Content uploaded by Susana Munoz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Susana Munoz on Sep 29, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
NOTICE
Warning Concerning Copyright Restrictions
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States
Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of
copyrighted material.
Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and
archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction.
One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or
reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private
study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later
uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair
use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement.
This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying
order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve
violation of copyright law.
SCANNED DOCUMENT
IS BEST COPY AVAILABLE
12 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
12 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical
Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
Laura I. Rendón Linares
University of Texas at San Antonio
Susana M. Muñoz
University of Wisconsin−Milwaukee
Abstract
Laura I. Rendón (1994) introduced validation theory with particular applicability to low-
income, rst-generation students enrolled in higher education. Validation theory was oered
as a new way to theorize how these students might nd success in college, especially those who
found it dicult to get involved, had been invalidated in the past, or had doubts about their
ability to succeed. is article gives special attention to: 1) how the theory was developed,
including the theoretical foundations of the theory; 2) how the theory has been employed
as the foundation to frame studies, discuss student success, improve pedagogy, foster student
development, and frame institutional strategies; 3) which theoretical perspectives overlap with
validation theory; 4) epistemological and ontological assumptions in validation theory; and
5) future directions that could enhance the theory, as well as advance the future research and
practice of validation.
Introduction
Introduced by Laura I. Rendón in 1994, validation theory slowly yet
signicantly found an audience of scholars and practitioners who sought a
theory that could speak to the issues and backgrounds of low-income, rst-
generation students (the rst in the family to attend college), as well as adult
students returning to college after being away for some time. As originally
conceived, validation refers to the intentional, proactive armation of students
by in- and out-of-class agents (i.e., faculty, student, and academic aairs sta,
family members, peers) in order to: 1) validate students as creators of knowledge
and as valuable members of the college learning community and 2) foster
personal development and social adjustment.
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 13
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
Often, students labeled as “nontraditional” attend aordable community
colleges and Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) such as Historically Black
Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions, as opposed to
elite, expensive, research-extensive universities. “Traditional” students are those
whose families have a history of college attendance, come from middle- and
upper-class families, and typically feel condent about attending college.
Conversations and expectations about college attendance are generally part of
family life. Conversely, for nontraditional students the decision to attend college
is typically not automatic or expected. Students struggle weighing the costs and
benets of attending college versus working full time to help supplement the
family income. Some students question if they are “college material,” which
often stems from past invalidation in their prior schooling experiences. Many
of these students hail from communities where college graduates are scarce.
Consequently, they have few role models and friends in their communities
who can help them navigate the college-going process (i.e., lling out college
admissions and nancial aid applications, taking college entrance exams,
selecting appropriate programs). While college involvement is a desired activity
for these students, they are often unaware of the availability of opportunities and
resources because they do not know what questions to ask. For nontraditional
students, institutional validation can be the key to attaining success in college
(Rendón, 1994, 2000; Solorzano & Yosso, 2000).
e Development of Validation eory
In the early 1990s, the U.S. Department of Education funded the National
Center for Postsecondary Teaching, Learning and Assessment, which was
headquartered at Pennsylvania State University. A key research strand dealt with
the transition to college and involved well-known researchers and student aairs
leaders such as Patrick Terenzini, Lee Upcraft, Susan B. Millar, Romero Jalomo
(then a doctoral student at Arizona State University), Kevin Allison, Patti Gregg,
and Laura I. Rendón. ese scholars were primarily interested in assessing the
inuences of students’ out-of-class experiences on learning and retention. To
do so, they designed and conducted a qualitative study involving focus group
interviews. A total of 132 rst-year students were interviewed. Sites included a
predominantly minority community college in the Southwest, a predominantly
White, residential, liberal arts college in a middle Atlantic state, a predominantly
14 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
Black, urban, commuter, comprehensive state university in the Midwest, and a
large, predominantly White, residential research university in a middle Atlantic
state (Rendón, 1994).
Researchers worked with an institutional contact person who recruited the
students to participate in the focus group interviews. Students who volunteered
to be interviewed were paid $10 for participating in focus groups lasting between
1–1.5 hours. e sample yield included a diverse student body in terms of gender,
race/ethnicity, and residency (residential and commuting students). e original
transition to college study was framed using Astin’s (1985) theory of student
involvement and Pascarella and Terenzini’s (1991) review of 20 years of research
on the eects of college on students. An open-ended interview protocol was
designed. Questions dealt with issues such as how students made decisions to
attend college, their expectations for and the reality of college, signicant people
and events in their transition, selected characteristics of the transition, and the
general eects of college on students (Rendón, 1994).
Once interviews had been transcribed, the research team held telephone
conference calls to analyze what students were saying about their rst-year
experience in college. Initially, the researchers were looking for emergent themes
related to college student involvement, given that the scholars were employing
Astin’s (1985) theory of involvement as the study’s framework. As the study
progressed, two revelations became apparent: 1) there were stark dierences
in the way low-income and auent, “traditional” students experienced the
transition to college, and 2) at some point, low-income students suddenly began
to believe in themselves not so much because of their college involvement, but
because some person(s), in- or outside-of-college took the initiative to reach out
to them to arm their innate capacity to learn.
For example, when students were asked when they knew they could be
successful, they did not typically cite instances of getting involved in college.
Rather, they spoke, often with excitement and awe, about the reassurance and
validation they received from individuals they encountered in college (i.e.,
faculty, peers, counselors, advisers, and/or coaches) and the outside-of-college
personal world of family and friends (sisters, brothers, partners, spouses,
children, grandparents, uncles, aunts). For many students, this was the rst time
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 15
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
someone had expressed care and concern and the rst time someone made them
feel that their prior life experiences and knowledge were valuable. For example,
validating experiences included instances such as when:
• Facultytookthetimetolearntheirnamesandrefertothembyname.
• Facultygavestudentsopportunitiestowitnessthemselvesas
successful learners.
• Facultyensuredthatthecurriculumreectedstudentbackgrounds.
• Facultysharedknowledgewithstudentsandbecamepartnersinlearning.
• Facultytoldstudents,“Youcandothis,andIamgoingtohelpyou.”
• Coachestookthetimetohelpstudentsselectcoursesandplantheirfutures.
• Parents,spouses,andchildrensupportedstudentsintheirquesttoearna
college degree.
• Facultyencouragedstudentstosupporteachother(i.e.,formfriendships,
develop peer networks, share assignments, provide positive reinforcement).
• Facultyandstaservedasmentorsforstudentsandmadeaneortto
meet with them outside of class such as in patio areas, in cafeterias, and/
or in the library.
Reecting carefully on what students were saying about what was most meaningful
to them as they navigated the transition to college, the term “validation” seemed to
make the most sense. e impact of validation on students who have experienced
powerlessness, doubts about their own ability to succeed, and/or lack of care
cannot be understated. Validation helped these kinds of students to acquire a
condent, motivating, “I can do it” attitude, believe in their inherent capacity to
learn, become excited about learning, feel a part of the learning community, and
feel cared about as a person, not just a student.
eoretical Foundation of Validation eory
Rendón (1994) took the originally conceived construct of validation and
theorized its implications for student development and learning in an article
that appeared in Innovative Higher Education. In developing the theory of
validation, Rendón (1994) was inuenced by the work of feminist researchers
who had produced a groundbreaking study of women as learners, Women’s Ways
16 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
of Knowing (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986). ese scholars
discussed a class of women who were essentially “undereducated,” and felt
powerless and voiceless. ese women had come to believe that “they could
not think or learn as well as men” (p. 16). ey “feared being wrong, revealing
their ignorance or being laughed at” (p. 57). Coming from all walks of life,
and cutting across class, racial/ethnic, age, and educational backgrounds, some
of these women had experienced a powerful developmental progression “from
silence or conformity to external denitions of truth into subjectivism” (p. 54).
In short, these women had moved from relying solely on external “authorities”
for reliance on truth to acknowledging and working with an internal authority
which recognized that truth and understanding relied on considering multiple
perspectives, including one’s own personal experience. What had transformed
these women was armation provided by maternal or nurturing authorities
(in these cases: therapists, peers, mothers, sisters, grandmothers, and/or close
friends). ese sympathetic, nonjudgmental individuals helped women to
“begin to hear that maybe she is not such an incompetent, a dummy, or an
oddity. She has experience [original emphasis] that may be valuable to others;
she, too, can know things” (pp. 60–61). A paradoxical situation appeared to
be at work here. External conrmation from nurturant authorities was helpful
in order to get women to focus on their internal, subjective views about their
ability to become knowers in their own right. While women relied on external
agents as powerful knowledge bearers, they also recognized the self as a shared
authority in meaning making and knowledge production.
Similarly, Rendón (2002) noted:
Many nontraditional students come to college needing a sense of direction
and wanting guidance but not in a patronizing way. ey do not succeed
well in an invalidating, sterile, ercely competitive context for learning that
is still present in many college classrooms today. For example, some faculty
and sta view certain kinds of students as incapable of learning, assault
students with information and/or withhold information, instill doubt and
fear in students, distance themselves from students, silence and oppress
students, and/or create ercely competitive learning environments that pit
students against each other. is kind of “no pain, no gain” learning context
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 17
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
greatly disadvantages nontraditional student populations such as working-
class women and minorities. (p. 644)
is suggests that many students encounter subtle and overt forms of racism,
sexism, and oppression on college campuses. While some students are perfectly
able to overcome these potentially devastating and invalidating experiences
through sheer determination and will to succeed, it is likely that the most
vulnerable students will respond by dropping out of college. Validation theory
provides a framework that faculty and sta can employ to work with students
in a way that gives them agency, armation, self-worth, and liberation from
past invalidation. e most vulnerable students will likely benet from external
validation that can serve as the means to move students toward gaining internal
strength resulting in increased condence and agency in shaping their own
lives. As such, both external armation and internal acknowledgements of self-
competence are important in shaping academic success. What is being theorized
is that for many low-income, rst-generation students, external validation is
initially needed to move students toward acknowledgement of their own internal
self-capableness and potentiality.
Elements of Validation
e theory of validation has six elements. Rendón (1994) indicated that
“validation is an enabling, conrming and supportive process initiated by in- and
out-of-class agents that fosters academic and interpersonal development” (p. 44).
e rst element places the responsibility for initiating contact with students on
institutional agents such as faculty, advisers, coaches, lab assistants, and counselors.
Nontraditional students will likely nd it dicult to navigate the world of college
by themselves. ey will be unlikely to take advantage of tutoring centers, faculty
oce hours, or the library, because they will be working o campus, will feel
uncomfortable asking questions, and/or will not want to be viewed as stupid or
lazy. Consequently, it is critical that validating agents actively reach out to students
to oer assistance, encouragement, and support, as opposed to expecting students
to ask questions rst. ere are some who would say that validation is akin to
coddling students to the point that it might make them weaker, and that college
students should be able to survive on their own. However, validation is not about
pampering students or making them weaker. On the contrary, it is about making
18 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
students stronger in terms of assisting them to believe in their ability to learn,
acquire self-worth, and increase their motivation to succeed. Validating actions
should be authentic, caring, and nonpatronizing.
e second element speaks to the notion that when validation is present,
students feel capable of learning and have a sense of self-worth. Whomever the
student turns to for validation, the arming action should serve to conrm
that the student brings knowledge to college and has the potential to succeed.
e third element is that validation is likely
a prerequisite for student development. In
other words, when students are validated on
a consistent basis, they are more likely to feel
condent about themselves and their ability
to learn and to get involved in college life. e
fourth element is that validation can occur in and out of class. Validating agents
actively arm and support students on a consistent basis. Fifth is that validation
should not be viewed as an end, but rather as a developmental process which
begins early and can continue over time. Numerous instances of validation over
the time the student spends in college can result in a richer college experience.
Finally, because nontraditional students can benet from early validating
experiences and positive interactions in college, validation is most critical when
administered early in the college experience, especially during the rst few weeks
of class and the rst year of college.
Types of Validation
ere are two types of validation: academic and interpersonal. Academic
validation occurs when in- and out-of-class agents take action to assist
students to “trust their innate capacity to learn and to acquire condence in
being a college student” (Rendón, 1994, p. 40). In classrooms, faculty can
create learning experiences that arm the real possibility that students can
be successful. One way this can be done is by inviting guest speakers and
exposing students to individuals who come from backgrounds similar to the
students. One of the reasons why many students nd ethnic studies programs
so appealing is because they are able to learn in a validating classroom context.
Students can cultivate a learning a community, have professors who draw out
When validation is
present, students feel
capable of learning
and have a sense
of self-worth.
{
{
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 19
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
student strengths, learn about their history, see themselves in the curriculum,
and interact and develop close relationships with faculty and peers who reect
their own backgrounds. Another example is that faculty can validate the notion
that what students know and bring to the classroom is as valuable as what others
think and know. is calls for attention to the curriculum so that students
witness themselves in what they are reading and learning. Yet another example is
that faculty can arm student cultural experience and voice by having students
write about topics rooted in students’ personal histories. Rendón (1994) also
noted another example of academic validation, which can occur when faculty
members design activities where students can witness themselves as powerful
learners. In this example, the participant, a community college student who
had been out of school for a long time and had been raising children on her
own, initially believed she might not be able to nd success in college. When
asked, “When did you believe that you could be a capable college student?” she
enthusiastically referred to her communications class, in which she had been
taped giving a speech. e student reected on the experience of watching
herself on tape:
I don’t know quite how to say this, but when you hear yourself talk … and
you observe this individual that has blossomed into something that I hadn’t
even been aware … I would sit in awe and say, “at’s me. Look at you.
And I like me.” (p. 41)
In a validating classroom, faculty and teaching assistants actively reach out
to students to oer assistance, encouragement, and support and provide
opportunities for students to validate each other through encouraging comments
that validate the work of peers.
Interpersonal validation occurs when in- and out-of-class agents take action to
foster students’ personal development and social adjustment (Rendón, 1994).
In a validating classroom, the instructor arms students as persons, not just as
students. Faculty do not detach themselves from students. Rather, faculty build
supporting, caring relationships with students and allow students to validate
each other and to build a social network through activities such as forming study
groups and sharing cell phone numbers.
20 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
Review of Research Studies Using Validation eory
A review of quantitative and qualitative studies over the past 15 years reveals that
validation theory has been employed in a variety of ways.
Validation as a eoretical Framework
Validation has provided a theoretical framework to guide research that attempts
to understand the college experience for low-income, rst-generation students
such as students of color, developmental education students, immigrants,
community college students, and international students (Ayala Austin,
2007; Barnett, 2011; Bustos Flores, Riojas Clark, Claeys, & Villarreal, 2007;
Dandridge Rice, 2002; Ezeonu, 2006; Gupton, Castelo Rodriguez, Martinez,
& Quintanar, 2007; Harvey, 2010; Holmes, Ebbers, Robinson, & Mugenda,
2007; Lundberg, Schreiner, Hovaguimian, & Miller, 2007; Pérez & Ceja,
2010; Rendón, 2002; Saggio & Rendón, 2004; Stein, 2006; Vasquez, 2007).
Collectively, these studies provide the following key ndings:
• Somestudentsexperienceinvalidationwhileincollege.Examplesof
invalidating actions include some faculty who students believe are
unapproachable, inaccessible, and often dehumanizing toward students.
• Academicvalidationcantakemultipleforms.Forexample,faculty,
counselors, and advisers can arm the real possibility that students can
be successful college students. Faculty can also validate students’ cultural
experiences and voices in the classroom, provide opportunities for
students to witness themselves as capable learners, and actively reach out
to students to oer support and academic assistance.
• Facultycouldbenetfromtrainingtoprovideacademicand
interpersonal validation for their students.
• Studentsbenetsignicantlyfromvalidation.Studentsareproudwhen
they are recognized as capable learners, and when they develop a strong
sense of condence. ey feel cared about when faculty and sta take the
extra time to support them during dicult times.
• Employingvalidationdoesnotmeanthatfacultyneedtolowertheir
academic expectations.
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 21
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
Validation as a Framework to Foster Student Understanding and Success
In numerous cases, the theory is cited in literature reviews, research ndings,
and recommendations (often alongside other student success, engagement, and
persistence theories) when attempting to provide educators and policymakers
with a better understanding of at-risk, underrepresented populations and when
proposing strategies to improve student retention, transfer, and academic success
(Bragg, 2001; Castellanos & Gloria, 2007; Chaves, 2006; Cox, 2009; Dodson,
Montgomery, & Brown, 2009; Jain, 2010; Jalomo, 1995; Maramba, 2008;
Martin Lohnk & Paulsen, 2005; Martinez & Fernandez, 2004; Martinez
Aleman, 2000; Moreno, 2002; Museus & Quaye, 2009; Nora, 2003; Nora,
Barlow, & Crisp, 2006; Nora & Crisp, 2009; Nuñez, forthcoming; Nuñez,
Murkami-Ramalho, & Cuero, 2010; Oseguera, Locks, & Vega, 2009; Patton,
McEwen, Rendón, & Howard-Hamilton, 2007; Pérez & Ceja, 2010; Rendón,
2000, 2005, 2009; Tinto, 1998; Smith, 2009; Solorzano, Villalpando, &
Oseguera, 2005; Terenzini, et. al., 1994; Woodlief, omas, & Orozco, 2003).
e theory has also been used to frame student success initiatives (Bustos Flores,
Riojas Clark, Claeys, & Villarreal, 2007; Richter & Antonucci, 2010; University
of Texas at El Paso, 2006). Taken together, these research articles posit that:
• Low-income,rst-generationstudentsrequirebothin-andout-of-class
validating support strategies and communities comprised of faculty,
counselors, advisers, family, peers, and professionals.
• Studentknowledgeandexperienceshouldbeusedasalearningresource
and be validated in the curriculum.
• Students’personalidentitiesandoccupationalrolesshouldbevalidated.
• Avalidatingteamoffacultyandcounselorscanprovidestudentswith
care, encouragement, and support, as well as key information needed to
transfer and academic skills needed to be successful in college.
Validation as a Tool to Improve Pedagogic Practice
Validation theory has been employed in connection with the improvement of
teaching and learning practices through the use of validating environments
(Rendón, 2009, 2002) and in the development of teaching approaches with
concern for inclusive, liberating pedagogy (Bragg, 2001; Jehangir, 2009; Nuñez,
Marakami-Ramalho, & Cuero, 2010; Rendón, 2009). Liberatory pedagogy
22 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
works against the oppressive banking model of education that oppresses and
exploits students (Freire, 1971). Instead, a liberatory pedagogy honors diverse
ways of knowing, invites all to participate in knowledge production, allows both
teachers and students to be holders and beneciaries of knowledge, promotes
an ethic of care, helps students nd voice and self-worth, and works with a
curriculum that is democratic, inclusive, and reective of student backgrounds.
Researchers such as Nuñez, Murakami-Ramalho, and Cuero (2010), as well as
Rendón, (2009), contend that faculty need to critically reect upon their own
assumptions of students. Often, students of color and rst-generation students
are regarded as non-college material, and some faculty view these students
from a decit standpoint. Validation theory is related to the tenets of liberatory
pedagogy in the following ways:
• Facultybecomeaccessible,supportivevalidatingpartnersinlearning
with students.
• Facultyvalidatestudentculturalidentities.Validationofone’scultural
identity and prior knowledge can address the existing inequities with
educational attainment among student-of-color populations.
• eclassroominvitesstudentstoexploretheconnectionsbetweentheir
personal histories, group, and community contexts to allow students to
arm their own identities and create new knowledge. is can also help
students decipher abstract concepts and become comfortable challenging
ideas in class.
• ecurriculumcontainsassignmentsthatreectstudentbackgrounds.
Validation as a Student Development eory
For the next generation of student aairs practitioners and scholars, student
development theory is important in understanding the developmental process of
college students. At the same time, researchers (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, &
Renn, 2010) have cautioned practitioners and scholars to keep in mind: 1) the
applicability of theory in various contexts (theories must consider environmental
factors), 2) the generalization of theory to all student experiences (theories must
consider student dierences), and 3) the utilization of theory as a solution to
student behaviors (theories are not prescriptions to remedy student behavior
but rather a way in which students can engage and reect about their own
developmental process).
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 23
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
Validation theory (Rendón, 1994), can be considered to have an “interactionist
perspective” (Evans et. al, 2010, p. 29) that considers environmental factors
and agents such as “… physical surroundings, organizational structures, human
aggregates, and individuals” (p. 29) that can either help or hinder students’ growth
and development. Nancy Schlossberg’s (1989) concept of mattering and marginality
has attributes of interpersonal validation by focusing on human needs such as
attention, caring, feeling needed and appreciated, and identifying with others.
eoretical Perspectives Supporting Validation eory
eoretical perspectives posed by numerous scholars share remarkable
consonance with some key elements of validation theory. e theories briey
summarized below have important implications for creating validating, inclusive
learning environments where all students (regardless of gender, race/ethnicity,
sexuality, physical ability, or socioeconomic background) can thrive.
ABC model of creating inclusive environments. Daniel Tatum (2007) posits that
inclusive classrooms should focus on an ABC model, where A is arming
identity, B is building community, and C is cultivating leadership. Arming
identity “refers to the fact that students need to see themselves—important
dimensions of their identity—reected in the environment around them, in
the curriculum, among the faculty and sta, and in the faces of their classmates
to avoid feelings of invisibility or marginality that can undermine student
success” (p. 22). Building community “refers to the importance of creating a
school community in which everyone has a sense of belonging, while cultivating
leadership prepares students to be active citizens in society” (p. 22).
Community cultural wealth model. Yosso’s (2005) community cultural wealth
model employs a critical race theory framework to challenge decit-based
perspectives that view all low-income students as marginal and as possessing
limited social, educational, and cultural assets. Instead, Yosso (2005) views
low-income students from an asset perspective, and theorizes that students
may possess at least one but often multiple forms of capital. is capital may
be categorized as 1) aspirational (referring to student hopes and dreams), 2)
linguistic (speaking more than one language), 3) familial (ways of knowing
in immediate and extended family), 4) social (signicant others who provide
support), 5) navigational (ability to maneuver institutional structures), and 6)
resistance (ability to recognize and challenge inequities).
24 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
Funds of knowledge. Luis Moll, Cathy Amanti, Deborah Ne, and Norma
Gonzalez (2001) worked with the concept of funds of knowledge “to refer to
the historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and
skills essential for household or individual functioning and well-being” (p. 133).
Funds of knowledge is an asset-based theory where teachers can become learners,
and can come to know their students and the families of their students in new
and distinct ways. e theory of funds of knowledge debunks the pervasive,
decit-based notion that linguistically and culturally diverse working-class
minority households lack worthwhile knowledge and experiences. When faculty
and sta take time to get to know students—to acknowledge and validate their
backgrounds, culture, family sacrices, challenges they have overcome, etc.—
they can view students with more respect and understanding. In the process of
working more closely with students, faculty can potentially draw out hidden
talents and abilities.
Liberatory pedagogy. Scholars such as Paulo Freire (1971) and Laura I. Rendón
(2009), among others such as Peter McLaren (1995), Antonia Darder (2002),
bell hooks (1994), and Henry Giroux (1988), have advanced the notion
that education must transcend the “banking model” (Freire, 1971), where
knowledge is simply “deposited” in students’ minds and faculty operate at
a distance from students. ese scholars posit that the banking model is
oppressive in nature, exploiting and dominating students, as well as working
against democratic structures that honor diverse ways of knowing and
participation in knowledge production. A liberatory pedagogy allows both
teachers and students to be holders and beneciaries of knowledge. rough
an ethic of care, compassion, and validation, faculty and sta can liberate
oppressed students from self-limiting views about their ability to learn and
can help students nd voice and self-worth. e curriculum is democratic,
inclusive and reective of student backgrounds. Ultimately, a liberatory
pedagogy has the potential to transform both faculty and students who break
away from conventional ways of teaching and learning that oppress and
marginalize students. Students can begin to dene themselves as competent
college students and nd their sense of purpose and voice (Rendón, 2009).
Ethic of care. At the core of validation is authentic caring and concern. Both
Nel Noddings (1984) and Angela Valenzuela (1999) expressed concern that
many schools are focused on detachment, impersonal and objective language,
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 25
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
and nonpersonal content. ese forms of invalidation can lead students to
believe that who they are and what they represent are not valued. Noddings
(1984) and Valenzuela (1999) argued that an ethic of caring can foster positive
relationships between faculty and students. Noddings (1984) noted that care is
basic in all human life; all people want to feel that they are being cared for in
their lives. Simple actions such as calling students by name, expressing concern,
and oering assistance can go a long way toward building caring, validating
relationships with students.
Epistemological and Ontological Assumptions in Validation eory
From the discussion above, one can conclude that validation theory nds strong
conceptual, theoretical, and pragmatic support from dierent theorists and bodies
of research. is rich body of literature illuminates what could be considered the
epistemological and ontological assumptions of the theory. Validation theory:
• Workswithstudentsaswholehumanbeings.Attentionisplacednot
only on academic development, but also on emotional, social, and
inner-life aspects of human development (i.e., caring, support, reective
processes, relationship-building, nurturance).
• Embracesstudents’personalvoicesandexperiences,whichareas
important as traditional, objective ways of knowing.
• Isanasset-based(asopposedtodecit-based)model.Akeyassumption
is that students, regardless of background, bring a reservoir of funds of
knowledge and experiences that render these students open to learning
with validating instructors and classroom climates. When validating agents
work with students as possessing a reservoir of assets, the dominant view
that poor students only have decits is shattered and decentered.
• Isrootedintheexperiencesoflow-income,nontraditionalstudents.
Validation theory emerged directly from student voices, and the theory
places students as the center of analysis.
• Opensthedoorforfacultyandstatoworkwithstudentstopromote
equitable outcomes, to eliminate racist and sexist views about students,
and to promote inclusive classrooms.
• Engenderstransformativeconsequencesforstudentsaswellasfor
validating agents. With validation, students can begin to view themselves
as competent college students and college sta can begin to work
26 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
with students in a more respectful, compassionate manner, while not
sacricing academic rigor.
• Isfocusedonmakingstudentsacademicallyandpersonallystronger,
as opposed to coddling or patronizing students. e emphasis is on
working with student assets in order to unleash potential to learn,
promote well being, and help students feel that they are being cared for
in a way that promotes their ability to succeed in college.
• Shiftstheroleoftheinstitutionfrompassivetoproactiveintermsof
promoting learning and retention. In other words, it is not enough for
the institution to say it oers student services. Proactive measures to
actually get students to take advantage of these services must also be in
place. is means that college faculty and student aairs sta must be
ready to actively reach out to students (as opposed to having student
reach out to them rst), be accessible, and be open to establishing close
working relationships with students.
Validation eory: Enhancements and New Directions
Like all theories, validation theory has its strengths and limitations. Future
research, theoretical perspectives and practice strategies should consider how to
enhance the theory.
Research Enhancements
Most of the studies employing validation theory have been qualitative in nature,
and more quantitative analyses are needed to conrm the impact of validation on
student learning and overall academic success, including changes in motivation,
attitudes toward learning, and identity changes, among others. Research questions
to consider include the following: To what extent does validation predict
retention? To what extent does validation overcome past invalidation and/or
feelings of incompetence? In what ways does validation contribute to identity
development? What are the liberatory elements of validation?
In the original study (Rendón, 1994) where validation emerged as a theoretical
construct directly from the voices of students themselves, the analysis did not specify
how the theory could apply to all kinds of students with a multiplicity of diverse
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 27
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
backgrounds (i.e., race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, academic ability,
physical ability, religion, sexuality). It is appropriate that future studies apply the
theory to understudied populations. As future research develops, it will be important
to examine the theory closely with an eye toward providing more specic examples
of academic and interpersonal validation in and out of the classroom context.
e original study also did not fully employ a social justice perspective. Validation
theory has liberatory and equity elements related to power and agency, and future
studies could explore the role of validation with a social justice framework.
eory Enhancements
eorizing about academic success for underserved students will become
increasingly important as more low-income, rst-generation, and older students
choose to attend college. Advancing theory for these students requires a theoretical
critique of notions of self-ecacy. e uncritical acceptance of the premise that
all students can and should be successful on their own seems to privilege auent
students who have signicant nancial, social, and academic capital. Students
lacking these forms of capital will ultimately want to function on their own, but
studies employing validation theory demonstrate that there is a class of students
that does initially benet from nonpatronizing, caring, external authorities who
can provide armation and support. is external support can eventually translate
to internal strength as students gain condence and agency.
Related theories noted in this article (i.e., ethic of care, mattering, funds
of knowledge, etc.) support the premise of validation. It is likely that both
internal acknowledgements of self-condence and external forms of validation
are important; one is not better than the other. However, future theoretical
perspectives should illuminate the concept of self-ecacy with a deep critical
analysis. For example, given the oppressive, invalidating elements in some
parts of higher education (i.e., racism, monocultural curricula, stereotyping of
students, etc.) how can students develop their own form of armation?
While validation theory has been explored as a student development theory,
it is important that educators understand how the theory contributes to student
development. e transformative power of validation for both students and faculty
also needs to be conrmed and expanded as future studies are developed.
28 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
Pedagogic Enhancements
e role of validation in fostering a liberatory, inclusive teaching and learning
context needs to be further dened. Training in the use of in- and out-of-class
validation could benet educators with whom students are most in contact
such as faculty, teaching assistants, advisers, and counselors. Faculty also need
to engage in self-reexivity which explores their own identities, assumptions
they make about students, positionalites, and how they have located themselves
within the classroom context (Osei-Ko, Richards, & Smith, 2004).
Final oughts
Validation has emerged as a viable theory that can be employed to better
understand the success of underserved students, improve teaching and learning,
understand student development in college, and frame college student success
strategies. With its underlying tenets of social justice and equity, validation
theory can serve researchers and practitioners alike with a framework to create
liberatory classroom environments, work compassionately with students as
whole human beings who can best function with an ethic of care and support,
and transform underserved students into powerful learners who overcome
past invalidation and oppression. For those researchers and practitioners who
seek a socially conscious, eective way to theorize student success, as well as to
understand and work with underserved students, validation theory holds great
promise and merits increased research attention
about the authorS: Laura I. Rendón Linares is a professor in the Educational Leadership and
Policy Studies department at the University of Texas−San Antonio.
Susana M. Muñoz is an assistant professor in the Department of Administrative Leadership at the
University of Wisconsin−Milwaukee.
Address correspondence to: Laura Rendón, One UTSA Circle, San Antonio, Texas 78249,
laura.rendon@utsa.edu
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 29
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
References
Andrade, M. S. (2008). International student persistence at a faith-based institution. Christian
Higher Education, 7, 434–45.
Astin, A. (1985). Involvement: e cornerstone for excellence. Change, 17(4), 35–39
Ayala-Austin, E. (2007). Validating the experiences of male Mexican American community
college transfer students studying at Catholic universities. (Unpublished dissertation).
University of San Diego, San Diego, CA.
Barnett, E. (2011). Validating experiences and persistence among community college students.
e Review of Higher Education, 34(2), 193–230.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of
knowing. New York, NY: Basics Books, Inc.
Bragg, D. D. (2001). Community college access, mission, and outcomes: Considering intriguing
intersections and challenges. Peabody Journal of Education, 76(1), 93–116.
Bustos Flores, B., Riojas Clark, E., Claeys, L., Villarreal, A. (Fall 2007). Academy for teacher
excellence: Recruting [sic], preparing, and retaining Latino teachers through learning
communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 53–69.
Castellanos, J., & Gloria, A. M. (2007). Research considerations and theoretical application for
best practices in higher education: Latina/os achieving success. Journal of Hispanic Higher
Education, 6(4), 378–396.
Chaves, C. (2006). Involvement, development, and retention: eoretical foundations and
potential extensions for adult community college students. Community College Review, 34(2),
139–152.
Cox, R. D. (2009). Promoting success by addressing students’ fear of failure. Community College
Review, 37(1), 52–80.
Dandridge Rice, R. C. (2002). e applicability of Rendón’s model of validation with African
American community college students. (Unpublished thesis). California State University, Long
Beach, Long Beach, CA.
Daniel Tatum, B. (2007). Can we talk about race? And other conversations in an era of school
resegregation. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Darder, A. (2002). Reinventing Paulo Freire: A pedagogy of love. Cambridge, MA: Westview Press.
Dodson, J. E., Montgomery, B. L., & Brown, L. J. (2009). “Take the fth”: Mentoring students
whose cultural communities were not historically structured into U.S. higher education.
Innovative Higher Education. 34(2), 185–199.
30 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student
development in college: eory, research, and practice (2nd Ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ezeonu, R. F. (2006). e academic and interpersonal development of immigrant students in the
community college. (Unpublished dissertation). Seattle University, Seattle, WA.
Freire, P. (1971). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Giroux, H. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Towards a critical pedagogy of learning. Westport, CT:
Bergin & Garvey Publishing, Inc.
Gupton, J. T., Castelo Rodriguez, C., Martinez, D. A., & Quinatanar, I. (2007). Creating a
pipeline to engage low-income, rst-generation college students. In S. Harper & S. Quaye
(Eds.), Student engagement in higher education: eoretical perspectives and practical approaches
for diverse populations (pp. 242–260). New York, NY: Routledge.
Harvey, M. D. (2010). e “lost boys” of higher education: African American males from basic skills
through university transfer. (Unpublished dissertation). University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, CA.
Holmes, S. L., Ebbers, L. H., Robinson, D., & Mugenda, A. G. (2007). Validating African
American students at predominately White institutions. In A. Seidman (Ed.), Minority
student retention: e best of the journal of college student retention: Research, theory & practice
(pp. 79–96). Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York, NY:
Routledge Publishing.
Jehangir, R. R. (2009). Cultivating voice: First generation students seek full academic citizenship
in multicultural learning communities. Innovative Higher Education, 34, 33–49.
Jain, D. (2010). Critical race theory and community colleges: rough the eyes of women student
leaders of color. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 34(1), 78–91.
Jalomo, R. E., Jr. (1995). Latino students in transition: An analysis of the rst-year experience in the
community college. (Unpublished dissertation). Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
Lundberg, C. A., Schreiner, L. A., Hovaguimian, K. D., & Miller, S. S. (2007). First-generation
status and student race/ethnicity as distinct predictors of student involvement and learning.
NASPA Journal, 44(1), 57–83.
Maramba, D. C. (2008). Understanding campus climate though the voices of Filipana/o
American college students. College Student Journal, 42, 1045–1060.
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 31
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
Martin Lohnk, M. & Paulsen, M. B. (2005). Comparing the determinants of persistence for
rst generation and continuing generation students. Journal of College Student Development,
46(4), 409–428.
Martínez Alemán, A. M. (2000). Race talks: Undergraduate women of color and female
friendships. e Review of Higher Education, 23(2), 133–152.
Martinez, M., & Fernandez, E. (2004). Latinos at community colleges. New Directions for Student
Services, 105, 51–62.
McLaren, P. (1995). Critical pedagogy and predatory culture. New York, NY, Routledge Publishing.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Ne, D., & Gonzalez, N. (2001). Funds of knowledge for teaching:
Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. eory Into Practice. XXXI(2),
132–141.
Moreno, J. F. (2002). e long-term outcomes of Puente. Educational Policy, 16(4), 572–587.
Museus, S. D., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Towards an intercultural perspective of racial and ethnic
minority college student persistence. e Review of Higher Education, 33(1), 67–94.
Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminist approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Nora, A. (2003). Access to higher education for Hispanic students: Real or illusory? In J.
Castellanos & L. Jones (Eds.), e majority in the minority: Expanding the representation of
Latina/o faculty (pp. 47–68). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Nora, A., Barlow, L., & Crisp, G. (2006). An assessment of Hispanic students in four-year
institutions of higher education. In J. Castellanos, A. M. Gloria, M. Kamimura (Eds.), e
Latina/o pathway to the Ph.D.: Abriendo Caminos (pp. 55–77). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Nora, A., & Crisp, G. (2009). Hispanics and higher education: An overview of research, theory,
and practice. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of eory and Research (Vol.
XXIV, pp. 317–353). New York, NY: Springer.
Nuñez, A.-M. (in press). Counterstories and connections in college transitions: First-generation
Latino students’ perspectives on Chicano Studies. Journal of College Student Development.
Nuñez, A.-M., Murkami-Ramalho, E., & Cuero, K. K. (2010). Pedagogy for equity: Teaching in
a Hispanic-serving institution. Innovative Higher Education, 35(3), 177–190.
Oseguera, L., Locks, A. M., & Vega, I. I. (2009). Increasing Latina/o students’ baccalaureate
attainment: A focus on retention. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 8(1), 23–53.
32 Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011
Laura I. Rendón Linares, Susana M. Muñoz
Osei-Ko, N., Richards, S. L., & Smith, D. G. (2004). Creating inclusive classrooms: Politics of
knowledge, reection, and engagement. In L. I. Rendón, M. Garcia, & D. Person (Eds.),
Transforming the rst-year experience for students of color (Monograph No. 38, pp. 55–66).
Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina: National Resource Center for e First-Year
Experience and Students in Transition.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college aects students: Findings and insights from
twenty years of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Patton, L. D., McEwen, M., Rendón, L., & Howard-Hamilton, M. F. (2007). Critical race
perspectives on theory in student aairs. In S. R. Harper & L. D. Patton (Eds.), Responding
to the realities of race on campus: New directions for student services (Vol. 120, pp. 39–53). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Pérez, P. A., & Ceja, M. (2010). Building a Latina/o student transfer culture: Best practices and
outcomes in transfer to universities. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9(1), 6–21.
Rendón, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and
student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33–51.
Rendón, L. I. (2000, July–August). Academics of the heart. About Campus, 5(3), 3–5.
Rendón, L. I. (2002). Community college Puente: A validating model of education. Educational
Policy, 16(4), 642–666.
Rendón, L. I. (2005). Realizing a transformed pedagogical dreameld: Recasting agreements for
teaching and learning. Spirituality in Higher Education Newsletter, 2(1), 1–13.
Rendón, L. I. (2009). Sentipensante pedagogy: Educating for wholeness, social justice and liberation.
Sterling, VA: Stylus Press.
Richter, K., & Antonucci, M. (2010, June). Going “good to great” from the ground up. Presented
to the Association of National College and University Housing Ocers International
Conference, Austin, TX.
Saggio, J. J., & Rendón, L. I. (2004). Persistence among American Indians and Alaska Natives
at a Bible college: e importance of family, spirituality, and validation. Christian Higher
Education, 3(3), 223–240.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. In L.
Huebner (Ed.), Redesigning campus environments: New directions for student services (Vol. 8,
pp. 5–15). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Smith, B. (2009). Mentoring programs: e great hope or great hype? ASHE/Lumina Policy
Briefs and Critical Essays No. 7. Ames: Iowa State University, Department of Educational
Leadership & Policy Studies.
Enrollment Management Journal Summer 2011 33
Revisiting Validation eory: eoretical Foundations, Applications, and Extensions
Solorzano, D., Villalpando, O., & Oseguera, L. (2005). Educational inequities and Latina/o
undergraduate students in the United States: A critical race analysis of their educational
progress. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4, 272–294.
Solorzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2000). Toward a critical race theory of Chicana and Chicano
education. In C. Tejeda, C. Martinez, & Z. Leonardo (Eds.), Charting new terrains of
Chicana(o) Latina(o) education (pp. 35–65). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
Stein, K. K. (2006). Developing voices: A study of developmental education students and
their perspectives of individual and institutional attributes necessary for academic success.
(Unpublished dissertation). University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX.
Terenzini, P. T., Rendón, L. I., Upcraft, M. L., Millar, S. B., Allison, K. W., Gregg, P. L., et
al. (1994). e transition to college: Diverse students, diverse stories. Research in Higher
Education, 35(1), 57–73.
Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. e
Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167–177.
University of Texas at El Paso. (2006). Quality enhancement plan: Student success in the middle
years. Rearmation Leadership Team. Retrieved from http://cetalweb.utep.edu/ldi/images/
QEPReportUpdateWithCovers.pdf
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S.-Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany,
NY: SUNY Press.
Vasquez, P. L. (2007). Achieving success in engineering: A phenomenological exploration of Latina/o
student persistence in engineering elds of study. (Unpublished thesis). Iowa State University,
Ames, IA.
Woodlief, B., omas, C., & Orozco, G. (2003). California’s gold: Claiming the promise
of diversity in our community colleges. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://www.
californiatomorrow.org
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity, and Education. 8(1), 69–91.
