don’t really know if I even believe in God anymore. If He existed He would at
least provide me with good friends.”

84

Dating, sex, and romantic relationships. Evangelical students said that their
encounters with dating, sex, relationships, and assault brought about spiritual struggles
for them. Some questioned whether God would provide for them and fill the longings
they had for a significant relationship. Simon reflected, “I ended up dating this girl. So it
kinda sucks that she broke up with me. So I went to God and asked, ‘Why did you do
this to me?’” Others like Trisha expressed hurt and questioned her convictions when her
boyfriend broke up with her because she would not have sex with him:
I’ve questioned what I’ve been told about relational boundaries and sex. It wasn’t
an issue in high school. In college, this year, I had a guy interest. So I started
talking with this guy. He said he went to church, was religious. And then he
completely stopped talking to me because I wouldn’t sleep with him. […] And
that made me think, “Am I the only person that thinks that it’s right to stay pure
before marriage [tears]? So that made me question a lot of things about my
Christian life.
Philosophical/theological topics. Evangelical students described philosophical
and theological factors that brought them struggle. Often, theological/philosophical
struggles resulted from the students’ encounters with individuals who held different
worldviews.
Intellectual topics. Some students explained the philosophical differences they
felt between their personal beliefs and the churches and/or CRGs they attended. For
example, Joseph felt disconnected with the churches and CRGs he had attended:
“Sometimes where I’m at spiritually and student organizations are, don’t align
with me. I’m wanting a different thing from what I’m given from them. It’s not

85

an excuse. I feel like, I could go but I’d rather relax at home if I don’t find CRGs
valuable.”
Other students identified philosophical/theological factors that emphasized
theological or religious particularities. John wrestled with the doctrine of sin. Andy
reconsidered the meaning of baptism. Mike expressed that it was important for him to
work through the doctrines of predestination and human free will, especially after talking
with one of his professors:
I meet this professor. At some point it comes out that he’s a pastor, and I kind of
poked and prodded him on this issue, which seemed to me, to be the most
important issue at the time. As I talked with him more, I realized that he was of
the Reformed Church tradition. He’s studied a lot of Calvin, and that struck me
as someone I respected and liked. And that challenged me because I liked and
respected this person, and everything he said I liked, but he held this belief of the
church that I was at odds with.
Other worldviews. Students were challenged to consider their theological beliefs,
as they encountered students at college with different religious backgrounds. Some, like
Simon, thought more generally about other religions, making him wonder if his belief as
a Christian could be the only right one. He reflected, “I sometimes don’t feel that desire
a lot. My freshman year I was in an exploration phase. I wondered how Christianity
could be the only one.” Jenny described how her religious beliefs encouraged her to
“convert” [i.e. evangelize, proselytize] others, but wondered how she would react if those
from other religions did the same thing to her. She reflected, “It’s difficult for me to talk
with others about religion who believe as deeply about their religion as much as I believe

86

about mine. They’re not going to convert me, so how can I convert them? I’m struggling
with that right now.” Brenda’s encounter was more specific, as she sought out and
served the poor with a group of Muslim students. She talked about bridging differences
and shared, “Yeah. It shakes me a little bit. I see these people on the other side of the
table making sandwiches with me, don’t know Jesus, yet [they] are friendly and devoted
to their religion. So it makes me wonder about those kind of aspects.”
Substance abuse or destructive behaviors. Of the 20 students interviewed, 5
said that drug, and alcohol- related experiences contributed to spiritual struggle. All five
described traumatic experiences that made them reconsider how they were living their
lives. Karen explained how, after a tough breakup with her boyfriend, she gave up on
religion and self-medicated through drugs and alcohol that almost led to suicide. At that
point she said she hated God: “So here I am [at this moment] with all this [crisis], and
this guy tells me I’m not good enough.” Mike spoke of his spirituality and drug habits
“colliding:”
I began to smoke pot. [I thought] it never affected my faith. I just separated them
as two different things. The curtain got taken away. I got caught and then things
collided. That struck me that I was holding two things at once. I’d think one way
and act one way, I’d think another way and act the other way.
Assault. Jenny struggled with her faith and her identity as a Christian as a result
of her sexual encounters, one which led to an assault situation:
So I had buried this thing [rape]. I’d go to a CRG, and then drink with these guys
and then hook-up. I was trying to figure out where I’d fit in, where I could make
friends, and where I would be accepted. I was looking for love and acceptance,

87

and thought I found it in boys and in pleasing others. I became a people-pleaser.
Freshman year was trying to figure out where I fit and living this double life.
Campus religious groups (CRGs). While some Evangelical students described
CRGs as a spiritual resource, others said CRGs contributed to their spiritual struggle.
Sometimes students’ values and beliefs collided with the CRG outlooks and practices.
For example, Mara challenged her CRG to invest more in social issues. Aaron did not
like that his CRG did not value his academic pursuits like he did. Mike felt that one CRG
didn’t treat his friend fairly. And, Karen felt disrespected by the CRG leadership, as they
were digging up her past and using it against her.
Women, faith, gender, and feminism. Only women noted this eighth factor,
which pertained to religion, gender roles, and feminism. This factor, specifically raised
by women, expressed the tension they felt by wanting to be faithful to religious teachings
while also valuing gender equality and feminism. Cassandra described the tension: “It
sucks. It is a struggle every single day. […] But the Bible says that women are supposed
to submit to their husbands. I struggle with those [ideas] a lot. I did a lot of reading
about feminism, and all kinds of sociology.” Jenny explained that her spiritual
convictions about being a woman didn’t seem to align with her campus culture, causing
her additional stress:
I believe we all should have the same rights. But for me, I want to be a mom. It’s
sort of how I’m made. I don’t want to work. I want to be in the home, volunteer
at the church, be available. I’m the same as the woman who is the CEO woman.
But it’s hard to articulate that. Even to say we complement each other is pretty
radical on this campus.

88

Off-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle
Off-campus factors affecting spiritual struggle refer to non-campus-related
elements that, like on-campus factors, uprooted students’ assumptions about transcendent
meaning. In this study, students identified off-campus factors that included experiencing
a family death or illness, navigating hometown expectations, defining their spirituality as
different from others’ spirituality, and being victims of sexual assault back home.
Family death/illness. Evangelical students described a family death or illness as
a factor affecting spiritual struggle. Many students expressed concern for their parents,
and especially their aging grandparents and the potential of them dying. Brenda reflected
on her grandmother’s passing and the difficulty she had with understanding and facing
the death of a loved one: “My freshman year… I’m really close with my family… my
grandma was diagnosed with cancer. It was a hard thing. It was hard for me to be here
on campus and have that going on.” Mara struggled with understanding God in light of
her mom getting cancer:
My mom got diagnosed with breast cancer. I was just like, what is happening? I
didn’t expect it at all. I just remember that night. I was just like, “Well, I can’t do
this on my own!” I was just praying like, I know you know I can’t live without
my mom right now, but you’re gonna have to take care of her.
Going home. Matt and Jenny, Mitch, and James described how they have
become different people since going to college and their struggle with now navigating
hometown friends and family expectations. Matt described his experiences:
In my hometown, people were set in [their] ways. I was experiencing this new,
open world. I probably dove into that world too quickly. When I would go home

89

I felt like I was being ganged up on, accused. It scarred me a bit. Pretty hostile. I
felt hurt. I backed away.
Mitch struggled with living out his spiritual convictions without disrespecting his
father’s beliefs:
I wanted to raise support and allow other people to partner with me in that. My
dad didn’t like that at all [and wanted to pay for the trip]. I told my dad, “thanks,”
but I want to grow in this area, and I don’t want you to pay for it, though thank
you. This was about me, not you. This was hard for him. My dad loves his
children, and to tell my dad “no” was hard to take. It was hard for me because I
love him so much.
Assault. Two women admitted that they were raped while visiting their
hometowns. One shared that “I lost my virginity. I didn’t call it [rape] right away. It
was very shameful, and I buried it, which is unique for me because I’m a pretty open
person. He didn’t think he did anything wrong. I was confused. I went through a faith
and identity crisis. It was a really dark time. A black hole.”
Summary of On-Campus and Off-Campus Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle
Students described eight on–campus factors affecting spiritual struggle that were
connected to their university experiences and experienced by students for the first time on
their own. More relationally-oriented factors affecting spiritual struggle were often
described as occurring during their freshmen years, while intellectually-oriented causes
of struggle were reported as occurring later. Off-campus factors affecting spiritual
struggle were more event-oriented and yet still impacted the students’ college
experiences and spiritual outlooks.

90

Resources Named Relevant to Undergraduate Spiritual Struggles
This section addresses the third sub-question: What college-related factors
(resources, relationships, experiences) do these undergraduates perceive as affecting the
process of how to handle their struggles; and specifically, which of these factors helped
and impeded them, as these students experienced and managed spiritual struggle? Like
the factors affecting spiritual struggle that were previously identified, the factors that
students described using to resolve their spiritual struggle were found both on-campus
and off-campus.
On-Campus Resources Helping With Spiritual Struggle
Evangelical students described three on-campus resources that helped them the
most with their spiritual struggle: Friends on campus; CRGs or CRG mentors; and
interactions with faculty, classroom settings, and/or course assignments.
Friends on campus. For students, the most prominent resource that was
described twice as often as the other resources was friends. In particular, students looked
to classmate friends, CRG friends, and roommate friends to help them through their
spiritual struggles. The participants saw these friends as people with whom they felt
accepted and comfortable sharing spiritual topics.
Classmate friends. Students found the peers they met in their classes to be
reliable friends. Jodi described how she relied on fellow classmates to talk through
several topics related to her major and her spirituality:
My one friend has been in almost all my social work classes. She’s a Christian,
and we talk a lot, about the things discussed in our classes, like the LGBT
community. That’s a hard thing for me. I mean, being a Christian and in social

91

work at [my university] bring points of tension, and so I wrestle through things.
And so my friend and I go to the coffee shop and talk things through.
Jenny said she met a friend in one of her classes who helped her work through her
past struggles and supported her spiritual journey:
So, Linda and I started being friends again. After one class, Linda and I had a
really deep discussion. She was going through her own personal struggles. So we
were accountability partners. She was the first person who I really felt was a
support for me. It was really the first time in college where I felt like I practiced
my faith in a conscious and deliberate time of living.
CRG friends. Some students relied on their CRG friends to help them through
their times of struggle. Karen described her CRG friends as being there for her when she
worked through her personal challenges:
I have three best friends at [my university]. I was horrible to them when I went
through all the stuff I went through. I was a loose cannon. Shut them out. I had
no idea, but they got together to pray for me. I’m like, “you guys are wonderful
people!” They’ve been there the whole way.
Simon struggled with finding connections at the university and credited his CRG
friends for helping him feel connected:
Everyone just welcomed me. They were super friendly. They embraced me even
though they didn’t know who I was. I was like, ‘This is really weird.’ I’ve never
felt that much love, especially from people I just met.
Roommate friends. Some students relied on the support their roommates. Matt
said his roommate helped him expand his spiritual outlook:

92

My roommate grew up Catholic. I grew up Protestant. It was really interesting.
He and I definitely saw that when you sum up the basics, that there’s a God of
love out there, and I don’t think he’s given up on this world.
Brenda discovered her suitemates to be a great resource as she sought out friends
at college for the first time: “I went in blind with my roommate and had two other
suitemates. We were an eclectic group, but we learned to do life together so well.”
Therese and Cassandra found friends in the dorms who shared her spiritual
perspective and proved to be supportive of her. Therese shared:
God really blessed me in that people across the hall were people who went to a
CRG. And down the hall, there was a girl who was Baptist. So I was able to
become stronger by having a support system around me in the dorms.
Friendship summary. Evangelical students looked to their classmate friendships,
CRG friendships, and roommate friendships to be resources for them when they were
working through their spiritual struggles. Many were surprised by the connections they
made with a new classmate or roommate and often attributed this connection as God
providing in their lives. The most memorable events the students described came from
the friends who stuck with them, went deeper into relationships with them, and supported
them.
CRGs and CRG leaders/mentors. Some Evangelical students, who were
involved in CRGs, looked to their group leaders or mentors for support in times of
spiritual struggle. Aaron relied on older students in his CRG to help him think through
the creation and evolution debate. John shared how his CRG mentor helped him work
through the spiritual struggle and doubt he was experiencing, and he appreciated how his

93

mentor was a consistent part of his life at college: “I’ve met with him for two years now.
He’s been awesome.” Jenny and Colleen found encouragement and support from their
CRG leaders as they worked through challenges in their lives. Colleen reflected on that
support:
So, that following Monday, I went to Bible Study and I talked to one of my
leaders and I think I just sat there and cried for an hour. And just seeing the way
she loved on me, rather than saying you probably shouldn’t have been with that
guy, or gotten drunk after serving Jesus dogs, really impacted me. I started taking
stuff out of my life, little by little. I think my mentor, in my time of weakness,
showed me Christ.
Faculty and class resources. Some students mentioned their professors, classes,
and class assignments as resources that helped them work through their spiritual
struggles. Matt shared how his courses and his religion professor helped him move from
“undecided” to being a Religious Studies major:
My first semester, I took a class on Intro to Biblical Literature with Professor
[Smith]. I talked with him about joining the Religious studies program and joined
my sophomore year. It’s something I realized I always wanted to study.
Brenda explained how an assignment she had and her interaction with that
professor helped her process the death of her grandmother:
For my assignment, I wrote about my grandma. I kind of had it in my head, and
we had to go into peer review. And then my professor called me in after the
papers had been turned in and sat down with me and said, “I’m so sorry for your
loss. It seems like it happens to a lot of college students, and it doesn’t make it

94

easier.” The fact that this grandfatherly writing professor was taking time to
invest in me brought me peace. So I think that it was a roller coaster of a struggle,
and I think God provided the whole time.
Therese shared how an academic advisor and a professor in her department
encouraged her to stick with her major and her career aspirations, even when her
assignments were getting tough:
I remember going to my professor and feeling so distraught about Vet School. I
kept hearing that nobody gets into the vet school and that I should come up with a
back-up plan. But my whole entire life I wanted to be a vet, so what do I do? This
is what I want. And so I went to her and started to say, “If grad school doesn’t
work…” And she’s like, “You don't’ need a back-up plan. You’re going to get
into that school.”
In summary, those students who identified faculty and their classroom
experiences as positive resources that helped them through spiritual struggles noted that
their professors challenged, supported, and encouraged them. Professors helped them
choose a major, stick with their major, and even helped them work through their life
circumstances and intellectual challenges.
Summary of on-campus Resources. Students overwhelmingly identified their
friends as their most frequent resources for helping them work through their spiritual
struggles. These friends were classmates, CRG friends, and roommates. Students
involved in CRGs referenced their leaders and mentors as people who helped them
through specific periods of spiritual struggle and also walked all the way with them

95

throughout their college careers. Students also described faculty as a resource for
support, challenge, and encouragement.
Off-Campus Resources Helping With Spiritual Struggle
In order of frequency, students identified the off-campus resources they accessed
as studying on their own, parents/family, counselors/therapists, and churches.
On their own. Many students reported working through their spiritual struggles
on their own through personal study and reflection. Jodi journaled regularly. Karen,
Mitch, Mike, Brenda, James, Matt, Colleen, and Jenny all said they read a lot and did
further reading and study beyond their assigned coursework. These students referred to
specific books that they said had helped them through their spiritual struggles over
theology and worldviews, and in personal crises. John said he found support and
resources on the Internet to help him understand and embrace his atheism more fully.
Brenda saw her college experience as a way to learn to how to express her own
spirituality:
I think this is one of the ways attending a public university has served me so well.
It forced me to adopt new spiritual practices for myself. No one is telling me to
go to church. No one is telling me to journal. It’s something I do for myself now.
Parents/family. Next to personal study, the students identified their parents and
family members as resources to whom they turned. Mara talked to her mom about her
longing for a boyfriend: “If I do break it down to my mom and tell her sometimes I’m
insecure about this, then she will reassure me, but most of the time it’s just her like,
‘praying for your love life!’ Oh my gosh!” Jodi looked to her parents when she struggled
with finding a new church that was much different than the one she grew up with and

96

attended. She explained, “My parents have been understanding. They have encouraged
me to make that leap to the new church. I’m really glad for that.” Joseph mentioned his
parents as people he felt comfortable going to if he needed support: “ I think if I were to
doubt the faith, I’d talk with them about it.” Colleen said she went to her mom when her
eating disorder was too much for her: “I ended up talking to my mom. I needed help. I
really did. I didn’t know where to run to.”
Counselors/therapists. A few students sought out help from a counselor or a
therapist to work through their personal challenges. Karen shared how her therapist
helped her unpack her borderline eating disorder, giving her new perspectives for
understanding herself. Jenny shared the significant healing she obtained through the time
she spent with her counselor at the clinic: “I grew a lot my junior year. I knew I needed
help emotionally, and spiritually. I called a pregnancy center. The clinic was Christian.
My experience was really beautiful and significant. This counselor was an angel.”
Church. Just five Evangelical students described churches as being the resources
for their spiritual struggles. Brenda gave credit to her church for helping her feed the
poor and interact with Muslim students by serving alongside them. Jodi saw her church
as a force for good by caring for the poor, which was important to her spiritual
convictions. Simon said he found a pastor from another town who was always available
to him. John felt very supported by his church throughout college. Mike said his pastor
helped him work through theological topics and inspired him to consider ministry as a
profession. A few other students said they enjoyed going to their church or watching
video-casts on line, but they didn’t speak specifically to how that interaction was a
resource for them.

97

Summary of off-campus resources. The primary off-campus resource that
students accessed for working through their spiritual struggle was studying further on
their own. Students studied topics that went beyond their academic courses, focusing
specifically on the issues they were wrestling with, such as theology, crisis, and
relationships. Some students reached out to their parents, especially their moms. Other
students told of the specific ways that churches helped them although this particular
resource was mentioned much less frequently than the other two. A few students like
Mara were searching for an older, non-family member, to mentor them: “I think it’d be
nice sometimes to talk to someone about relationships who’s actually married or to have
an older mentor, which is something that I’m probably going to start looking for.”
Summary of Resources for Spiritual Struggle Named by Undergraduates
These students described resources, relationships, and/or experiences they
accessed for working through struggle in two general domains: on-campus and offcampus. As on-campus resources, friendships were overwhelmingly accessed followed
by CRG programs and leaders (for those who attended CRGs), and faculty/class
resources. As off-campus resources, students most preferred working out their struggles
on their own, although they also sought out parents or family members, saw a
counselor/therapist, and/or accessed their home or campus church connections.
Spiritual Struggle within Spiritual Development
This section classifies the students’ descriptions of their spiritual struggles in light
of the elements that Parks (2000) suggests are forms of change in college students’
spiritual development (community, dependence, and knowing) noted in Chapter 3. In
light of these classifications, and to understand the students’ perspectives of their

98

university context, I will introduce the separating-integrating continuum in the last
section, to describe students’ views of their campus and how these views may influence
the kinds of spiritual struggles they encounter and the types of resources they access to
work through that struggle.
Spiritual Struggle within the Form of Community
Forms of community highlight a particular dimension of spiritual struggle that
pertains to the relationships that students move from and toward (Parks, 2000). College
students typically experience spiritual struggle in the form of community through the
three kinds of struggle I have described as separating struggle, seeking struggle, and
contributing struggle. In separating struggle undergraduates reconsider their loyalties
and relationships to the people or groups with whom they associate. The next
developmental transition is seeking struggle, wherein people search for a community that
welcomes, supports, or encourages their evolving perceptions and questions within a
more inclusive environment. Beyond merely participating in a mentoring community,
people then experience a transition in contributing struggle, where they seek to find their
own place or role within a community that now respects and welcomes their
contributions. What follows here are descriptions of these separating, integrating, and
contributing struggles that were observed in the student participant interviews. Table 3
depicts Evangelical descriptions of spiritual struggle within the form of community.
Separating struggle. Within the form of community, the students described
experiencing separating struggle the most; indeed, 16 of the 20 students described
separating struggle as having to leave familiar support networks or questioning their own
fit in groups where they once felt comfortable. Students described the need to separate

99

from the beliefs of their parents, former religious leaders and churches, and also the
CRGs they joined when coming to college, as they felt “boxed in,” and unable to express
their expanding spiritual perspectives as interfaith dialogue, justice, and leadership.
The struggle students felt separating from their families was expressed by Matt,
who said he rejected the assumptions he used to share with his friends and family back
home. Mitch described separating struggle by trying to tell his parents how he wanted to
live his spirituality different than how they lived their faith. James explained how, in
college, he came to grips with his atheism, distancing himself from the Christianity he
had been taught at home and in his Christian school. Therese said she resisted the
pressure she felt from her family to join a similar group at college.
Students also described the separating struggles they encountered as they
distanced themselves from their home churches and religious leaders. Aaron and Simon
doubted the reliability of what their leaders taught them about science and claimed to be
more liberal now. Jenny struggled with a CRG she tried where her peers and the leaders
couldn’t relate to her experiences. Joseph rejected the simple answers offered by the
CRG and church leaders that he met and was now seeking a place where he could ask
more questions. Mike wanted to avoid the church politics he had experienced growing
up. Tom chose to not become involved in a religious group like he had done in high
school.
Seeking struggle. Of the 16 students who described their separating struggle,
only 8 described any seeking struggle. These students described their individual searches
for new kinds of communities. Some students reported finding new religious or
academic groups that they felt more precisely reflected their emerging spiritual ideas.

100

Matt, Mike, Tom, and James described finding community within their academic
programs. Matt explained how he felt a sense of community within his Religious Studies
program. Mike felt a connection through his pastor who was also a professor at his
university and explored academic and theological topics with him. James, who
considered himself an atheist, found community with his friends in his program who were
also atheists and his professors with whom he worked closely. Mara, Therese, Brenda,
and Jodi explained that they found churches that were more open to their changing
spiritual outlooks. Therese described the new kind of church she had found at school that
was much different than her home church:
[My church at school] was very different than any church I had gone to before. It
had all kinds of people, all kinds of races. It was really small. And it was really
cool. The people were cool. And I’m learning about the Bible. I’m expanding,
spiritually. And I still go there. It’s like my second home church and it’s really
nice.
Contributing struggle. Only Brenda and Jodi explained the personal
contributions they made to their churches and how they felt compelled not only to benefit
from their new faith communities but to contribute to them as well. Brenda explained her
search to contribute in this way: “I liked the choir, I like to teach Sunday school once a
month. I like that they need me.” When responding to whether other students she knew
went to the church, Brenda responded: “A few [laughs]. And that’s okay, too. We have
gotten to know each other and rely on each other.” Jodi had a similar story where she
described having found an inner-city church that cared for the poor and said that she
planned to invest more in that church: “I love that it’s small and diverse. It’s an inner-

101

city church, so they have a breakfast. There’s a pie shop, and they give us all their dayold pies. They feed the homeless. I love how inclusive it is. I could bring anyone, and
they wouldn’t feel unwelcome. I think in the summer I will volunteer more.”
Table 3
Kinds of Struggle Described within the Form of Community
Struggle and Forms
of Community

Separating Struggle

Seeking Struggle

Students and Their
Struggle
Descriptions

Separating from
family’s/parents’
beliefs
Matt
Mitch
James
Therese

Connecting with a
different church
Mara
Therese
Brenda
Jodi

Separating from
religious leaders
Aaron
Jenny
Joseph
Mike
Therese
Tom

Connecting with an
academic program
Matt
Mike
James
Tom

Contributing
Struggle
Investing in Church
Jodi
Brenda

Separating from
CRGs
Brenda
Jodi
Matt
Kate
Jenny
Therese
Karen
Spiritual Struggle within the Form of Dependence
Spiritual struggle within the form of dependence highlights the affective dimension

102

of individuals’ spiritual struggles, describing both the negative and positive feelings
individuals experienced with those struggles. In this study, the majority of emotions
students’ described were negative feelings with only four expressing positive feelings.
Table 4 describes Evangelical students’ spiritual struggles within the form of dependence.
Negative feelings. The majority of emotions students reported were negative ones.
All the students who reported negative feelings also described their experiences with
separating struggle; the most prevalent emotions they expressed were feeling
overwhelmed and feeling anxious. Trisha felt overwhelmed by all the new possibilities
and challenges at college. Matt said he felt like he was pulled in so many directions, as
he explored new ideas and read diverse literature: “I had tons of questions. My mind
raced. I was searching for ideas about God. Questioning things. It was overwhelming.”
Therese doubted if she could handle what she had felt called to study in school because of
its rigorous nature and Karen described a similar experience, namely, feeling “over my
head.” Tom may have best captured what the others felt with his description about how
any change in his spiritual outlook could affect every part of his life: “You start thinking,
if I was wrong about this, or I have a different perspective on this, what else am I wrong
about? You change your opinion on one thing and it affects everything else.”
Positive feelings. The four students who expressed positive feelings from their
struggles described working through an experience and then discovering liberation,
satisfaction, clarification, and encouragement. Mitch explained that his journey was
“freeing.” Brenda seemed satisfied with the changes that she made in her spirituality, and
she reflected: “I think it was a needed change in perspective for me. These things caused
me to take a step back and reevaluate how I’m doing faith and how I’m doing life.” Jodi

103

expressed her satisfaction with the current state of her spiritual journey and the decisions
she has made:
I have felt encouraged on the journey I’m on. That it’s okay to question things, to
make decisions you wouldn’t expect or that others would expect [you to make]
because they see you as [someone who should be] a “Campus Religious Group
Girl” and lead Bible studies. And then I ended up not [being that]. And people
were surprised. And it’s been okay to make that decision.
Table 4
Kinds of Struggle Described within the Form of Dependence
Struggle and Form of
Dependence

Negative Feelings

Positive Feelings

Students and their
Struggle

Overwhelmed
Trisha
Matt
Therese
Karen
Tom

Freeing -Mitch
Satisfying -Brenda
Clarifying -Matt
Encouraging - Jodi

Anxious
Matt
Mitch
Brenda
Fear -Mara
Rejection -Matt
Confusion - John
Boxed-in - Jodi
Unpleasant - James
Spiritual Struggle within the Form of Knowing
The form of knowing highlights a dimension of spiritual struggle wherein
undergraduates began to critically reflect on their beliefs and worldviews, often

104

questioning what those in authority had taught them (Parks, 2000). Within this form,
students described their experiences of spiritual struggle as doubting struggle, adjusting
struggle, and integrating struggle. Doubting struggle, especially adjusting struggle, was
described the most. Only two students described experiencing integrating struggle. Table
5 shows where Evangelical students placed their struggles within the form of knowing.
Doubting struggle. Doubting struggle, as described by 8 of the 20 students
surveyed for this project, focused on differentiating current beliefs from those at home or
distinguishing their beliefs from Evangelical CRGs that they either encountered or were
still part of. While these students were able to articulate what they questioned or no
longer believed, they still struggled to explain what new beliefs they did hold. The CRGs
that Matt tried because he thought he’d find common ground “didn’t work” because he
realized his worldview was different from theirs and that he would have to look
elsewhere to explore his emerging thoughts. He reflected further that: “College opened
me up to world of new religions. I tried Christian groups and that didn’t work. I felt
rejected from them, and so I’d go look somewhere else for means of fulfillment.”
Simon’s experience is one example of doubting struggle, wherein he describes
questioning his inherited views on creationism in light of the coursework in his science
class:
So now, I don’t know which one’s true. I mean, I still want to say creationism,
but [I want to] understand the other viewpoint before I take that stance. I’m
learning things on my own. Conservatives, they’re stuck in their mindset and
what they believe in. I want to be open to other things.

105

Adjusting struggle. Eight students described adjusting struggle wherein they
attempted to incorporate new kinds of people, concepts, and roles into their worldviews.
Students who experienced adjusting struggle described a growing awareness of the
varied, even conflicting beliefs that they held and also their attempts to integrate those
beliefs. Therese described how her beliefs had changed since coming to college: “I
started to see God who was more of a loving figure than what I was taught to believe.
Looking back, it got lost in the rules and regulations and things I couldn’t do, but I didn’t
know why.” Tom recalled his realizations when encountering others different from him
and how that made him reconsider and go “back and forth” with his own worldview:
And I realized that people don't all believe the same thing. It was kind of a
culture shock. Especially here, there seem to be a lot more liberal people. You
grow up hearing one thing, and then you come here and hear other things. I keep
going back and forth. In high school I was the liberal guy. I’ve come here and
I’ve realized that I’m the conservative guy.
Jodi explained how she did not agree with the labels that her classmates
associated with Christianity, while also recognizing that the kind of Christian she was
becoming was different from her parents’ and grandparents’ Christianity. She was
becoming more open to the needs and rights of others and also more aware that her own
worldview was changing:
[My view of people who are not Christians has] changed a lot. They’re not just a
“non-Christian.” They have all these qualities and great personalities. We get
along great. They are no longer my projects. I want them to know God, but when
we hangout I don’t feel pressure to convert them. We just hang out.

106

Mitch demonstrated his attempt to test out some his emerging beliefs: “If I have
faith in what God says he’s going to do, I’m going to see if he’ll do it. So I started to put
more trust in that. I started to see how true these promises were. It’s growing my faith.”
Brenda shared her awareness of the multiple roles she holds as an RA and a Christian and
the sensitivity that comes with projecting her values on others while remaining congruent
to herself as a person:
[Students come to me] with struggles, anything from eating disorders to
roommate trouble. It’s difficult to be a person of faith and not jump in with a
faith-based aspect of it. It can be such a comfort to me and it’s difficult for it to
not be my first reactions.
Integrating struggle. People who experience integrating struggle seek to take
responsibility for their own thinking and live in a way that is committed to and congruent
with their new emerging beliefs. Only two students demonstrated integrating struggle.
They described their beliefs by avoiding religious clichés and using language that was
more congruent and personal. These students knew who they were and what they
believed, and this recognition was expressed by the way they lived. When I asked Matt if
he still considered himself a Christian, he offered:
There’s one quote I heard from Gandhi, where someone came up to him and said,
“Would you identify yourself as Hindu?” And Gandhi said, “If you have a little
bit of time, yes, I am. If you have a lot of time, no, I’m not.” If we have a quick
moment, face value, yes I’m a Christian, totally fine. If you have more time,
there’s a lot more there than simply affiliating with one religious background.
The way that I label myself, I don’t like the term “Christian.” I never have. I

107

prefer the term, “follower of Jesus Christ.” It highlights the relationship. I would
say that.
Brenda’s spirituality flowed seamlessly into all the experiences she was involved
in, such as being a Resident Assistant, tutoring Spanish children, leading a Boy Scout
troop, serving the poor with her church and Muslims, and substitute teaching. She
described her actions more as expressions of the person she was becoming than as the
things she did only to make herself a Christian. She explained:
These activities are things I just like to do. I like to substitute teach. It’s a
highlight of my week. My Boy Scouts changed my perspectives. These activities
cause me to take a step back and reevaluate how I’m doing faith and how I’m
doing life.
Table 5
Kinds of Struggle Described within the Form of Knowing
Struggle within the
Form of Knowing

Doubting Struggle

Adjusting Struggle

Integrating Struggle

Students and Their
Struggle
Descriptions

Disagreeing with
CRGs
Mara
Mike
Jodi
Matt

Integrating new
people
Matt
Brenda
Therese
Jodi
Tom

Articulating and
owning their
worldview
Matt
Brenda

Disagreeing with
inherited beliefs
John
Aaron
Simon
James

Integrating new
concepts
Matt
Mike
Mitch
Brenda

108

Table 5 (cont’d)
Integrating new
roles
Brenda
Jodi
James
Therese
Summary of Students’ Spiritual Struggle within Spiritual Development
By adapting Parks’ (2000) framework for understanding Evangelical students’
spiritual struggles, I was able to categorize students’ descriptions beyond the on-campus
and off-campus factors that students perceived as influencing and resourcing their
spiritual struggle experiences. What became evident was that, relationally, most
Evangelical students experienced a relational disconnection as they began to question or
reject the religious and spiritual assumptions held by their parents, religious leaders,
home churches, or the CRGs they had joined. Only some found connections with new
religious or academic groups, and few described the ways they were trying to invest in
these new groups. Emotionally, most described their negative feelings of being
overwhelmed and anxious with only a few expressing positive feelings when referring to
their spiritual struggles. Intellectually, most students doubted or acknowledged the
tensions they felt between their inherited beliefs and their new ideas and experiences, and
only a few were able to articulate their own, newly developed beliefs.
Apart from the kinds of spiritual struggles described above, I identified four
students who described their struggle as more akin to what Parks (2000) might view as a
pre-emerging adult struggle. I called this kind, crisis struggle. Crisis struggle refers to the
students’ described crisis experiences (excessive drinking, drugs, sex, pregnancy, assault,

109

getting arrested) and their search for help. For these students, a CRG or a local church
served as a familiar, safe haven to where they returned when they lost their way. Table 6
summarizes how all the participants described their struggle in light of the forms and
stages of spiritual development adapted here from Parks’ (2000) framework.
Table 6
Summary of Student Struggle Descriptions within the Spiritual Development Forms
Forms of Struggle

Aaron
Andy
Brenda
Cassandra
Colleen
James
Jenny
Jodi
John
Joseph
Karen
Mara
Matt
Mike
Mitch
Simon
Trisha
Therese
Tom
Trevor

x

Contributing

Community

Separating

Positive
Feelings

Negative
Feelings

Dependence

Integrating

Adjusting

Doubting

Crisis

Knowing

Seeking

Students

x

x
x

x

x

x

x

x

x
x

x

x

x
x
x

x

x

x
x

x

x
x

x
x
x

x
x
x

x

x

x
x
x
x

x
x
x

x

x

x

x
x
x

x
x
x

x
x
x

x
x
x

x

110

x
x

x
x

x

Student Spiritual Struggle and Their Perceptions within the Separating-Integrating
Continuum
The previous section showed that the majority of Evangelical students have yet to
fully mature in their spiritual development either relationally, emotionally, or
intellectually. I also noticed that their spiritual struggle descriptions were associated with
the way that they perceived various elements within their university. I began to speculate
that the students’ perceptions of their university influenced the kinds of spiritual struggles
they described and also the kinds of resources they accessed to work through those
struggles. Now, with a clearer understanding of the kinds of spiritual struggle that these
students’ reported, I took a closer look at the student interviews to see whether students
shared any other outlooks or behaviors. That process led me to discover that the students
shared similar perspectives that closely aligned with their spiritual development, which I
call the separating-integrating continuum. Thus, I characterized each student as having a
separating or integrating perceptive. In this section, I explain how students with these
different perspectives characterized their campus’ climate, their interaction with others,
their education, their spiritual growth, and also their interview experiences.
The Separating Perspective
In describing their spiritual struggle experiences, some Evangelical students used
language that attempted to maintain a distance or separating posture between their
spiritual/religious beliefs and their campus environment. Specifically, they experienced
their campus as hostile or adversarial toward their spiritual beliefs, and they described
their interactions with others who were different from them in terms of proselytizing (e.g.
witnessing, sharing their faith). They kept their spirituality and education separate, and in

111

their interviews, they often revealed their definition of spiritual faithfulness as
maintaining the same religious faith they had been taught.
College climate. Some students used language and imagery that portrayed their
perception of the university climate as being indifferent or hostile toward Christians and
Christianity. What Cassandra described the university as “anti-Christian,” Trevor called
it “secular,” and Jenny viewed it as “liberal,” all were using terms that described the
opposite of who they saw themselves to be. Therese’s comments are a useful example of
this view:
I think [the university] wants to put religion in a very specific box. And you are
allowed to say this, but not that. You can believe homosexuality is wrong, but
you can’t tell someone it’s wrong. You can have your beliefs, but you can’t share
them. I think [those] people would be heavily persecuted. You can believe what
you want to believe but not say a word about it. It’s heavily against witnessing,
regardless of who you are. It’s okay to have your religion, but don’t spread it–
like the flu.
Interacting with “others.” All the students agreed that there was a tremendous
amount of diversity on their campus. However, some students saw those “others” who
were different than them as people who did not hold the truth or have spiritual beliefs.
They often referred to “other” students who did not share their religious outlook as “nonChristians” or “atheists,” but giving little explanation as to what those labels actually
meant. When asked what it was like to interact with students who were different than
themselves, most described experiences of proselytizing other students for the purpose of
converting them. Students like Colleen believed that other students in her classes who

112

weren’t Christian didn’t have the right beliefs or had no beliefs at all: “I try my darndest
to make friends in my class. I don’t know what they believe, but I’m guessing nothing
too strongly.” Also, she talked of mentoring other Evangelical students by taking them
out to proselytize on campus. When asked what he learned from conversations he had
with Jews, Muslims, and atheists, Trevor responded that most of them are “scared” and
they “shrink away from the conversation” when he tries to talk with them. John,
Cassandra, and Karen expressed respect toward these others, but were very clear that
there was a distinction between Christians and non-Christians and that non-Christians
needed saving. Karen honestly admitted a similar view:
If people tell me, I don’t say it out loud. But in my head [I’m thinking], ‘You’ve
got it wrong.’ If they ask what I believe, I tell them. People have said to me, ‘Are
you one of those people who think that if I don’t believe in God I’m going to
Hell?’ It’s hard, but I tell them, ‘yes.’
Spirituality and education. When asked how they sought to integrate or connect
their spirituality into their actual learning, classrooms, and/or assignments, most of the
students with a separating perspective either did not see a connection, felt that spirituality
was repressed by faculty or other students, or tried to avoid any tension between their
spirituality and their education altogether. Colleen lamented that in class there was “no
room for discussion for what we might believe.” Jenny admitted: “Learning about
feminism and what I believe about it has been very challenging at the university because
the faculty and professors and the people I work with, are very liberal.” Simon also
noted: “There is not as much talk about spirituality in my classes as I had hoped,
actually. My best shot about getting people to know God is how I carry myself and then

113

they’ll ask.” When asked if she thought professors cared about her spiritual perspectives,
Coleen responded: “I don’t think so. I never felt any reason they would. So, I don’t feel
they do.” Therese admitted trying to keep her spirituality and education separate:
That’s one of the things I’ve tried to avoid. Because I’m part of such a sciencebased major, I’m also in the honors college. All the university requirements that
would open up the possibility to talk about religion, I have avoided.
Reflections on the interview experience. When asked about their interview
experience pertaining to this current study, those students who espoused a separating
perspective admitted feeling comfortable with talking about spiritual things; felt proud
about remaining faithful to the religious beliefs taught to them; appreciated the chance to
reflect on their spiritual lives, admitted that they hadn’t spent much time reflecting on
their spirituality; and felt a need to process some of my interview questions with their
peers and mentors between their first and second interviews. Therese said what many of
these students expressed: “It’s been very interesting. I’ve never before sat down and
actually looked through my entire experience. And to be able to see how everything was
leading up to me growing stronger in Christ and becoming a better person.” Mike
reflected: “It’s been great to step back and reflect and see how things three years ago
have connected with who I am today.” Mitch offered: “I’ve been really excited. This is
awesome for me to process what’s been going on in my life. We talked about how much
time I spend doing different things. I saw it as an opportunity for me to think about what
different things have impacted my faith over the course of my college career.” Aaron saw
his interviews as a chance to reflect on his spiritual progress:

114

I think [the interviews helped] a lot. I’m an external processer and I don't get a
chance to talk to people a lot about this. It gave me a deeper understanding of
where I am and where I came from. You had me recall things before I came to
college, and it helped me see my progress.
Similarly, Jenny said she was proud of her spiritual progress over her college
career:
Yeah. I think [these interviews] have come at a really cool time for me because I
am graduating. So it’s been really cool to reflect [over my four years at college].
And I’m kinda proud of myself about seeking healing and seeking God. I’m
thankful for the heart that God has given me.
The Integrating Perspective
In describing their spiritual struggle experiences, some Evangelical students used
language and concepts that attempted to integrate their spirituality with their college
lives. Those students who held an integrating perspective saw the college climate as
beneficial and supportive of their spirituality, viewed others as peers where mutual
understanding was possible, held their education and spirituality as partners in their own
personal growth, and struggled with their spiritual path when it diverged from the
traditional Evangelical script.
College climate. Evangelical students who espoused an integrating perspective
toward their university described a campus that was an open and positive environment
that helped them grow, expanded their perspectives, and matured their convictions.
Notably, the only negative experience that all of this group did mention referred to a
street preacher who visited the campus regularly and told the students that they were

115

going to Hell. Mike was grateful for the university environment: “I think the university
has been a stronger environment for me to grow spiritually. It’s the strongest
environment I could ask for. [My faith and calling] has stuck, and it’s given me more
certainty about what I’m doing.” Joseph and Jodi talked about the openness of the
campus. Jodi explained: “I have never felt oppressed or feel like I couldn’t talk about
God. I think there is a general openness.” Brenda’s comments provide a useful example
of some of the students’ growing appreciation for their university: “You know, this
might just be my bias, but the university gets a really bad rap for being hostile on all
spectrums. And there probably have been instances of that. But I don’t see it.”
Interacting with “others.” Students who espoused an integrating perspective
were more open to seeking out, meeting, understanding, and learning from other students
and professors who were different from them. These relationships, however, brought
forth a new level of struggle, as they tried to make sense of their spiritual differences
within their newfound friendships. Mike explained, “I’ve had my perspective broadened
to realize that people who disagree with me have legitimate points.” Therese reflected,
saying, “I try, when I see someone, no matter what background, to learn from them to be
a better person.” Matt’s language demonstrated his desire to recognize the uniqueness of
others while also finding common ground. Reflecting on the friendships he has made at
college, he commented: “Right now, I don’t have friends that affiliate with Christianity
the same way I do. Many wouldn’t identify with Christians. They would identify
themselves as spiritual, or atheist, or agnostic. A broad range of people.”
Spirituality and education. Some students had a more positive view of their
classes and also their professors. They valued what they were learning and attempted to

116

make connections to their spirituality. They experienced the classroom as a place where
ideas and opinions could be shared in order to understand others and grow, not simply
proselytize. Matt gave credit to his college classes for teaching him how to dialogue
better with others:
But in college, the small group settings [versus large group settings where the
professor just lectures], is where it’s easier to branch out and say what you want
to say. So, there are times I agree with the group, and other times I say, “What if
we were to think about this in another way.”
Students also described times when their class experiences did not go so well.
Brenda, for example, had a bad experience when another Christian did not handle the
class environment well:
One girl spoke up and said she went to campus religious group. She said that she
doesn’t judge anyone but there’s the truth, and what the Bible says is that
homosexuality is a sin […] and I think I probably would have scaled it back a bit.
I remember thinking that the way [this student] handled that probably wasn’t
needed. Props to her for sharing her opinion, but I think if you don’t think
through all the possible viewpoints, it’s hard to be articulate about it.
While they did remain positive toward the classroom environment, most of these
students preferred to talk about spiritual religious topics outside of class in lower-risk
settings where conversations could revolve around their friendships with trusted
classmates. Joseph attempted to interpret the divide he sometimes saw between peers in
the classroom:

117

[The classroom] is definitely open, but sometimes, I think people are more prone
to hold their tongue about their faith in class. [It gets set up that] you’re either
atheist or religious and there’s no talking between the two sides. People are more
prone to hold their tongue to speak about these things because it’s uncomfortable
to talk about that subject. People want to be right. They don’t want there to be
any doubt in what they believe, any uncertainty. If you feel strongly about
something, you’ll defend it. But I have to be with these [peers] all semester.
Reflections on the interview experience. Similar to those with a separating
perspective, students with an integrating perspective appreciated their interviews, but also
had slightly different reactions. These students treated the interviews as rare and safe
places to lament, even grieve, over some of their spiritual challenges. Some students like
Joseph, Jodi, and Brenda appreciated having their spiritual journeys validated even when
they admitted diverging from the traditional Evangelical script, which those with a
separating perspective valued, such as being a leader in a CRG, attending church
regularly, or evangelizing on campus. Tom admitted:
“Since we met last time, it’s made me think a lot about where I am, about my
spiritual life, what I want to do in the future. It’s helped me put it into perspective
and what kind of path I want to take. What kind of people I want to meet with.
What I want to join. It’s made me think about it more than I have before.”
Jodi explained: “I think I feel really validated in my journey. Not that I felt
invalidated. I just wonder what people think about me, and I shouldn’t but I guess I have
felt encouraged on the journey I’m on.” Similarly, Brenda shared how her interviews
helped normalize her experiences and give her comfort:

118

I think it has been nice for me to know that not everyone goes about it the same
way. Even in our last interview when you said you’ve heard responses from all
across the board. That is comforting to me. That it’s kind of unique and that not
all doing Christianity at the university do it the same black and white way. That’s
been good. It’s nice to hear that I’m not completely off, that I’m doing faith right!
Summary of Student Perceptions along the Separating-Integrating Continuum
Based on the Evangelical students’ responses regarding campus climate, view of
“others,” education and spirituality, and their view of personal faithfulness, I
characterized these students as resting along the separating-integrating continuum as
depicted in Table 7. While some students fit consistently in the separating or integrating
categories, other students fit in between, as they espoused some separating and some
integrating perspectives. Notably, the perspectives these students held aligned closely
with the kinds of spiritual struggles that they described under Parks’ (2000) framework.
Table 7
Student Places on the Separating-Integrating Continuum
Separating Perspective

Aaron
Andy
Cassandra
Colleen
Jenny
John
Mara
Simon
Trevor
Trisha

In-Between Separating and
Integrating Perspectives
James
Joseph
Karen
Mitch
Therese

119

Integrating Perspective

Brenda
Jodi
Matt
Mike
Tom

Undergraduates’ Perceived Purpose, Expectations, and Recommendations in Light
of the Separating-Integrating Continuum
Characterizing Evangelical students on the separating-integrating continuum,
while also paying attention to the kinds of struggle these students described, proved to be
helpful for answering this study’s research question and the remaining two sub-questions
(restated below).
Undergraduate Descriptions of Purpose
How have the experiences of undergraduates who have worked through spiritual
struggle affected and influenced other areas in their lives (major/career decisions,
relationships, interests, beliefs, religious practices, etc.)? I asked students to discuss their
purpose for being at the university and what they hoped to pursue beyond college. I also
asked them about any expectations that they had of the university or any
recommendations to provide the university. Answers varied depending on whether a
student tended toward having an integrating perspective rather than a separating
perspective. Appendix E summarizes where students were located on a separatingintegrating continuum in terms of their descriptions of their educational purposes and
future goals.
Purpose expressed from a separating perspective. Students with a separating
perspective believed that the campus and their future careers were mission fields where
they could take their Christian message. Aaron admittedly had yet to find any integration
between his study of science and his spirituality, but like John, he saw his education as
preparing him for medical missions. Andy aspired to be a computer programmer, Colleen
to be a teacher, Jenny to be a social worker, and Cassandra to be an orphanage worker.
All envisioned their careers as means to their ultimate goal– to proselytize others. Simon

120

did not explain or demonstrate a clear integration of his spirituality and education, but
nevertheless, he felt a deep conviction to serve others. Trisha and Trevor were unable to
articulate their present and future roles as students with their future aspirations. In
general, students with a separating perspective had very authentic and compassionate
attitudes for how they wanted to serve God by investing their lives to help others. Yet
most of their descriptions about purpose were general, vague, and lacked specifics.
Purpose expressed from an integrating perspective. Those students espousing
an integrating perspective described the purposes of their roles at their university and for
their futures using language that was original, less clichéd, and more natural. They
expressed more specific and more thought-out aspirations and were able to articulate
some of their next steps. Mike talked about the impact of his studies at college and his
specific plan to get a teaching degree and then study theology to become a pastor. Tom
gave credit to his learning community for helping him see the injustices present in the
world. He planned to apply to graduate school and study international politics in order to
study the political challenges associated with global warming. Matt discovered, through
his studies at college, a growing interest in religious studies and psychology. He talked
of going to a graduate school or a seminary that valued and taught theological and
psychological integration. His description demonstrated his clear growing convictions
about his spirituality and how he hoped to develop a psychological and theological
integration to prepare him to either be a skilled pastor and/or a counselor with theological
training. Brenda, likely the most integrated student of the sample, sought to use her
degree in education to teach Spanish to underprivileged children.

121

Purpose expressed in between the separating and integrating perspectives.
Some students when describing their purpose fell in-between the separating and
integrating perspectives, as they showed signs of integration, while also admitting that
they had yet taken any steps to pursue their aspirations. Mitch often referred to his role
and future career as his opportunities to share Christ, and yet he also explained the ways
he was trying to integrate his faith and his role as a Residence Assistant by seeking to
honor his supervisor’s expectations and Christian convictions. Karen described “getting
an education” as not being spiritual, but then also talked about her college training giving
her courage to step out to teach children overseas. Karen expressed being this “inbetween” by using two different versions of her name. When I asked her about it, she
referred to the names as the “old and new Karen.” Joseph had trouble integrating his
education and spirituality, but talked passionately and specifically about being a teacher
or a professor because he wanted to make the world a better place through good teaching
and caring for his students. Mara tended to separate her education and spirituality, yet
still dreamed of using her major to work with a Christian adoption agency or with
refugees.
Undergraduates’ Expectations and Recommendations for Higher Education
What recommendations do Evangelical undergraduates offer to their higher
education institutions for better ways to support them as they experience and manage
their spiritual struggle? Evangelical students seemed at a loss when asked to offer
specific “recommendations” to the university, but they did talk freely about their own
experiences and about the advice they would give others associated with the campus.
These students offered insights on the following topics: descriptions of their own

122

freshmen expectations and their advice to future Evangelical freshmen; recommendations
for their professors through describing their best professors and classes; and
recommendations to campus religious groups. Considering how students responded in
light of their separating and integrating perspectives also provided helpful insights.
Freshmen expectations and advice for future freshmen. I asked if the students
had any expectations of their university regarding their spirituality when they entered
college, and if they had any advice for future incoming freshman who also shared their
Evangelical Christian backgrounds. Evangelical students across the separatingintegrating continuum all described having little or no expectations of the university
actually helping them with their spiritual development. What was evident, however, was
that most of the participants had similar expectations entering college, but where they fell
along the separating-integrating continuum was related to how they discussed their
expectations and advice.
When they came to the university, almost all the respondents said that they had
anticipated that the university would be hostile or indifferent toward their spirituality.
They assumed that they were spiritually on their own or admitted that they gave little
thought about their spirituality as they started college. Mara explained: “I knew that it
wasn’t a Christian school; it was public. The classes are big, so I didn’t expect them to
nurture my spirituality at all.” Similarly, Trisha felt that spiritually, she was on her own:
“I kind of knew that it was a public school and that I would have to find [spiritual and
religious] things on my own.” Therese explained her expectations: “I expected to
encounter professors and students who were going to combat my beliefs either in their
teachings or what they believed. I expected my roommate and my dorm not to believe

123

what I believe.” Mitch admitted: “This is really bad to say. I was interested in seeing if I
would have a professor who was outlandish, an atheist, or agnostic.” Mike shared the
same sentiment: “No expectations. I heard the ‘boogeyman stories.’ I got that professors
are going to be there to get you. I never experienced that. I’m not sure I had any
expectations.”
Most students admitted having little expectations of their university regarding
their spirituality. Yet, when asked what advice they would give to incoming freshmen or
their “freshmen selves,” their suggestions were more descriptive and did align with their
separating or integrating perspectives.
The majority of advice offered by those students with a separating perspective
was to become connected with a CRG. Simon, Coleen, Aaron, and Mara gave similar
advice. For example, Mara explained that there were multiple ministries on campus,
referring only to CRGs as options: “If you’re interested in growing your faith, there are
lots of Christian organizations for you to seek out.” Aaron, suggested that Evangelical
students should have two friend groups–a spiritual friend group and a secular friend
group: “For spiritual, I like what I did. Keep going to a CRG. Understand that having
two friend groups is okay.”
In contrast, those students’ holding an integrating perspective suggested that
freshmen try new things, branch out, and explore what their university has to offer. Tom
recommended: “Don’t be afraid to be yourself. Branch out!” Jodi offered: “I would say,
feel free to explore different groups on campus.” Therese, who expected the university to
be “hostile” before she attended, advised:

124

Being close-minded is one of the worst things you can do. It’s important to
explore other Christian faiths. It’s important for each person to find what they
think is the full truth and to search earnestly for it. I believe if you search for the
full truth, you will find it.
Recommendations for faculty. Previously, in Chapter 4 I noted that most
students reported spirituality rarely coming up in the classroom. Also, due to the
personal nature of that topic, students preferred to talk about it within friendship contexts,
outside of class. This view may explain why students had difficulty describing what
recommendations they would offer to faculty to support them, as they worked through
any spiritual struggle. However, when asked to describe a favorite professor or class
experience, the students were much more specific and even animated about sharing their
insights. Students said that they appreciated faculty who were approachable and
accessible in their personalities; enthusiastic, inspiring, creative, and organized in their
teaching; and relevant in connecting subject matter to real life. Students appreciated and
were impacted by classes that were smaller, discussion-oriented, and input-inviting.
Regarding spirituality, an encouraging message from these students was that faculty did
not necessarily need to talk about spirituality to attend to students’ spiritual needs
effectively. Regarding faculty, students’ place along the separating-integrating
continuum showed less contrast, although, those with a separating perspective tended to
be more harsh and dismissive of professors whom they perceived as unspiritual. There
also appeared to be little distinction between students’ descriptions of faculty and their
classroom experiences based on their major of study.

125

Be approachable and accessible. Students said they appreciated professors who
were approachable and accessible both in and out of class. Simon, Aaron, Jodi, Jenny,
and Trisha admitted that they felt intimidated by professors and had experienced some
distant, even aloof ones. Aaron’s comment summarized many of the students’
sentiments: “I didn’t really go to any of my professors. I don’t like approaching my
professors or teaching assistants. I think they’re really intimidating.” Conversely, many
students relayed stories of being pleasantly surprised by their encounters with certain
faculty who were approachable, engaging, helpful, and who did value interaction. Mara
loved how her instructor treated students as her peers, as she felt that professor’s posture
empowered the class to learn and ask valuable questions. John appreciated how his
professor was understanding of his religious commitments outside the classroom and was
accommodating toward some of John’s scheduling conflicts. James liked how closely he
worked with professors on some of his projects, while Brenda appreciated the sympathy
her professor showed her when her grandmother died.
Be enthusiastic, inspiring, creative, and organized. A prominent theme
expressed by most of the students was how much students appreciated their professors’
enthusiasm about the subjects they taught. They offered examples of their professors
being “passionate” about their subjects and gave multiple examples of how they were
creative in their teaching approaches. Students noticed when more effort and investment
in learning were put into a class. Simon remembered a teacher who was creative and
invested in her teaching, and it inspired his future career choice:

126

My teacher, she talked about kale and brought samples for our class of 200
people! It was interesting, and I enjoyed it. She was nice and passionate about
what she was teaching. It was really great, and I knew that’s what I wanted to do.
Mitch’s experience captured qualities that students experienced and appreciated
from the professors who loved their subjects:
I had this professor my freshman year who I think is one of the best professors on
campus. He was my chemistry professor, and he loved talking about chemistry.
Because he loved talking about chemistry so much, it didn’t matter if he loved
teaching. I remember one time that he always had really great notes for us in
class, and I had a question. And I went up to him and I said, “Professor, I have a
question.” And his eyes lit up and he said, “Yeah, what’s the question? Let’s talk
chemistry!”
Be able to connect material to real life and personal ideas. Students appreciated
when professors tied class subject matter to their real lives. Students felt supported when
instructors were sensitive to their students’ spiritual and religious convictions and
acknowledged students’ attempts to integrate these views with their academic studies.
Jodi offered this example:
I appreciated my professor a lot. Just that she realized that religion can be an
issue in the social work profession. That it can be hard for Evangelical Christians.
That was actually the term. It was in our textbook. It was like a bold vocab word.
Smaller, discussion- oriented, input- inviting classrooms matter. Students
described some of their best classes as the ones where class sizes were smaller and safer
for discussion. They appreciated instructors who valued students’ input and questions

127

and worked to make the classroom space safe and inviting for exchanges of dialogue.
Students like Tom and Jodi said that these kinds of classes helped them grow in
articulating their opinions, interacting with others, and speaking up in class. Tom
described his love-hate experience in one class that he learned to value:
There was a smaller intro course where my professor made us think deeply about
the causes and consequences of the topic we were discussing. She would also call
us out in class if we weren’t debating. That’s probably where I started getting my
skills for dialoging with others. She was very demanding. There were times I
hated it. I hated this professor! But when I came out of it, I realized it was one of
my best experiences. It helped my reading and writing a lot.
Faculty do not need to talk about spirituality to attend to spirituality. Most
students noted there was little discussion of spiritual or religious topics in the classroom.
Some assumed that their professors avoided spirituality because they did not like it or
simply chose not to approach the subject. More students admitted that their peers
avoided the topic in class because they were intimidated, did not want to be controversial,
and worried about the subject moving from discussion to debate (which some students
did actually witness). Students who wanted to talk about spiritual topics found that most
of these conversations happened outside of class in casual conversations, with friends.
Many said students were open to talking about spirituality, but that the stakes were too
high in class. Still, many talked about how the classroom was the place where they were
challenged and inspired to integrate their thinking, consider new perspectives, or
entertain new ideas pertaining to their majors and their career choices. Trisha explained
her experience:

128

Actually, one of the professors I have right now, I had him my freshman year for
my intro to bio-systems engineering class, and he was probably the reason I stuck
with the major I’m in now. He was really engaging. And I’ve had him for one of
my higher-level classes, and it seems like he cares that we’re learning.
Regarding students and their perspectives along the separating-integrating
continuum, there appeared to be little distinction between different students’ advice to
faculty, although those espousing a separating perspective tended to be more harsh and
dismissive of professors, assuming them to be unspiritual or resistant to Christianity.
Undergraduate impressions of campus religious groups (CRGs). This section
captures how students described their university’s connection to CRGs along with my
personal observations; why students thought students should join CRGs; how they saw
CRGs’ supporting them as students; what they described as their CRG’s theology in
practice; and how they described CRGs’ views of gender and gender roles.
CRGs and the university have a legitimate connection. In terms of context,
Evangelical CRGs are recognized groups on the university campus in the current study.
They hold the privileges that come with this recognition, such as access to campus
building spaces and acknowledgment as a legitimate campus group on the university’s
website. Students saw these CRGs as part of their university community. Students
remembered filling out a “Religious Preference Form” during Freshman Orientation. It
gave students the opportunity to share their religious backgrounds, so those groups that
matched their religious leanings could contact them. These forms were delivered to
campus religious groups who then had the option to follow up with students through
emails, social media, and visitations.

129

Many students in this study reported filling out the form, being visited by CRG
leaders, or as a student leader, some of these students following up with freshmen
themselves. In addition, some students mentioned and appreciated the fact that the
university’s Vice President of Student Development has, for the last two years, attended
their large group meeting to speak to students and parents. Generally, the university
appeared to welcome Evangelical CRGs, formally recognize them, promote the groups
on the university website, and provide or allow ways for students to become connected to
CRGs.
Reasons that students join CRGs. Beyond receiving advice from their parents, I
asked students why they thought students joined CRGs. Their responses were largely
consistent across the separating-integrating continuum. Students offered that CRGs were
familiar to students and similar to what students experienced in their home church youth
groups. For example, Jenny explained: “Generally, students join CRGs their freshman
and sophomore years because they did it in high school. They come to college and do the
religious thing because they’ve been told that they should, or they did it in high school.”
Mitch added: “They come to CRG events because they’ve done these kinds of religious
gatherings their entire lives.”
Also, students reported that CRGs provided students with opportunities for
friendships with similar and like-minded individuals. For example, Karen explained:
“Why they join is to find community, because that’s especially hard here at school. They
seek people [with whom] they share things in common, people they can be friends with.”
Aaron admitted: “Coming to college, I didn’t know anyone because I was out of state. So
the group helped me get friends.”

130

In addition, students explained that CRGs provided protection, support, and
alternatives to college partying. Simon admitted: “For me, [my CRG] kept me from a lot
of temptations, like going to parties and drinking. Jenny framed her “Thursday night”
decisions as a spiritual choice where CRGs offered an alternative: “Thursday nights are
when people go out, so students have to decide between faith and going out.”
Finally, students said that CRGs helped some of them to connect with something
meaningful. Mara explained: “I know that a lot of people at our college are lost and
searching for something. So I think people like to get involved in things that are bigger
than themselves.”
CRGs support of higher education. I asked students who did have experiences
with CRGs if they thought their CRGs and CRG leaders also supported their academic
aspirations. Their responses were mixed. Some held the view that their CRGs
encouraged them to glorify God in their studies, while still providing them with
encouragement and support. Colleen, Therese, John, and Mara felt supported enough by
their CRGs to invest in their schoolwork. They explained how people in their groups did
ask them how school was going, offered to study together, and reminded them that they
were college students for a reason. Mara said: “We’ve been taught in [my CRG] about
glorying God in everything you’re doing, and that includes schoolwork.”
Other students felt a tension with some of their CRGs’ expectations. Simon,
Mitch, Jodi, and Aaron all expressed the pressure they felt to choose between CRG
involvement and their studies. Aaron described what he felt: “Sometimes I feel judged
and that my priorities are a little skewed. That may be true, but I came to school, not to

131

serve this fellowship, but to be a student and help people grow in God.” Jodi, however,
felt pressured by her CRG to attend certain programs even when she had to study:
In my CRG, I felt like I couldn’t pour myself into my classes. Say you had an
exam study session, and it conflicts with Bible study. I would feel like I had to go
to Bible study. Even though I was here at school to get a degree. I didn’t feel
100% freedom to do that, I guess.
Mitch and John explained that CRGs emphasized the importance of doing
ministry on campus, going into ministry beyond college, or at least “ministering” through
the choice of a person’s career. Mitch explained: “Ministry here means being a witness
to Christ and evangelizing. I think our group would like anyone involved [in our CRG]
to do full-time ministry.” He explained that CRGs see getting every student into ministry
as a profession or to evangelize through their “secular” jobs:
And that’s why you’re here so that we can build you up and send you out into the
workforce. So, I think our CRG ideally would like everyone to do full-time
ministry because it would complete the Great Commission [Referring to Acts 28
and Jesus’ command to “Make disciples of all nations”]. Some Christians argue
that when the Great Commission is completed, Christ will return and reign].
CRG theology and outreach. The tensions felt by some students about CRGs
may have related to the pressure from CRGs to proselytize. The most significant
activities that those students who attended CRGs mentioned were activities that involved
engaging other students by sharing their faith either directly or indirectly. Colleen
explained: “I think that [my CRG] focuses on evangelizing and sharing the Word of the
Lord like my church back home, which I think is good. There is more emphasis on

132

witnessing at [my CRG].” A number of students mentioned a “hot dog ministry” where
Christian groups would hand out hot dogs to drunken students on weekends trying to tell
or show them God’s Love.
CRGs and gender. Another theological belief that occurred in the interviews
pertained to students’ descriptions of their CRG views on gender roles. Most of the
comments on this topic came from the female participants. Positively, females
appreciated the respect they received from men in their CRGs. Mara felt “respected and
honored” much more than in the other interactions she had with men on campus. Colleen
admitted that she liked it when men “took the lead” in a relationship, appealing to what
she had been taught about the uniqueness of men and women’s roles in a relationship.
Some students said their CRGs had women leaders and teachers. Still, females also
expressed the tension they felt between their university experience and their CRG culture.
Jenny explained her CRG’s view in relation to women: “No [women do not teach].
Women lead prayer meetings. But, the president and large group leaders are males. We
have female Bible study leaders. Whenever we have speakers come in, they’ve always
been male.”
Summary of undergraduate expectations and recommendations. Regarding
Evangelical students’ expectations and recommendations, what appeared most common
for all students was that they came to college with the advice that the campus would be
hostile to their faith and with little expectations of the university supporting their
spirituality. Students’ impressions and their advice seemed to differ, however, on whether
the students held separating or integrating perspectives. For those students with an
integrating perspective, the university introduced them to new kinds of struggle, while

133

simultaneously, this group also discovered that the university offered multiple resources
for spiritual support. Those students with a separating perspective appeared to remain
unchanged, still holding to the advice and perspectives that had been communicated to
them before they came to the university as freshmen.
Summary of Spiritual Struggle within Spiritual Development
In Chapter 3, I noted that the goal of phenomenographic research is to identify
categories of description as drawn from participants’ perceptions of a particular
phenomenon. As these descriptions are established, this approach seeks out underlying
meanings and then examines the relationships between them (Entwistle, 1997; Marton,
1981). This section adapted Parks’ (2000) spiritual development framework to probe
more deeply into the students’ experiences in this study. Specifically, this section took
into account the different forms of spirituality (community, dependence, and knowing)
and the spiritual maturity of the students who were participants in order to understand
their responses. This analysis led to the creation of a continuum that defined the
separating and integrating perspectives that shape students’ views of their campus, their
interactions with others who are different from them, their integration of their education
and spirituality, and their view of spiritual faithfulness. Further, students’ positions on
the separating-integrating continuum helped to clarify their expectations and the
recommendations for incoming freshmen, faculty, the classroom, and CRGs; and shed
light on the resources certain Evangelical students preferred accessing to help them with
their spiritual struggle.

134

CHAPTER 5:
DISCUSSION
In this final chapter, I present: (1) an overview of the study; (2) a summary of the
key findings; (3) a discussion of results; (4) the considerations for future practice; and (5)
the limitations of the study and suggestions for further research.
Overview of Study
This section offers a brief overview of the study’s research problem and its
rationale, the research questions, key literature, and design summary.
Problem and Rationale
Undergraduate experiences of spiritual struggle on campus are common and
indeed necessary for personal spiritual development and holistic maturity, but they are
often unseen or misunderstood by universities, leading to a lack of support and even
detrimental effects on the students’ experiencing that struggle. The purpose of this study
was to understand Evangelical undergraduates’ perceptions of the factors affecting
spiritual struggle and learn the resources they accessed to work through that struggle.
Understanding these factors offers additional insights for public colleges and universities
to apply, as they seek to support their students in their spiritual development. This
project sought to contribute to the knowledge of undergraduate spiritual development by
examining the college-related factors that Evangelical students perceive as either
supporting or impeding them as they work though that same spiritual struggle.
Research Questions
In light of the aforementioned problem, this study presented the following
research question:

135

From the perspective of undergraduate students who have come from the
Evangelical Christian tradition, what factors support or impede their experiences when
working through spiritual struggle while at college?
The research sub-questions were the following: a) What does spiritual struggle
mean for Evangelical undergraduates? b) For those Evangelical undergraduates who have
experienced spiritual struggle, what do they view as the particular sources or issues that
relate to that struggle? What brought the struggle on for them? c) What factors do
undergraduates perceive as affecting the process for how they handled their struggle?
Specifically, what college-related factors (resources, relationships, experiences) do these
undergraduates perceive as affecting how they handled their struggle? Which of these
factors helped and which impeded them, as these students experienced and managed
spiritual struggle and in what ways? d) How have the experiences of undergraduates who
have worked through spiritual struggle influenced other areas in their lives (major/career
decisions, relationships, interests, beliefs, religious practices, etc.)? and e) What
recommendations can Evangelical undergraduates offer to their higher education
institutions for ways to better support this group of students as they experience and
manage personal spiritual struggle?
Key Literature
The key literature that framed this study includes the available works on spiritual
development, particularly the research on emerging adulthood, undergraduate spirituality,
spiritual struggle, and Evangelical Christian students.
Spiritual development. Researchers have argued that spiritual development
fosters students’ well-being (Temkin & Evans, 1998), contributes to an interdisciplinary

136

foundation (Inayatullah & Gidley, 2000; Love & Talbot, 1999), acknowledges personal
“conversion” or transformation (Fowler, 1995; Vella, 2000; Zinnbauer & Pargament,
1998), encourages greater authenticity and a more integrated self (Kazanjian & Laurence,
2000; Love & Talbot, 1999; Murphy, 2005; Stewart, 2005; Tisdell, 2003), and it supports
meaning-making as one of the ways that individuals construct their knowledge and
integrate their lives (Jablonski et al., 2001; Keeling & Dungy, 2004; Tisdell, 2003).
Spiritual development affects these individuals’ understanding of themselves, their
relationship with others, and their ongoing pursuit for more meaning-making.
Spiritual development and emerging adults. Certain researchers have focused
primarily on the emerging adult life-stage (Arnett, 2004; Arnett & Jensen, 2002; Arnett et
al., 2011; Parks, 1991, 2000; Smith & Snell, 2009). They have agreed with other lifestage theorists that emerging adults (ages 18-26) experience a unique period in life where,
among other things, their spirituality shapes and is shaped by their new knowledge and
experiences (Arnett, 2004; Arnett et al., 2011). “Something changes” in the spirituality
of many emerging adults, as they search to make their spirituality “more true,” reinterpret
their worldview, and reframe their beliefs in light of their ever-growing exposure to a
diversity of worldviews and experiences (Arnett, 2004; Parks, 2000).
Spiritual development and undergraduates. A select group of researchers have
studied emerging adult spiritual development, as that development pertains specifically to
undergraduate students. It has been observed that a majority of undergraduates bring
their religious traditions and beliefs to campus (Astin, 2004; Astin & Astin, 2003; Astin
et al., 2003; Jablonski et al., 2001; Lindholm, 2007; Love, 2001; Tisdell, 2001). Studies
have also reported that a majority of undergraduates who enter college have a high

137

interest in spiritual ideas and involvement, and the expectations that their college or
university will support their spiritual development (Astin et al., 2003; Lindholm, 2007).
Simultaneously, some educators have called spirituality in higher education a “blind
spot” that needs more and better understanding by educators (Collins & et al., 1987;
Palmer et al., 2010; Rue, 1985; Temkin & Evans, 1998).
Undergraduate spiritual struggle. In order to understand undergraduate
spirituality more specifically, this study focused on studying undergraduate perceptions
of their own spiritual struggle. Bryant & Astin (2008) offered that “struggles of a
spiritual nature are a reality for college students” (p. 23). Spiritual struggle is a known
source of challenge for a “considerable portion of college students” thus bringing about
spiritual conflict within the person (Rockenbach et al., 2012, p. 55). Undergraduate
spiritual struggle is also a necessary part of their spiritual development and needs
understanding and support, as it can impact the academic, social, and emotional wellbeing of college students (Bryant & Astin, 2008; Rockenbach et al., 2012).
Evangelical undergraduates and spiritual struggle. This study looked at a
specific Christian tradition–Evangelical Christians. Evangelicals are the one category of
religious groups on campus that typically have a larger organized presence on a campus,
but are often less open to dialogue, remain more separate from campus activities, and are
more susceptible to spiritual struggle (Bryant, 2006a; J. P. Hill, 2009; Magolda & Gross,
2009). Although many Evangelical students join campus religious groups (CRGs),
Magolda and Gross (2009) have stated that the “academy remains largely ignorant about
the intricacies of Evangelical organizations and uncertain how to meet the unique needs
of evangelical students while remaining true to core, secular institutional values” (p. 11).

138

Gaps in the literature on undergraduate spiritual struggle. So far, the prior
studies that have sought to understand spiritual struggle in college students include Parks
(2000), Astin, et al., (2003), Bryant & Astin, (2008), Fisler et al. (2009), Astin, Astin &
Lindholm, (2011a, 2011b), and Rockenbach et al. (2012). In terms of the perceived
spiritual struggle of Evangelical Christian undergraduates, I identified specific gaps in the
literature. In particular, I noticed that none of the studies on undergraduate spiritual
struggle have considered the religious backgrounds of the undergraduate participants; that
spiritual struggle was described in more general terms and called for new and more
specific descriptions; that little has yet been learned on how faculty or classroom
experiences can support students through their spiritual struggle; and that students’
spiritual struggle and development are rarely resolved by graduation, thus raising key
questions on how their development does affect their spiritual struggle. It is unclear
whether campus religious groups, often accessed by Evangelical students, are helpful or
harmful. Finally, researchers who also have theological training, may offer a level of
insight that most studies pertaining to students’ religious and spiritual perceptions have
not addressed or achieved.
Design Summary
The studies that have researched spiritual struggle have all encouraged more
qualitative research on unique campus environments with students from particular
religious (including non-religious) backgrounds (Bryant & Astin, 2008; Fisler et al.,
2009; Rockenbach et al., 2012). This study thus conducted 39 interviews with 20
participants who were juniors or seniors, identified their family religious traditions as
conservative and/or Evangelical Christian and self-identified as having experienced a

139

shift or change in their spiritual or religious beliefs or practices while in college. A
phenomenographic method of qualitative research was used to better understand how the
participant undergraduates all attending the same public university perceive, think about,
and conceptualize their experiences. The emphasis was on the specific phenomenon of
spiritual struggle. Special attention was given to distinguish students’ descriptions of
spiritual struggle from other common forms of human struggles they experience while
attending college. Thus, students who volunteered for this study self-identified as having
experienced shifts or changes in their spiritual or religious beliefs or practices. The
interviewees sought to understand their spiritual struggle experiences where everyday
events were often catalysts for struggle, but their struggles had transcendent elements that
caused students to question their views of God, their Christian identity, and their
relationships with others (Fisler et al., 2009; Rockenbach et al., 2012; Zinnbauer &
Pargament, 1998).
Parks’ (2000) model of spiritual development was adopted to examine more
closely how spiritual struggle is described in light of the different forms of spirituality she
explained (community, dependence, knowing) and the students’ level of spiritual
development. These crucial elements of spiritual development and struggle–relational
spiritual struggle, emotional spiritual struggle, and intellectual spiritual struggle–provided
a way to categorize students’ described experiences. This rubric allowed the me to note
more precisely the way that students described their spiritual struggle, what influenced
that struggle, what resources they sought to work through it, and how that experience
affected their religious involvements, campus experiences, educational pursuits, and
future aspirations.

140

Summary of Key Findings
The previous chapters presented the findings of the research in detail. Chapter 3
described much of the background information the students revealed about their families,
homes, majors of study, and investment in non-academic activities. Chapter 4
categorized students’ descriptions of their spiritual struggle experiences in terms of oncampus and off-campus factors affecting and resourcing their spiritual struggles. Next, it
adopted the conceptual framework adapted from Parks’ (2000) model on spiritual
development to examine more closely the spiritual struggles that the student participants
described, and the meanings they placed on their experiences. These observations
surfaced descriptive patterns, informed by their separating and integrating perspectives,
evident in the students’ perceptions of themselves, their integration of education and
spirituality, their views of spiritual faithfulness, and their purpose in life. These
perspectives also clarified the different kinds of struggle that the students described and
the ways they chose to access university resources to work through each struggle.
Student-Described Factors affecting Spiritual Struggle
The students’ perceived factors affecting spiritual struggle were summarized in
two broad categories, namely, on-campus and off-campus causes. On-campus factors
influencing spiritual struggle described spiritual challenges that the students experienced
as the result of a particular experience at college. There were eight major areas of
concern: educational/classroom experiences; finding friends and connecting relationally;
dating, sex, relationships; philosophical/theological intellectual and relational encounters;
substance abuse and destructive behavior; campus religious groups; sexual assault and
specifically for females, integrating gender, faith, and feminism. Off-campus factors

141

influencing spiritual struggle related to the spiritual challenges students experienced
beyond their campus locations. These included family deaths/illness, hometown
expectations, and sexual assault.
In light of the students’ religious and family backgrounds and how they invested
their time during college, it is not surprising that the factors affecting their struggles
primarily involved their new experiences at college. The off-campus factors that students
reported were more event-oriented, such as the death or sickness of a family member,
coming home to bad influences, or experiencing sexual assault from someone away from
college.
Student-Described Resources for Addressing Spiritual Struggle
The students’ perceived resources, relationships, and/or experiences used for
working through struggle were again summarized in the same two categories that were
used for the factors affecting struggle-- on-campus and off-campus. The on-campus
resources, relationships, and/or experiences that these students described overwhelmingly
placed friends as their most common resource followed by CRG programs and leaders
(for those who attended CRGs), and faculty/class resources. The off-campus resources,
relationships, and/or experiences that students identified included working through
struggle on their own, seeking out parents or family members, seeing a
counselor/therapist, and accessing their home or campus church.
Spiritual Struggle within the Realm of Spiritual Development
This study thus took a closer look at students’ descriptions by understanding their
perceptions of these descriptions in light of their spiritual development. By adapting
Parks’ (2000) framework, the study sought to understand more specifically how the

142

factors affecting spiritual struggle and the resources available for addressing that struggle,
as described by students, varied in their meaning based on the different forms of spiritual
struggle and the students’ developmental maturity. What was discovered was that
Evangelical students generally had yet to attain more spiritually mature perspectives
within their spiritual development. Therefore, their experiences with spiritual struggle
reflected less mature stages of challenge and resolution within their spiritual
development, with few students having yet attained a more mature, resolved, and focused
spiritual maturity.
Within spiritual maturity, this study adapted Parks’ (2000) essential elements of
spirituality (i.e. community, dependence, and knowing) and created descriptive terms for
the kinds of spiritual struggle that the students described. Within the form of community,
students’ described kinds spiritual struggle by what I call separating struggle, seeking
struggle, and contributing struggle. Most students described the separating struggle they
felt as being separated from home, parents, or religious leaders, or distancing themselves
from campus churches or the CRGs they joined as freshmen. Some sought new
connections (seeking struggle) with a different faith community or connections with their
academic programs. Only a few students mentioned their desire to invest in local
churches or groups, feeling compelled to not only benefit from these communities but to
contribute to them as well (contributing struggle).
Within the form of dependence, students’ described the emotions they felt during
spiritual struggle by what I call negative feelings and positive feelings. The
overwhelming majority of students described experiencing negative emotions, primarily

143

feeling overwhelmed or anxious. Only four students described positive feelings related
to their spiritual struggle experiences as freeing, satisfying, clarifying, and encouraging.
Within the form of knowing, students described the kinds of epistemological
spiritual struggle they experienced by what I call doubting struggle, adjusting struggle,
and integrating struggle. Almost half of the students experienced doubting struggle,
disagreeing with the CRGs they attended or questioning their inherited beliefs acquired
from family or their home religious community. An equal number of students
experienced adjusting struggle, describing their attempts to integrate new people, new
concepts, and new roles into their worldviews. These students expressed a growing
awareness of the diverse perspectives available at school and a new appreciation of the
complexity of the world in which they lived, even if they still remained unsure of how to
integrate these new people, concepts, and roles into their lives. Only two students
demonstrated integrating struggle, where they were able to use language and concepts to
help them explain and question how their spirituality could be expressed through their
worldview, studies, aspirations, and challenges. Indeed, they appeared to know who they
were, what they believed, and how they desired to live.
The Separating-Integrating Continuum and Student Perspectives
Capturing Evangelical students’ descriptions of their spiritual struggle and
classifying their struggles by adopting Parks’ (2000) conceptual framework, allowed me
to place students along a separating-integrating continuum of perspectives in this study.
Students espousing a separating perspective. Those students with a separating
perspective viewed their campus as hostile. They saw those who were different from
them as needing to hear and believe the truth they had without their ever considering

144

other students’ backgrounds or beliefs. They perceived their classes as either ignoring or
attacking Christianity and had trouble synthesizing their education with their spirituality.
In addition, when asked what advice they would give to freshmen like themselves, they
encouraged freshmen to join a CRG. When asked about their purpose for being a student
now and their aspirations for the future, these students saw their role as a student and
their role as a Christian separately, and typically talked about their future aspirations in
very general terms (e.g. desiring to love God, help people, or go into mission work).
Those students with a separating perspective were proud that they had “kept the faith” of
their families, and even though they did struggle, they didn’t stray. Their perspectives
and advice did not diverge from what their adults and church leaders had told them when
they entered their freshmen year. Most all of the students who held a separating
perspective still attended a CRG.
Students espousing an integrating perspective. Those students holding an
integrating perspective viewed the campus as a resource filled with possibilities. They
saw others as people they needed to know, learn from, and befriend. They viewed the
classroom as a place where learning and dialogue were possible and also helpful in their
spiritual growth. In addition, when asked what advice they would give to freshmen like
themselves, they encouraged these freshmen to branch out and try the new and many
different things their campus offered. When asked about their purpose for being a
student now and their aspirations for their futures, these students talked of learning from
and contributing to their school and spoke of their future with more particularity and
specificity (e.g. exploring ways to use their teaching degree to help inner-city kids or
aspiring to pursue graduate degrees and psychology and theology to be well rounded as a

145

psychologist or minister). Further, students who exhibited an integrating perspective
were proud that they had found their own path, although they admitted having struggled
with feelings of unfaithfulness because their paths had diverged from the typical
Evangelical script (e.g. religious attendance, joining Bible studies, being a leader in a
CRG, or upholding foundational beliefs). In their interviews, many felt encouraged that
their journeys were validated. Their perspectives of college and their advice to freshmen
changed from what their parents and church leaders had told them when they entered
college. They saw the college as a resource, not a hindrance, and emphasized trying new
things other than just CRGs. None of the students who held an integrating perspective
were attending a CRG at the time of their interviews.
Discussion of the Results
This section discusses how this study compares to other studies, namely, how it
has extended the research on undergraduate spiritual struggle by raising particular
highlights and tensions discovered during the effort. I also discuss the particular
questions that this research raised for me.
Religious Tradition Affects Evangelical Undergraduates’ Spiritual Struggle
There have been studies on the spiritual struggle of undergraduate students by
Zinnbauer & Pargament (1998), Bryant & Astin (2008), Fisler et al. (2009) and
Rockenbach et al. (2012). There also have been studies on Evangelical undergraduates
by Bryant (2006a) and Magolda & Gross (2009), but this study was the first to
specifically focus on Evangelical undergraduate spiritual struggle at a public university.
As detailed in Chapter 2, this study assumed that the presumed separation of one’s
religiousness and spirituality during higher education creates an unhelpful dichotomy,

146

contributing to both the “blindness” and the “hiddenness” that educators experience with
students when they seek to understand their spiritual experiences as students on campus
(Chickering et al., 2006; Collins & et al., 1987; Dalton & Crosby, 2007; Rue, 1985).
Thus, this current study supports the suggestions made by Hill (2000) and Smith & Snell
(2009) who argue for the inseparability of one’s spirituality and religiousness, and
challenge the assumptions of undergraduates being “spiritual, but not religious” as
suggested by Cherry et al. (2001), Colby (2003), Johnson et al. (2008), and Love (2001).
The Evangelical students I interviewed confirmed and highlighted the fact that
parents and other influential adults from home (e.g. grandparents, extended family, other
adults, religious leaders) created a positive network of support for them as they headed
off to college (Clydesdale, 2007; Smith & Snell, 2009). Undergraduates who came from
a religiously Evangelical Christian tradition brought with them something beyond
theology; they also brought a distinct and rich religious culture. Because the religious
tradition of Evangelical students espouses a rich religious culture that permeates family
relationships and everyday practices, these students may have more in common with
minority religions on campus, such as Buddhists, Hindus, and Muslims, than do most
Mainline Christians. If this aspect is true, then Bryant & Astin’s (2008) observations that
undergraduates holding minority religions experience more struggle may apply to
Evangelicals as well. Further, this finding may shed further light on Magolda & Gross’s
(2009) observations that Evangelicals see themselves as “cultural outsiders” and Smith’s
(1998) commentary that Evangelical undergraduates gravitate toward religious
organizations to avoid any perceived marginalization. It may also explain why
Evangelical students report higher rates of spiritual struggle than do Mainline Christians

147

(Astin et al., 2010; Bryant, 2007; Bryant & Astin, 2008; Jacobsen & Jacobson, 2008;
Magolda & Gross, 2009). Therefore, any spiritual struggle that influences these students
to consider breaking away from their inherited beliefs is quite dramatic for them, as it has
not only epistemological, but also relational consequences. The findings here helped to
make sense of two contradictory concepts wherein Evangelical students are typically
from the majority culture (White, Middle Class, Christian, etc.) and yet perceive
themselves as being in the minority and operating out of an oppositional subculture
mentality (Magolda & Gross, 2009).
Student Described On-Campus and Off-Campus Factors of Spiritual Struggle
Rockenbach et al. (2012) described “classic understandings” of spiritual struggle
(p. 71) as those struggles typically described from previous literature on spiritual
struggle: gaining independence, critically reflecting on religious beliefs, and establishing
one’s own personal commitments. My initial on-campus and off-campus domains were
used to classify students’ descriptions in clearer descriptive categories and to attempt to
compare my findings with past studies. This current study confirmed the previous
research by indicating that Evangelical undergraduates share, on the surface, similar
kinds spiritual struggles described in the literature. The limitations of these classic
descriptions, noted by both by Rockenbach et al. (2012) and Fisler et al. (2009) are that
they fail to take into account the uniqueness of students’ backgrounds, maturity, or kinds
of the struggles experienced. Still, my first attempt to generally classify students’
descriptions of factors affecting their spiritual struggles and the resources they accessed
to work through those struggles within on-campus and off-campus domains were
intended to provide helpful categories for a university to consider in the future.

148

Universities can more directly address on-campus categories, while off-campus
categories are those that the university would be wise to be aware of and understand.
Student-described factors affecting spiritual struggle. Bryant and Astin’s
(2008) observations of student descriptions of spiritual struggles and Fisler et al.’s (2009)
attempts to categorize student descriptions of their spiritual struggles are noted in Table
8. Table 8 indicates that these Evangelical student descriptions of their spiritual struggles
were similar to those in the previous literature. Still, these understandings of spiritual
struggle across the different studies revealed slightly different ways that each study
categorized factors influencing spiritual struggle, making it difficult to know how similar
or different these descriptions truly were. Bryant & Astin (2008) identified the
experiences of students, while Fisler et al. (2012) used the categories of academic
experiences, external relationships, and internal thinking or feeling.
Notably, a unique factor affecting spiritual struggle described by female
participants in the current study pertained to how they navigated what their religion
taught them about their gender and what the university taught them. This issue was
especially expressed by females who attended CRGs. Although females felt respected in
their CRGs, some indicated that, either from the teaching or modeling, a
complementation perspective of male and female roles (e.g. a religious view stating that
there are prescribed gender roles), rather than an egalitarian one, was perpetuated.
Gilligan (1982) highlighted that the development for women often takes place in the
contexts of relationships, while Magolda & Gross (2009) asserted in their study that
females joined Evangelical CRGs for personal relationships and to grow closer to God.
Butchko (2004), in referring to Pastorino, Dunham, and Kidwell (1997), and Parks (2000)

149

also affirmed that the college years are a time when females often reexamine their faith.
Bryant’s (2006) study identified how some CRGs not only separated themselves from
other campus groups, but also perpetuated separation within the groups in terms of
gender and gender roles. The current study’s findings confirm these past references to
female Evangelical students who seek relationships through CRGs to develop spiritually,
only to often find those same relationships contribute to their own spiritual struggle.
On-campus and off-campus categories were used as ways of classifying the
factors described by students while also attempting to connect the findings to the
previous research. While these categories offer some clarity within this study,
comparisons remained difficult with previous studies on student spiritual struggle
because categories and even definitions varied. Rockenbach et al. (2012) are correct to
point out the limitations of the classic understandings of students’ spiritual struggles
described in previous studies and to call for more in-depth descriptions for understanding.
Agreeing with Rockenbach et al. (2012), I made an attempt in this study to adapt Parks’
(2000) framework and introduce the separating-integrating continuum.

150

Table 8
Literature Comparisons of Student Descriptions of Spiritual Struggle
Fisler et al. (2009)

Argue (2014)

Research

Bryant & Astin
(2008)

Descriptions

Understanding evil,
suffering, death

Academics
Classroom
Coursework
Study abroad

On-Campus Factors
Educational/ classroom
experiences

Questioning religious/
spiritual beliefs

External Influences
On- campus
relationships (friends,
roommates, other peers)

Feeling unsettled about
religious/ spiritual
matters
Disillusioned with one’s
family upbringing

On-campus groups
(religious and nonreligious)

Finding friends and
connecting relationally
Dating, sex,
relationships, and
assault

Campus climate

Philosophical/
Theological, intellectual
and relational
encounters

Internal Influences
Internal processing

Substance abuse and
destructive behaviors

Positive and negative
emotions

Campus religious
groups (CRGs)

On their own (reading
religious and non
religious books)

Integrating gender, faith,
and feminism (females)

Feeling angry at God

Off-Campus Factors
Death/illness
Hometown expectations
Sexual assault

Student-described resources for addressing spiritual struggle. While Astin et
al. (2011b) and Parks (2000) have called for non-peer support, such as mentors, religious
leaders, and faculty, and because students rarely navigate spiritual struggle on their own
(Clydesdale, 2007; Parks, 2000; Smith & Snell, 2009), the primary on-campus and offcampus resources that students accessed in this current study derived from peers and their
own. This finding confirms what Fisler et al. (2009) noted, namely, that students

151

predominantly tried to work out their struggles with other peers and/or on their own.
Rockenbach et al. (2012) observed that those students who share their struggles even with
close peers are rare. It is possible that the go-to resources that the students described in
this study were not because those resources were the best, but only that they were
perceived as being more accessible and offering lower risk.
Students Descriptions of Spiritual Struggle will Vary per Spiritual Development
Forms and Maturity
Rockenbach et al. (2012) attempted and then suggested that more research be
done to describe spiritual struggle that is “multilayered and manifests in myriad ways as
students navigate complex relationships, experience fear and doubt, lose and find
meaning, and negotiate social and personal identities” (p. 71). Bryant & Astin (2008)
offered that, in the end, students define spiritual struggle for themselves and must also
construct the answers they seek themselves. Further, Rockenbach et al. (2012) noted that
spiritual struggles were embedded in the “conflicting, contradictory, and paradoxical
aspects of life” (p. 62). They suggested that spiritual struggle emerges from the
contrasting experiences students feel regarding their conflicting identities, their
relationships, and how to synthesize those beliefs with their new experiences. This study
also attempted to place more specific language on Evangelical students’ spiritual struggle
descriptions by looking beyond the general descriptions described above to include the
relational, emotional, and intellectual elements associated with their spiritual maturity.
Spiritual struggle is experienced relationally. In terms of the relational form of
spiritual struggle, this current study aligns with what previous studies by Clydesdale
(2007) and Braskamp (2008) highlighted, namely, that relational struggle is often more

152

prevalent in students’ freshman years, while intellectual struggle emerges later in their
junior or senior years. These findings highlighted the varied types of struggle that
students experienced pertaining to community and offered a clearer interpretation of
Magolda & Gross’s (2009) statement that “belonging is on the minds of most first-year
students” (p. 89). Like Rockenbach et al. (2012), this study identified the conflict
students felt between their own self and others. Further, many students described their
ongoing effort to navigate their relationships with others, often joining, then leaving,
certain groups. Thus, students’ attendance at structured religious gatherings varied,
calling into question the value of religious attendance as an often-used measure of
religious or spiritual commitment in the previous studies (cf. Arnett, 2004; Fisler et al.,
2009; Lee, 2002; Nash, 1999; Uecker et al., 2007).
Statements used in the prior religious and academic literature about college
students “leaving church” or being “less religious” failed to capture the actual relational
spiritual struggles that Evangelical students are working through. It casts a different light
on Astin et al.’s (2010) definition of “religious engagement” where only religious
attendance is measured or Lee’s (2002) summary that attending college causes a decline
in religious activity. More likely, the findings from this study align with the studies by
Smith & Snell (2009) and Clydesdale (2007) where religious attendance means
something, but not everything. What the findings here also highlight is that spiritual
struggle may require students to both join and then leave faith communities in order to
develop spiritually.
Spiritual struggle is experienced emotionally. The current study’s findings
confirm the previous studies’ observations, but also reveal that the majority of emotions

153

described by students were darker and more negative, rather than being positive. This
study, along with those of Fisler et al. (2007) and Rockenbach et al. (2012), shows that
students feel more of the negative emotions associated with struggle with few students’
experiencing the positive emotions associated with resolution. Unresolved struggles with
negative feelings seemed akin to what Putnam & Campbell (2010) describe as
“liminality,” and what Bryant & Astin (2008) raised about students being “chronically
stuck” in a prolonged struggle (p. 23). This awareness of those Evangelical students who
are likely living with unresolved struggle and holding primarily negative feelings can
offer helpful insights for faculty and student development staff who then can have greater
opportunities to support these students.
Spiritual struggle is experienced intellectually. In terms of the forms of
knowing, most students began to realize the competing experiences and information they
were holding, but few attempted to or knew how to resolve that intellectual tension.
Thus, in concert with Clydesdale’s (2007) and Braskamp’s (2008) observations that
intellectual spiritual struggle is often experienced later in the undergraduate career, this
study witnessed few students who had worked through that struggle by that time to
achieve more intellectual maturity. This finding confirms what surprised Fisler et al.
(2009), namely, that undergraduates did not have their spiritual commitments worked
through by their senior year in college. Awareness of where Evangelical students
typically reside on intellectual spiritual struggle maturity may offer helpful insights into
what pedagogical and student development approaches can best serve students as they
experience this form of struggle.

154

Students’ Perspectives Affect How They View Spiritual Struggle Factors
The way Evangelical students perceived the factors affecting spiritual struggle
and the resources available to work through that struggle depended on the perspective
they held. By adopting Parks’ (2000) spiritual development framework to identify
students’ perceptions of their spiritual struggles, a continuum with two polar perspectives
emerged in this study, namely, a separating and an integrating perspective. Fisler et al.
(2009) observed that spiritual struggle resolution among the students they studied took
four forms: recommitting to an existing faith, slightly adjusting one’s spiritual or
religious values, blending spiritual traditions, or losing faith. The separating-integrating
continuum has certain similarities to Fisler et al.’s (2009) continuum of resolution in that
it recognizes that students are in-process as they renegotiate their core values and will not
necessarily find full resolution before they graduate.
Fisler et al.’s (2009) described categories, however, remain vague and lack
specificity for what “slightly adjusting,” “blending traditions” or “losing faith” really
mean. Further, while Fisler et al. (2012) offered descriptions of spiritual struggle and then
described the current state of their study’s participants, the study is unclear as to where
their diverse sample began spiritually or religiously or how their participants arrived at
their end positions. This current study attempted to describe students’ starting points (precollege) and understand their spiritual struggles as journeys that brought them eventually
to their current separating or integrating perspectives. This study highlights that those
students who come from the same religious tradition, even when they may still ascribe to
that religious viewpoint, may experience and work through their spiritual struggles quite
differently.

155

Students’ separating-integrating perspectives affect their views of college.
Evangelical undergraduates who demonstrated a separating perspective in this study did
not match the descriptions articulated by many researchers who suggest that
undergraduates want their colleges to help them integrate their spirituality with their
educational experience (Astin, 2004; Astin et al., 2010; Astin et al., 2003; Kazanjian &
Laurence, 2000; Lindholm, 2007; Tisdell, 2003). The students in this study did not
expect any support from their university other than their considering joining CRGs,
which they saw as part of the university. Those with a separating perspective matched
the findings of other studies, however, where students were less open to dialogue and
tended to separate from the rest of the college community (Bryant, 2006a; J. P. Hill,
2009; Magolda & Gross, 2009).
Similar to those Evangelical students who held a separating perspective, students
with an integrating perspective did not come to college with any specific expectations on
how their college would support them spiritually. However, they seemed to discover the
value of their university’s opportunities and resources unintentionally or accidentally.
Eventually, these students became aware that their campus had resources that could help
them integrate their spirituality with their educational experience. Thus, it does not
appear here that students with integrating perspectives unilaterally set out to find support
from faculty and staff as much as they discovered both as supportive through their
personal experiences at college.
The good news for higher education is that these students recognized the
challenge and support the university brought to them. What still remain as “blind spots”
and “hidden,” however, may be the proactive efforts of educators to anticipate or support

156

Evangelical undergraduates (Chickering et al., 2006; Collins & et al., 1987; Dalton &
Crosby, 2007; Rue, 1985). This point is important because the findings of this study
seem to suggest that students rarely know where or how to ask for support for their
spiritual development or how to work through their spiritual struggle.
Students’ separating-integrating perspectives affect their relationships with
Campus Religious Groups (CRGs). Bryant (2007) and Chickering & Reisser (1993)
highlighted the important role that (CRGs) and campus communities play in offering
social integration for students on campus. Chickering & Reisser (1993) offered that
groups that contribute to the development of students encourage interactions between
students, provide opportunities for collaboration, are small enough to make members feel
significant, include people from diverse backgrounds, and serve as a positive reference
point for students by maintaining boundaries and behaviors. For the students in this
study, CRGs served these functions, often providing safe, familiar places for them as they
sought relationships, especially during their freshmen year. Bryant (2007) noted that
those groups that are more homogeneous and insulated may distract students from
learning how to associate with others who are different from them. The findings from
this study confirm this point. Those students who held a separating perspective toward
campus, others, and their education were more likely to be involved with a CRG, while
those with an integrating perspective either never joined or left their CRGs.
What this study’s findings cannot answer is whether CRGs cause a separating
perspective in students or if students with a separating perspective simply seek out CRGs.
From the findings, however, it seems likely that because Evangelical students come to
college with a less mature spirituality; more often rely on advice from home to beware of

157

the hostile university and join a religious group and have immediate needs to connect
with peers similar to them, they seek out CRGs. Spiritually maturing students who begin
to hold a more integrating perspective no longer appear to need or even may reject CRGs.
Less spiritually maturing students appeared to stay with their CRGs who then reinforce
and reward those views associated with the separating perspective. This latter group
seems to describe students in the CRG studied by Magolda & Gross (2009) and raises
more general questions regarding CRGs as discussed below.
Additional Questions and Observations
As a result of this study, certain questions surrounding undergraduate spirituality
and spiritual struggle remain unanswered and are raised in detail in this section.
Can students change from a separating to an integrating perspective? The
findings here on students’ separating-integrating perspectives raises questions of whether
students can and do change from separating to integrating perspectives while at college.
While this study does not contain enough information to make a clear determination, I
speculate that the answer is “yes.” I believe this to be the case because the students from
this study had similar religious upbringings, were given similar advice, and had few
expectations that their university would support their spirituality. Over time, however,
those students who were able to acquire an integrating perspective did so by accessing
certain resources beyond their family and like-minded peers. For them, this new
perspective moved them from seeing the campus as hostile to seeing it as helpful.
Realization of these new resources gave students new options for solving the spiritual
struggles they encountered. Also, some students were able to explain the differences they
saw in themselves for how their perspectives regarding faith, “others,” and education had

158

changed through attending college. Thus, it appears that students can change their
perspectives, although the findings of this study also show that only 25% of the
participant sample did espouse an integrating perspective. This result raises questions as
to what can be done further on campus to help students grow toward this spiritually
maturing perspective.
What is the role of CRGs on campus? In this study sample, a large percentage
of students were aware of, tried, or attended CRGs, allowing me to gather a great deal of
information on the students’ experiences and perceptions of CRGs. It was striking that
when students’ separating-integrating perspectives were compared to their CRG
involvement, almost all the students who held a separating perspective attended CRGs,
while none of those espousing an integrating perspective attended them. This finding
raises a question as to the role of CRGs on campuses and how they are contributing to the
spiritual and holistic development of students. Magolda & Gross (2009) suggested that
higher education leaders must clarify the role of religion and faith on campus, forge
alliances with CRGs based on differences, challenge campus religious groups to expand
their worldviews, move beyond conformity, and encourage evangelical students to see
differences as positive opportunities for self-reflection and dialogue. While I agree with
Magolda & Gross (2009), this study also made me concerned that encouraging
Evangelical CRGs to forge alliances with groups different from them may be a
challenging task in that it seems to contradict the core mission of these CRGs. Further,
the hope that most Evangelical families hold that Evangelical CRGs will encourage and
support their children and also the hope that universities place in CRGs to help social
integration and retention, may hinder parents and universities from seeing how CRGs

159

hold students back in their spiritual development, especially with women. More work is
needed to explore how CRGs are both helpful and harmful to the spiritual and holistic
development of each student.
If the campus is “hostile,” why do Evangelical students attend public
universities? It is not surprising to hear that those from more conservative perspectives
(religious or political) describe colleges as being more liberal (Astin et al., 2010; Bryant
et al., 2003). I was surprised, however, by “the university is dangerous to your
spirituality” narrative that students’ consistently described being told before entering their
public university. I am curious about what informs this narrative and, if the public
university campus is perceived by Evangelical families as hostile toward their religious
beliefs, why these families send their children there. What value do Evangelicals see in
sending their children to public universities, and how does this value overcome the shared
concerns they have that the university culture is detrimental to their children’s spiritual
lives? Perhaps a positive bridge can be built that will help Evangelicals overcome their
strong perceptions of the public university as being hostile to their religion.
What is the relationship between spiritual struggle and a major of study?
Contrary to the previous research on students’ spiritual struggle and their choice of major,
no consistent theme emerged from this study’s findings on Evangelical students’
struggles and their majors (Astin & Astin, 2010; Bryant & Astin, 2008; Fisler et al.,
2009). I am unclear why I found no difference in students by major, as other studies have
highlighted that aspect. While 14 students were in professional/applied majors, their
academic concentrations varied. Only 2 students were in formal science majors, so I
speculate that Evangelicals in these particular majors may experience more struggle due

160

to the tensions that can be raised between religion and science. Further research that
focuses specifically on Evangelical students and their majors may prove helpful to
educators in this regard.
Further Considerations
In light of this study’s findings and the ongoing discussion, this section offers
specific considerations for public universities, faculty, CRGs, parents, and Evangelical
undergraduates to consider when understanding and supporting students as they express
and work through spiritual struggles at college.
Public University Considerations
When public universities consider what it means to support students through their
spiritual struggles, they must be aware that spiritual struggle has religious,
developmental, and unfinished elements. For Evangelical students, their religious
tradition often affects the way they view themselves on campus, the expectations they
have of a university, and the campus resources they choose to access. For universities
only to address students as “spiritual, but not religious” individuals fails to appreciate the
religious heritages that their students bring to campus and where some of their spiritual
struggle is actually rooted. Universities can support Evangelical students better by being
more aware of their religious tradition and the effects their tradition has on their spiritual
struggles. Developmentally, this study revealed the salience of students’ separating and
integrating perspectives and the impact these perspectives can have on how students
experience the factors affecting spiritual struggle and then access the available resources.
Universities can support Evangelical students by being more aware of the incomplete and
often negative feelings these students experience with spiritual struggle. This support can

161

include providing low-risk opportunities that help normalize the experiences this group
has, acknowledging the challenges they feel, and encouraging them to seek resources that
will help them work through their struggle successfully.
Faculty and Classroom Considerations
Providing on-campus support for students working through spiritual struggle may
not necessarily mean universities developing specific programs as much as it means
delivering better leveraging of the learning spaces already available on campus.
Research on learner-centered pedagogy has already identified the findings further
reported on in this study (Astin, 2004; English, Gillen, & Imel, 2000; Keeling & Dungy,
2004; Lindholm & Astin, 2008; Weimer, 2002). The encouraging aspect of this study is
that faculty need not be well-versed in religious or spiritual topics to support students
who are experiencing spiritual struggle. The efforts of faculty who are open to creating
space, both formally and informally, for their students to integrate their religious and
spiritual convictions with their education will likely suffice (Gappa, Austin, & Trice,
2007; Lindholm, 2007; Lindholm & Astin, 2008; Nash, 2001).
Evangelical students value those classroom environments that invite dialogue and
the sharing of their opinions. Faculty who were creative, inspirational and relevant, and
who encourage smaller group discussions, were most appreciated by the students who
participated in this study. They appreciated professors who noticed their religious
backgrounds and spiritual perspectives because they felt that these teachers wanted to
know a little bit more about them, especially through assignments, personal interactions,
and sensitivity to their religious involvement outside of class. Positive faculty support for
their spiritual struggle was seen in their professors’ abilities to teach well and be excited

162

about their courses, in their sensitivity to the religious backgrounds of all their students,
and in their ability to create a safe and open environment where their students could
wrestle with course topics and their spiritual perspectives freely and openly. Professors
who were dismissive, distant, and sarcastic about spirituality were treated with suspicion.
Offering class assignments to students to express their struggle and encouraging out-ofclass conversations (where students feel more comfortable and less risk) can be helpful
first steps.
CRG Considerations
Past events that have involved tensions between Evangelical CRGs and their
universities, such as occurred at Vanderbilt, the University of North Carolina, Harvard,
and the California University system are examples of the conflict felt between CRG
values and the values of the university campuses that host them (Paulson, 2014). This
study highlighted more subtle, but still consistent, tensions in this regard. Perhaps CRGs
should consider themselves as transitional groups that can help incoming freshmen
socially integrate and then provide off-ramps for better integration into university
resources and opportunities. Then these students can develop a more congruent existence
with their university. The challenge may be of course that this approach confronts certain
deeply held identities and purposes of some CRGs for actually being on campus.
Parent Considerations
This study’s findings highlighted the high degree of influence students perceive
their parents and religious figures have on their spiritual faithfulness. This study has also
noted that students’ approaches to spiritual faithfulness varied depending on the
separating or integrating perspectives they held. It is the opinion of this researcher that

163

students holding an integrating perspective were more able to integrate their spiritualty
with their education and experiences. Fowler (1980) and Parks (2000) have suggested
that one’s maturity within spiritual development is not about being more faithful but
more true or helpful with navigating the complexities one encounters in life. Still, there
can be faithfulness in students’ spiritualty no matter where students fall on the separatingintegrating continuum. This is important as, for some religious communities, faithfulness
means not diverging from religious beliefs, practices, and expectations. Some
participants indeed equated “faithfulness” with remaining true to their religious
teachings, practices, and behaviors. For parents and religious leaders who desire for their
children to uphold a separating perspective, it may behoove them to ensure that the CRGs
their children join are theologically consistent in supporting their religious beliefs and
practices. Alternately, other students, who held an integrating perspective, often
described “faithfulness” as diverging from the religious beliefs, practices, and actions of
their elders in order to integrate new ideas and experiences they had encountered at
college. Parents and religious leaders should not assume that these students are leaving
their religious tradition as much as reinterpreting it to remain faithful to their expanding
worldviews.
Regardless of the separating or integrating perspectives, students expressed their
concerns over sharing their spiritual struggles with their parents for fear of straining their
relationships with them. While the extent to which students diverge from their parents’
beliefs varies depending on their perspectives, most parents can help their children by
encouraging, trusting, and respecting them, as they work through spiritual struggle, and
by recognizing that their children’s spiritual paths, convictions, and expressions will

164

likely look different than their own. Parents who can appreciate this change as spiritual
growth, not unfaithfulness, will help their college children move through their spiritual
struggles and help them achieve a more integrated, self-authored faith that takes into
account the traditions from which they have come. This goal may mean that parents will
need to reconsider the advice they give their children before they head to college
regarding the campus climate and their children’s involvement in that climate.
Student Considerations
One of the goals of this study was to give voice to those Evangelical students who
have experienced spiritual struggle while attending a public university. I have been
humbled by the trust and transparency offered to me by these students, as they shared
their very personal and complex experiences. I thus offer the following considerations to
Evangelical students and their friends who share the same religious tradition, live in a
similar university setting, and have experienced similar spiritual struggles.
Struggle is normal. Many students were troubled that they struggled for fear of
being unfaithful, or they were worried that their struggles would cause tension with their
friends, family, and parents back home. Students must remember that spiritual struggle is
a necessary part of any spiritual growth and development. One cannot grow without
struggle, and these experiences that students have are likely true acts of faithfulness, not
unfaithfulness. When struggle is hard, students should be reminded that there is a
positive side of struggle where, once through it, they will not only find relief, but new
possibilities.
Students are not alone. Students admitted feeling alone as they navigated
through their struggles. At one level, spiritual struggle is a very personal experience to

165

address. At another level, however, students can be reminded that there are others who
struggle like they do, trying to make sense of their faith and purpose in life. While it can
often feel more natural for students to turn to peers or try to work out their struggle alone,
they need to be reminded that there are adults in their lives to whom they can turn for
support and that there are more resources on their campus than they may realize.
Part of working through spiritual struggle is seeking new resources. Some
students expressed feeling stuck in their spiritual struggles and not knowing how to
integrate new ideas or experiences with their religious teachings. Some students
suspended this tension by not addressing it or postponing the effort needed to work
through their struggle. In these moments, students can be encouraged to seek out and ask
people outside their regular relationships to help them work through the spiritual struggle
they are experiencing. A counselor, advisor, professor, religious leader from a different
church or organization, or a new classmate may give new, helpful insights. For
Evangelical students, branching out can sometimes be scary because many have been told
that the university is hostile toward their faith. However, this study revealed inspirational
stories of individuals on campus offering significant support and guidance to these
students.
Leave church, but find community. Evangelical students have been told that if
they are not involved in a CRG or a church, that they may become unfaithful. Students
from this study admitted feeling guilt over the choices they made to remain faithful by
not attending campus groups or churches that conflicted with their maturing faith.
Students need to understand that sometimes leaving a community is an act of faithfulness.

166

The challenge for students is to seek out other communities that encourage and support
the spirituality they want to nurture.
Find ways to reflect on your spirituality. During this project, students shared
very personal details about their lives, spirituality, and spiritual struggles. These students
said they appreciated our interview conversations, but also admitted that I was one of the
few, or even the only person, they had talked to about these things. Students should be
better supported by encouraging them to find adults with whom they can share their
spiritual journeys and who can make regularly scheduled time for them to reflect on their
spirituality while at college.
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
This study sought to better understand the Evangelical undergraduate experience
of spiritual struggle among students attending a public university. Previous literature has
called for more specific research on unique types of students with religious traditions.
This current study responded to this call. I offer the following limitations of this study
and recommendations for future research.
This study looked at a particular group of students to bring a more focused and
detailed approach toward studying undergraduate spiritual struggle. It was completed
with 20 students, and while there was salience in the responses of this participant group, a
larger sample may offer more insights and clarify the identified themes in greater detail.
With more time and resources, a longitudinal study that tracks undergraduates from their
freshman to their senior years may capture more of their unique struggles rather than only
having students reflecting back on their college experiences as this research effort did.

167

Students experience a unique context when they attend Research I public
universities. This study has chosen to focus on only one school, while recognizing the
uniqueness factors at each institution that affect and resource students’ development.
While context is affected by university type, the university at the center of this study
likely espoused a number of other factors. Since this university is a Midwest university
populated by many Midwest students, religious language and traditions might be more
familiar to the student population than schools on the east or west coasts. Further, the
fact that this study has been conducted in 2014 brings certain cultural factors that
distinguish this time period from previous decades. For instance, such factors include
higher educations’ growing sensitivity to factors associated with student learning and
development beyond the cognitive; the increasingly diverse student population that brings
varied cultural and religious views to campus; and the commitment universities have had
to developing students as global citizens which requires students to acquire new and
evolving competencies. Those students who come from particularly strong religious
backgrounds are faced with diverse ideas and new questions that often require creative
resources for support. Awareness of these factors can encourage researchers not only to
compare and contrast varied college types and locations for common and diverging
factors, but to also keep in mind the uniquely dynamic social and cultural elements in
which higher education institutions are situated. The goal, then, is not to find “the
answer” to students’ spirituality on campuses as much as it is to develop skilled attention
to the changing challenges students face, including those associated with their
spirituality.

168

One of the most significant findings of the study pertained to students’ separating
and integrating perspectives and the impact of these perspectives on students’
descriptions of the factors that influenced their struggle and the resources they accessed.
This finding raised an important question on which the researcher of this study could only
speculate. Given the distinct difference between students’ espousing separating and
integrating perspectives, did students change their perspectives at college, and if so, what
campus factors affected that change? Speculation on if and how that change occurred was
offered earlier, but more focused attention should be directed at understanding the
experiences and thinking that those students with integrating perspectives encountered
during their college experiences.
Given the positive and negative effects that CRGs had on Evangelical students
and their spiritual struggle, more research should be undertaken on the role and
relationship that CRGs have with universities. In this study, CRGs were grouped
together, although not all operated in the same way, had the same perspectives, or
cultivated the same environments. Other than my initial introductions to CRG leaders
who helped disseminate the study’s information to recruit students, I did not interview
them. All impressions of CRGs mentioned in this study came from the students.
Additional studies that explore one specific and nationally represented CRG across
multiple campuses and that include input from both students and leaders can provide
more specific findings and also more precise recommendations to these CRGs.
This study sought to explore one religious tradition, and therefore, it is limited in
its generalizability to other groups. Still, the study was able to capture some of the
distinct influences of religious tradition, parents, and home life on student perceptions of

169

college and spirituality. A closer exploration of the relationship between other religious
traditions and student spirituality on campus may also prove helpful in understanding all
students, their struggles, and how they perceive the university they attend. Future studies
on other Christian denominations or religious traditions that apply a similar methodology
may reveal shared similarities and also valuable differences in undergraduate spiritual
struggle and the influence that each religious tradition has on those perceptions.
The prevalence of a separating-integrating continuum that these students held and
how it affected their perceptions of their campus, spirituality, and education may be a
useful framework for understanding more about spiritual struggle, factors that affect that
struggle and resources sought out across other Christian denominations and even other
religious traditions. More studies using this framework to examine other religious
traditions can offer new ways for universities for understanding students from other
diverse religious backgrounds.
This study focused on students who drew from a religious tradition and language
that likely helped them articulate the spiritual struggles they experienced. Further
research might explore whether students who experience struggle must have language to
identify something as spiritual or to acknowledge that they are struggling spiritually. For
example, might some students, with no religious tradition upbringing, lack language to
express spiritual struggle? Or, might students who do not have religious backgrounds or
language actually not experience spiritual struggle, naming it as something more like
existential struggle?
This current study brought to the surface some unique aspects of spiritual struggle
descriptions pertaining to females and also some disturbing reports of sexual assault on

170

females. While some gender differences were noted, this study did not focus particularly
on gender similarities and differences as they pertain to student spiritual struggle. Given
some of the unique challenges that these Evangelical Christian undergraduate women
reported regarding their spiritual struggles, a closer exploration based on gender may
further reveal their unique spiritual struggle stories and as a result, new and valuable
insights.
While other studies have identified students’ majors of study as impacting
spiritual struggle, it is curious that this factor did not surface in this particular study.
More specific studies on undergraduate perceptions of spiritual struggle when studying a
specific major or a specific discipline may be worthy of exploration, since faculty posture
and pedagogy made a major impression on the students interviewed in this study.
Finally, a White, Christian, heterosexual, male planned and executed this study.
Previous discussion on methodology in Chapter 3 referenced and addressed my potential
biases and limitations. I am aware that my demographics may have affected the leaders I
chose, the leaders who were willing to meet with me, the students who chose to
participate, and even the information they revealed. Possibly a more diverse team of
researchers can produce a more diverse sample and potentially new or more nuanced
findings.
Concluding Remarks
Undergraduate student spiritual struggles on campus are common and indeed
necessary for personal spiritual development and holistic development that leads to
maturity, but these struggles are often unseen or misunderstood by many universities,
leading to a lack of support and even detrimental effects on the students who are

171

experiencing such struggle. The purpose of this study was to compile and understand
Evangelical undergraduates’ descriptions of their spiritual struggle experiences. The
findings of this current study revealed that Evangelical students’ religious tradition
affects their perceptions of their campus, spirituality, education, and spiritual struggle.
Most students described the factors affecting their struggle as on-campus factors, even
though they sought resources to work through that struggle using off-campus factors. A
closer look to consider the forms of that struggle and the spiritual development of these
students brought to light how their perceptions of spiritual struggle – the factors affecting
their struggle and the resources they accessed –differed based on either a separating or
integrating perspective. Students who held a separating perspective struggled with
preserving the faith they inherited and found support through Campus Religious Groups
(CRGs). Those who held an integrating perspective struggled with guilt from having
branched out from the traditional Evangelical expectations to find support through their
academics, different churches, and more diverse groups on campus. Most of the students
commented on how they appreciated their interviews, and that taking the time to reflect
upon and talk about their spiritual experiences during the course of the study was rare for
them. There is an ongoing need for more research to better inform universities of their
students’ spiritual lives. Then the university can be one of the supportive contexts where
students can spiritually mature and holistically prepare for both their education and
adulthood.

172

APPENDICES

173

APPENDIX A:
Researcher Identity Memo
I am a White male who comes from a family tradition that was economically
privileged, politically conservative, and religiously Evangelical Christian. While I
graduated from a public high school, I consciously remember my world expanding when
I attended a large, Midwest, public university. Here, my beliefs were abruptly challenged
as I encountered new friends, worldviews, and experiences that forced me to question
many of my prior assumptions. In my attempt to remain “faithful” to some of my
inherited beliefs, I joined and then quit para-church organizations on campus when I
found them unhelpful in my quest for a deeper, more inclusive spirituality. My own
experiences at college made me sympathetic to the spiritual journeys that undergraduates
intentionally and unintentionally take as they work to make greater sense of their lives.
My graduate studies were undertaken at a Midwest divinity school where I
learned Biblical languages, theology, and counseling, earning a Masters of Divinity
(MDiv). I found this experience intellectually satisfying, but also constraining, as I did
not believe that the professors were addressing the questions or challenges that younger
people were asking about life, faith, religion, or spirituality. Eventually I served as a
pastor at a large church, working with high school students. This work kept me
immersed in adolescent culture and eventually gave me numerous opportunities to train
others who were working in youth ministry. Later, my work at a non-profit training
organization and a Christian university gave me unique opportunities to teach and mentor
emerging adults. Currently, I oversee the spiritual formation of children and adolescents,
direct a residency program, and minister at a large church in the Midwest.

174

For over twenty years, I have worked with adolescents and emerging adults in
academic and religious settings as a pastor, instructor, mentor, and communicator. I
believe my background has served me well in this qualitative research study due to my
sense of comfort and long-time familiarity with both adolescents and emerging adults. At
the same time, I am aware that my experiences do not qualify me to know or understand
everything about a rapidly changing and increasingly diverse population. I believe my
religious training and experience allows me to talk comfortably about religious and
spiritual topics, a subject that many adults find difficult to discuss with young people
(Smith & Denton, 2005; Smith & Snell, 2009). I recognize also that while I am the most
familiar with certain forms of Christianity, I am not well versed in all forms of this or any
other religion. My interactions with varying denominations have taught me to seek
similarities while also appreciating the truth that differences that do exist in different
religious traditions.
I also recognize that my background contains spiritual and religious experiences
that have been in more privileged contexts. I have tried hard to bridge age, gender,
religious, and orientation gaps, seeking out partnerships and relationships to broaden my
own understanding. However, I find that my most critical biases are toward the tradition
and perspectives from which I have come. As I considered this study, I found I wrestled
with how I might present myself to the participants. I did not want to come across as a
presumed “pastor” as I thought that image might create an uncomfortable environment
for undergraduates, who might feel they were talking with a spiritual authority. Thus I
chose to address them as someone who also values faith and spirituality (I did not want

175

them to think I was someone who is anti-religious and only trying to trick them) and is
also extremely interested in hearing their different perspectives and experiences.
It was imperative for me to monitor how the participants were shaping my data
collection and interpretation (Merriam, 2009). More specifically, I used careful data
collection and interpretation and kept in mind what Merriam (2009) identified as
desirable competencies in qualitative research. These include the researcher having a
questioning stance that sought to understand why certain descriptions were offered by
participants, a high tolerance for ambiguity, a commitment to being a careful observer, an
interviewing approach that asked relevant questions, an inductive approach to data
analysis, and a comfort and skill with writing clearly to capture the data and its findings
effectively.

176

APPENDIX B:
Reflective Memo
A Reflective Memo was proposed by Maxwell (2012) to establish mutually
productive and equitable relationships throughout the entire interview process. What
follows are my responses to Maxwell’s (2012) Reflexive Memo Questions (pp. 102-103).
What kind of relationships have you established or do you plan to establish,
with the people whom you are studying? What consequences do you think these will
have for your study? What alternative kids of relationships could you create, and
what advantages and disadvantages would these have? I established a more formal
and structured relationship with my participants. I invited them to participate in my study
as interviewees with me as the interviewer. Other than an initial correspondence, there
was little previous relationship established between the participants and me. By
conducting a second interview with the same participants, I established more familiarity,
rapport, and trust with them. The consequences of this relationship ran the risk that
interactions would feel more formal and potentially somewhat guarded at first. Because
there was little relational history, there was also a unique possibility for participants to
share their thoughts openly, as there was little relational risk for them. Advantages of a
study of longer duration likely would bring a greater context to understanding participant
responses and greater openness, as they may learn to trust me even more. Disadvantages
might be that they would get to know me too well and that relationship could influence
the way they responded to my questions. For this study, I therefore took a more shortterm, “observer-participant” approach that sought close interaction with the individuals to

177

establish an insider’s identity without participating in any of the undergraduates’ other
activities (Merriam, 2009).
How do you think the people you interact with in your research will perceive
you? How will this affect your relationships with these people? What could you do
to better understand this perception and to correct possible misperceptions? I
planned to present myself as a researcher who was very interested in this topic and who
shared an appreciation for the faith perspectives of all the participants. I felt that some
self-disclosure about my own faith might help students know that I am sympathetic to
their religious and spiritual backgrounds, perspectives, and struggles. I hoped this
disclosure would establish further rapport and help them speak freely with me. I did not
share with them the fact that I was a pastor, as I was concerned that this revelation might
create an unnecessary power differential and potentially skew their responses because I
would be viewed as a religious authority figure expecting specific responses.
What explicit agreements do you plan to negotiate about how the research
will be conducted and how you will report the results, both to the people you are
working with and to others? What implicit understandings about these issues do you
think these people (and you) will have? How will both the implicit and explicit terms
of the study affect your research? Do any of these need to be discussed or changed?
Explicitly, I offered each participant a version of my “Lay Summary” that explained who
I was, what I was doing doing, and what role desired the participant to play in the
research project (Glesne, 2006). Explicitly, I expected to communicate to the participants
my desire to understand and accurately capture their personal and philosophical
perceptions. As I personally reflected on this process, I had certain implicit expectations

178

for creating the needed conversational space that produces exactly what I was asking of
these students, namely, that I provided a supportive environment for the students to talk
about their spirituality and their spiritual struggles as undergraduates. From the
perspectives of the participants, some of the previous research made me suspect that
opening up on the topic of spirituality to undergraduates was rare and yet, desired and
wanted by them. I wondered if these students might not only share their experiences, but
also seek my advice as I postured myself as a sensitive and sympathetic ear. It was
important for me, therefore, to respect the boundaries of these research relationships and
not default to the role of pastor or mentor instead.
What ethical issues or problems do these considerations raise? How do you
plan to deal with these? What was crucial for me was to remain in the role of researcher
and not gravitate to one of pastor/mentor. I believe my knowledge of Christian
spirituality helped me ask viable and precise questions and cultivate a good working
dialogue. My challenge was to seek to understand the participants’ perspectives and not
default to encouraging, correcting, or dismissing their thoughts, feelings, and
impressions. I dealt with this issue by establishing a clear Lay Summary and journaling
my own self-reflections after each interview to assist me in undertaking the next
interview.

179

APPENDIX C:
Lay Summary
A Lay Summary explains who the researcher is, what the researcher is doing, and
what role the participant plays in a study. What follows is the Lay Summary that I used
to frame what I explained to each participant, while also going through the IRB Consent
Form.
Lay Summary. You are being invited to participate in a research study to learn
about undergraduate spirituality, particularly the perspectives of undergraduate students,
namely, how their higher education institutions support or impede their experiences with
that spiritual struggle. This research is being done as part of my program as a doctoral
student at Michigan State University.
I am asking you to participate because a friend, mentor, pastor, or leader who
considers you as someone who values spirituality during your college career has
recommended you to me. Further, you have indicated through our voice or email
interactions that you have indeed experienced spiritual change while at college. I believe
your descriptions and perceptions will clearly help me better understand what supports or
impedes the experiences of other undergraduates who may also be addressing their
spiritual struggle or change. The benefits to you of doing this study are several. This
interview might give you a further positive opportunity to reflect on your own
experiences, and further, you may enjoy sharing your ideas, as doing so may help others’
entering college in the future. Your participation in this study will help others better
understand the spiritual struggles of undergraduates and help provide the support that
undergraduates truly value. There is, however, a risk. In talking about your spirituality

180

or spiritual journey, you may find that sometimes deeply held feelings will appear that
can be either upsetting or challenging for you.
While you have been recommended to me for this study, I will be the only person
who knows that you are participating. Anytime I use information you give me, I will
always identify you with a fake name that is a pseudonym. When I interview you, I
would like your permission to audio-record our interviews and take occasional notes.
Beyond professional transcribers and my dissertation advisors, I will be the only one who
possesses, listens to, or accesses these recordings. When I am not using them, I will keep
them stored in a locked cabinet and also password protected on my computer. After I am
finished with this study, I am required to store the data for three years, and then I will
destroy all the data. Your participation in this study will involve two interview sessions
of 60-90 minutes in length. For the first interview, I will give you a $15 Amazon gift
card and for the second interview, a $25 Amazon gift card as my appreciation for the
time you have invested in this important research.
The most important detail to remember while you are participating in this study
with me is that there are no right or wrong answers to the questions I will ask you. I am
extremely interested in your experiences and perceptions. If I ask you to tell me more or
to explain further what you mean, it is because I really want to understand what you are
saying and fully capture your perceptions as accurately as possible. Also know that you
can decide not to participate in this study or stop doing your participation at any time
even after you have started the study.

181

APPENDIX D:
Interview Protocol
I used the following interview protocol to frame my semi-structured interviews.
First Interview
x. “Getting to know you,” Questions
I will use the beginning of each interview to get to know the participant, asking her/him
about their semester, major, interests, aspirations, etc. I will also ask them about their
hometown, family, and general religious background. These questions will be asked in a
conversational posture with the goal of getting a general sense of who the participant is
and where he or she is coming from.
I will then transition to the purpose of our interview, reminding the participant that the
reason I’m eager to speak with them is that they may have a story of spiritual shift/change
that will be helpful toward understanding other students like themselves that come to
college.
1. Can you tell me about a time when your religious/spiritual beliefs shifted or changed
since you have been in college?
a. What happened?
b. Prompts (if needed): Can you offer a few examples?
Did you shift your thinking about God, science, other religions, or evil in the
world, etc.?
2. What brought on this/these experience(s) for you?
a. Prompt for college-related events/instances (e.g. classroom topic, peer
interaction, challenging event, etc.).
b. Student may offer non-college-related events/instances (family-related,
personal crisis, world event, etc.). Listen, but also explore further for collegerelated events.
3. What was it like working through it? What was the outcome of that experience
(resolved/not resolved? Positive/negative experiences?)
Prompts:
a. If college-related I will ask questions about the type of support they perceived
they were receiving (Who/what helped? Professors, advisors, friends, mentors,
campus group, etc.?).
b. If college-related factors do not come up, I will ask “Did you find
help/support from people, resources, or groups at college?
c. If non-college-related, I will note this detail, but I will not pursue it.
4. How did this experience affect other areas/parts of your life? (How has this
experience affected your overall college experience?)
182

Prompts:
a. Friendships/relationships (past and present)?
b. Academic Major/Career goals?
c. Interests/involvement in groups, causes, and events?
d. Beliefs (e.g. spiritual, political, social)?
e. Religious practices/involvement (personal practices, religious participation)?
xx. Wrapping up the interview
a. I will ask the participant if they have anything else they would like to share or
tell me.
b. If the participant offers information during the interview that contributes to
the research questions, I will thank them for their input and invite them for a
follow-up interview with me. I will try to schedule the follow-up interview
immediately, confirming through email.
c. If the participant’s responses do not fit the scope of the research questions, I
will thank them for their input and wrap up the conversation, but with no
invitation for a follow-up interview.
Follow-up/Second Interview
Follow up interviews will occur, likely within one month of the initial interviews. The
purpose of these interviews will be to clarify statements or ideas offered in the first
interview and pursue clarifying questions that may emerge from the first round of
interviews. The final question asked will be: “What was this interview experience like
for you?”

183

APPENDIX E:
Student Descriptions of Their Personal Purposes within the Separating-Integrating
Continuum
Separating Perspective
(10 students)

In-Between
(5 students)

Integrating Perspective
(5 students)

Aaron- God is helping him get his
medical degree so that he can use
his gifts and skills in missions.

James- Grad school, mathematics
and academics are an expression
of his atheism.

Andy- School is about reaching
others. Desires to get a job in
computer science and evangelize

Joseph- Desires to be a high
school teacher to make the world
a better place.

Brenda- Teaching
underprivileged kids, so
university is preparing her for
that, and she’s already doing it.
Her future doesn’t feel so “far
off” because she’s actually living
her future now.

Cassandra- Learning Chinese to
work in an orphanage in China.
Wants a degree to care for people
and care for her family.

Karen- Unsure, but may want to
teach oversees. Doesn't see
“getting an education” as very
spiritual, but necessary.

Colleen- Evangelize at school;
Become a teacher to evangelize.

Mitch- Pursuing engineering. At
school to evangelize, and also to
be faithful as both an RA and a
Christian.

Jenny- Wants to get married,
work with others who have been
through abortions like her.
John- Wants to be an evangelist
in school and go into medical
missions.
Mara- Goal is to work in a
Christian adoption agency or with
refugees; college helped her
discover God’s will.

Therese- Desires to be a
veterinarian, and it comes out of
her love for animals and
desire/calling to care for them.
Wants to be a positive influence
in her world, now and in the
future.

Simon- Pursuing nutrition to help
others like him who needed help
getting more healthy.
Trevor- Has not connected his
education with his spirituality and
sees them as oppositional; future
is about going on to grad school
though he is vague as to why.
Trisha- Was clear about her
major, but unclear about her
future career.

184

Jodi- At school, she seeks the
integration of spirituality,
relationships, and education.
Hopes to express this view in her
social work career.
Matt- Seeks integration of
religious studies and psychology
and is searching for a grad
program that values both.
Mike- Pursuing teaching to
eventually become a pastor who
integrates education and
theology.
Tom- Inspired by his courses,
wants to go on to grad school,
international politics, fight to stop
global warming- a political and
spiritual conviction for him.

REFERENCES

185

REFERENCES

Åkerlind, G. S. (2008). A phenomenographic approach to developing academics’
understanding of the nature of teaching and learning. Teaching in Higher
Education, 13(6), 633-644.
Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through
the twenties: Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Arnett, J. J., & Jensen, L. A. (2002). A Congregation of one: Individualized religious
beliefs among emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17(5), 451-467.
Arnett, J. J., Kloep, M., Hendry, L. B., & Tanner, J. L. (2011). Debating Emerging
Adulthood. New York: Oxford University Press.
Astin, A. (2004). Why spirituality deserves a central place in liberal education. Liberal
Education, 90 n2 p34-41(2), 34-41.
Astin, A., & Astin, H. (2003). Spirituality in College Students: Preliminary Findings from
a National Study. Los Angeles, CA Higher Education Research Inst., Inc.
Astin, A., & Astin, H. (2010). Exploring and nurturing the spiritual life of college
students. Journal of College & Character, 11(3).
Astin, A., Astin, H., & Lindholm, J. (2010). Cultivating the spirit: How college can
enhance students' inner lives (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Astin, A., Astin, H., & Lindholm, J. (2011). Assessing Students' Spiritual and Religious
Qualities. Journal of College Student Development, 52(1), 39-61.
Astin, A., Astin, H., Lindholm, J., Bryant, A., Calderone, S., & Szelenyi, K. (2003). The
spiritual life of college students: A national study of college students' search for
meaning and purpose. Los Angeles: UCLA Higher Education Research Institute.
Barry, C. M., & Nelson, L. J. (2005). The role of religion in the transition to adulthood
for young emerging adults. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(3), 245-255.
Baxter Magolda, M. (2000). Teaching to promote holistic learning and development. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning(82), 88-98.
Baxter Magolda, M., & King, P. M. (2004). Learning partnerships: Theory and models of
practice to educate for self-authorship (1st ed.). Sterling, Va.: Stylus Pub.

186

Booth, S. (1997). On Phenomenography, learning and teaching. Higher Education
Research & Development, 16(2), 135-158.
Braskamp, L., Trautvetter, L. C., & Ward, K. (2006). Putting students first: How colleges
develop students purposefully. Bolton, Mass: Anker Pub. Co.
Bryant, A. (2006a). Assessing the gender climate of an evangelical student subculture in
the United States. Gender and Education, 18(6), 613 - 634.
Bryant, A. (2006b). Exploring religious pluralism in higher education: Non-majority
religious perspectives among entering first-year college students. Religion &
Education, 33(1).
Bryant, A. (2007). The effects of involvement in campus religious communities on
college student adjustment and development. Journal of College & Character,
VIII(3), 1-25.
Bryant, A., & Astin, H. (2008). The correlates of spiritual struggle during the college
years. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(1), 1-27.
Bryant, A., Choi, J. Y., & Yasuno, M. (2003). Understanding the religious and spiritual
dimensions of students' lives in the first year of college. Journal of College
Student Development, 44(6), 723-745.
Capeheart-Meningall, J. (2005). Role of spirituality and spiritual development in student
life outside the classroom. New Directions for Teaching and Learning(104), 3136.
Cherry, C., DeBerg, B. A., & Porterfield, A. (2001). Religion on campus. Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press.
Chickering, A. W., Dalton, J. C., & Stamm, L. (2006). Encouraging authenticity and
spirituality in higher education (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Clark, R. T. (2001). The law and spirituality: How the law supports and limits expression
of spirituality on the college campus. In M. A. Jablonski (Ed.), The implications
of student spirituality for student affairs practice (pp. 37-46). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Clydesdale, T. T. (2007). The first year out: Understanding American teens after high
school. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Colby, A. (2003). Educating citizens: Preparing America's undergraduates for lives of
moral and civic responsibility (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

187

Collins, J. R., & et al. (1987). The blind spot extended: Spirituality. Journal of College
Student Personnel, 28(3), 274-276.
Cranton, P., & Roy, M. (2003). When the bottom falls out of the bucket. Journal of
Transformative Education, 1(2), 86-98.
Creswell, J. W. (2002). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dalton, J. C., & Crosby, P. C. (2007). The hidden world of college students: Five reasons
we know less about students than we should. Journal of College & Character,
8(2), 1-5.
Dirkx, J. M. (1997). Nurturing soul in adult learning. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 1997(74), 79-88.
Dirkx, J. M., Mezirow, J., & Cranton, P. (2006). Musings and reflections on the meaning,
context, and process of Transformative Learning: A dialogue between John M.
Dirkx and Jack Mezirow. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(2), 123-139.
doi: 10.1177/1541344606287503
Eck, D. L. (1993). Encountering God: A spiritual journey from Bozeman to Banaras.
Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press.
Elkins, D. N., Hedstrom, L. J., Hughes, L. L., Leaf, J. A., & Saunders, C. (1988). Toward
a humanistic-phenomenological spirituality. Journal of Humanistic Psychology,
28(4), 5-18.
English, L. M. (2000). Spiritual dimensions of informal learning. New Directions for
Adult and Continuing Education, 85, 29-38.
English, L. M., Gillen, M. A., & Imel, S. (2000). Addressing the spiritual dimensions of
adult learning: What educators can do. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Entwistle, N. (1997). Introduction: Phenomenography in higher education. Higher
Education Research & Development, 16(2), 127-134.
Fisler, J., Agati, H. A., Chance, S. M., Donahue, A. E., Donahue, G. A., Eickhoff, E.
J., . . . Foubert, J. D. (2009). Keeping (or losing) the faith: Reflections on spiritual
struggles and their resolution by college seniors. College Student Affairs Journal,
27(2), 257-274.
Fowler, J. W. (1981). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the
quest for meaning (1st ed.). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

188

Fowler, J. W. (1984). Becoming adult, becoming Christian: Adult development and
Christian faith (1st ed.). San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Fowler, J. W. (1995). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the
quest for meaning. [San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco.
Fowler, J. W., Keen, S., & Berryman, J. (1978). Life maps: Conversations on the journey
of faith. Waco, Tex.: Word Books.
Fowler, J. W., & Loder, J. E. (1982). Conversations on "Stages of Faith" and "The
Transforming Moment". Religious Education, 77(2), 133-149.
Freitas, D. (2008). Sex and the soul: Juggling sexuality, spirituality, romance, and
religion on America's college campuses. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University
Press.
Gappa, J., Austin, A., & Trice, A. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher education's
strategic imperative. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York,: Basic Books.
Geiger, R. L. (2005). The ten generations of American higher education In P. G. Altbach,
R. O. Berdahl & P. J. Gumport (Eds.), American higher education in the twentyfirst century: Social, political, and economic challenges (2nd ed., pp. 38-70).
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (3rd ed.). Boston:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Gotz, I. L. (1997). On spirituality and teaching. In S. Laird (Ed.), Philosophy of
Education Society Yearbook. Champaign-Urbana, IL: Philosophy of Education
Society.
Hamilton, D. M., & Jackson, M. H. (1998). Spiritual development: Paths and processes.
Journal of Instructional Psychology, 25 (4), 262-270.
Haynes, C. (2006). The integrated student: Fostering holistic development to advance
learning. About Campus, 10 n6 (6), 17-23.
Hill, J. P. (2009). Higher Education as moral community: Institutional influences on
religious participation during college. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,
48(3), 515-534.
Hill, P. C., Pargament, K., II, Hood, R. W., McCullough, J. M. E., Swyers, J. P., Larson,
D. B., & Zinnbauer, B. J. (2000). Conceptualizing religion and spirituality: Points

189

of commonality, points of departure. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour,
30(1), 51-77.
Hill, P. C., & Pargament, K. I. (2003). Advances in the conceptualization and
measurement of religion and spirituality: Implications for physical and mental
health research. American Psychologist, 58(1), 64-74.
Holcomb, G. L., & Nonneman, A. J. (2004). Faithful change: Exploring and assessing
faith development in Christian liberal arts undergraduates. New Directions for
Institutional Research, 2004(122), 93-103. doi: 10.1002/ir.112
Inayatullah, S., & Gidley, J. (2000). The university in transformation: Global
perspectives on the futures of the university. Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey.
Jablonski, M. A., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., Love, P. G., Dalton, J. C., Manning, K., . . .
Williams, S. (2001). The implications of student spirituality for student affairs
practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jacobsen, D. G., & Jacobson, R. H. (2008). Postsecular America: A new context for
higher education. In D. G. Jacobsen & R. H. Jacobsen (Eds.), The American
university in a postsecular age (pp. 167-185). Oxford; New York: Oxford
University Press.
Johnson, T., Sheets, V., & Kristeller, J. (2008). Empirical identification of dimensions of
religiousness and spirituality. Mental Health, Religion &; Culture, 11(8), 745767.
Kass, J. D., Friedman, R., Leserman, J., Zuttermeister, P. C., & Benson, H. (1991).
Health outcomes and a new index of spiritual experience. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 30(2), 203-211.
Kazanjian, V. H., & Laurence, P. L. (2000). Education as transformation: Religious
pluralism, spirituality, and a new vision for higher education in America. New
York: P. Lang.
Keeling, R. P., & Dungy, G. J. (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on
the student experience. Washington, D.C: ACPA : NASPA.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Lee, J. J. (2002). Religion and college attendance: Change among students. The Review of
Higher Education, 25(4), 369-384.
Lindholm, J. (2007). Spirituality in the academy: Reintegrating our lives and the lives of
our students. About Campus, 12(4), 10-17.

190

Lindholm, J., & Astin, H. (2008). Spirituality and pedagogy: Faculty's spirituality and use
of student-centered approaches to undergraduate teaching. Review of Higher
Education, 31(2), 185-207.
Loder, J. E. (1989). The transforming moment. Colorado Springs: Helmers & Howard.
Loder, J. E. (1998). The logic of the spirit: Human development in theological
perspective: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Love, P. G. (2001). Spirituality and student development: Theoretical connections. In M.
A. Jablonski (Ed.), The implications of student spirituality for student affairs
practice (pp. 7-16). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Love, P. G., & Talbot, D. M. (1999). Defining spiritual development: A missing
consideration for student affairs. NASPA Journal, 375(1), 361-375.
Lugo, L., Stencel, S., Green, J., Smith, G., Cox, D., Pond, A., . . . Ralston, M. (2008).
Religious affiliation: Diverse and dynamic U.S. Religious Landscape Survey: The
Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
Magolda, P. M., & Gross, K. E. (2009). It's all about Jesus!: Faith as an oppositional
collegiate subculture (1st ed.). Sterling, Va.: Stylus.
Manning, K. (2001). Infusing soul into student affairs: Organizational theory and models.
In M. A. Jablonski (Ed.), The implications of student spirituality for student
affairs practice (pp. 27-35). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography — Describing conceptions of the world around us.
Instructional Science, 10(2), 177-200.
Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different
understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21(3), 28-48.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A realist approach for qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Los Angeles: Sage.
Mayrl, D., & Oeur, F. (2009). Religion and higher education: Current knowledge and
directions for future research. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48(2),
260-275.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

191

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in
progress (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, V. W., & Ryan, M. M. (2001). Transforming campus life: Reflections on
spirituality and religious pluralism. New York: P. Lang.
Murphy, C. (2005). The academy, spirituality, and the search for truth. In S. L. Hoppe &
B. W. Speck (Eds.), Spirituality in higher education (pp. 23-29). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Nash, R. J. (1999). Faith, hype, and clarity: Teaching about religion in American schools
and colleges. New York: Teachers College Press.
Nash, R. J. (2001). Religious pluralism in the academy: Opening the dialogue. New
York: P. Lang.
Palmer, P. J. (1998). Evoking the spirit in public education. Educational Leadership,
56(4), 6.
Palmer, P. J., Zajonc, A., & Scribner, M. (2010). The heart of higher education: A call to
renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pargament, K. I., Murray-Swank, N., Magyar, G. M., & Ano, G. (2005). Spiritual
struggle: A Phenomenon of interest to psychology and religion. In W. R. Miller &
H. D. Delaney (Eds.), Judeo-Christian perspectives on psychology: Human
nature, motivation, and change (pp. 245-268): American Psychological
Association.
Parks, S. D. (1991). The critical years: Young adults and the search for meaning, faith,
and commitment. [San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco.
Parks, S. D. (2000). Big questions, worthy dreams: Mentoring young adults in their
search for meaning, purpose, and faith (1st ed.). San Francisco, Calif.: JosseyBass.
Patel, E. (2007). Acts of faith: The story of an American Muslim, the struggle for the soul
of a generation. Boston: Beacon Press.
Paulson, M. (2014). Colleges and Evangelicals collide on bias policy. New York Times.
Putnam, R., & Campbell, D. (2010). American Grace: How religion divides and unites
us. New York: Simon and Schuster.

192

Raper, J. (2001). "Losing our religion": Are students struggling in silence? In V. W.
Miller & M. M. Ryan (Eds.), Transforming campus life: Reflections on
spirituality and religious pluralism (pp. 13-32). New York: P. Lang.
Richardson, J. T. E. (1999). The concepts and methods of phenomenographic research.
Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 53-82.
Rockenbach, A. B., Walker, C. R., & Luzader, J. (2012). A Phenomenological Analysis
of College Students' Spiritual Struggles. Journal of College Student Development,
53(1), 55-75.
Rogers, J. L., & Love, P. G. (2007). Exploring the role of spirituality in the preparation of
student affairs professionals: Faculty constructions. Journal of College Student
Development, 48(1), 90-104.
Rue, L. D. (1985). Our most outrageous blind spot: The academic study of religion. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, 40.
Small, J. L. (2009). Faith dialogues foster identity development. About Campus, 13(6),
12-18.
Smith, C. (1998). American evangelicalism: Embattled and thriving: University of
Chicago Press.
Smith, C. (2010). What is a person? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, C., & Denton, M. L. (2005). Soul searching: The religious and spiritual lives of
American teenagers: Oxford University Press.
Smith, C., & Snell, P. (2009). Souls in transition: The religious and spiritual lives of
emerging adults. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.
Speck, B. W. (2005). What Is Spirituality? New Directions for Teaching and
Learning(104), 3-13.
Stewart, D. L. (2005). The role of faith in the development of an integrated identity: A
qualitative study of black students at a white college. In M. E. Wilson & L. E.
Wolf-Wendel (Eds.), ASHE Reader on college student development theory (pp.
163-176). Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing (Reprinted from Journal of College
Student Development 43, (1993), American College Personnel Association).
Svensson, L. (1997). Theoretical foundations of phenomenography. Higher Education
Research & Development, 16(2), 159-171.

193

Temkin, L., & Evans, N. J. (1998). Religion on campus: Suggestions for cooperation
between student affairs and campus-based religious organizations. NASPA
Journal, 36(1), 61-69.
Thelin, J. R. (2004). A history of American higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Tisdell, E. J. (2001). Spirituality in adult and higher education. ERIC Digest., ERIC
Clearinghouse on Adult Career and Vocational Education.
Tisdell, E. J. (2003). Exploring spirituality and culture in adult and higher education (1st
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Uecker, J. E., Regnerus, M., & Vaaler, M. L. (2007). Losing my religion: The social
sources of religious decline in early adulthood. Social Forces, 85(4), 1667-1692.
Vella, J. (2000). A spirited epistemology: Honoring the adult learner as subject. In L. M.
English, M. A. Gillen & S. Imel (Eds.), Addressing the spiritual dimensions of
adult learning: What educators can do (pp. 1-6). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice (1st ed.).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Welch, R. D., & Mellberg, K. (2008). Spiritual Maturation and Religious Behaviors in
Christian University Students. Christian Higher Education, 7(12), 142-161.
Wilber, K. (1996). A brief history of everything (1st ed.). Boston: Shambhala.
Wuthnow, R. (2005). America and the challenges of religious diversity. Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press.
Zinnbauer, B. J., & Pargament, K. I. (1998). Spiritual conversion: A study of religious
change among college students. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37(1),
161-180.

194