Running head: ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 1

Analysis of Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model and its Higher Education Implications

Donavon A. Barbarisi

University of Central Missouri

ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 2

Analysis of Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model and its Higher Education Implications

In the 1970s, Urie Bronfenbrenner (1994) published an ecological model for human

psychological development that still finds heavy use today. Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) model was

more focused defining the norms of development as opposed to his vision that “much of

developmental psychology is the science of the strange behavior of children in strange situations

with strange adults for the briefest periods of time” (p. 513). This vision represents an

understanding that many previous psychological studies took people out of their element, and

often would lead to variables that couldn’t be accounted for in the study. Bronfenbrenner with his

ecological model took a different approach in that his observations were in an average setting,

and how things truly work in day to day life. Bronfenbrenner’s (1994) ecological model is split

up into four distinct parts being the process, person, context, and time (Evans, Forney, Guido,

Patton, Renn, 2010, p. 161-165).

Theory Summary

The four aspects of Bronfenbrenner’s modern ecological theory are process, person,

context, and time. These aspects are what shape what an interaction looks like, how someone

will respond, and how he/she will develop because of it.

Process

According to Evans et al. (2010), the process aspect of the model represents an

interaction between the individual and his or her environment. It is these interactions that affect

the development of the individual. In terms of a zone of proximal development, these

interactions need to become increasingly more complex. Also akin to Sanford’s model, the

challenge must be enough to prompt new development, but not so much that primitive solutions

are resorted to (Evans et al., 2010, p. 30).

ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 3

Person

Evans et al. (2010) also goes on to describe the “person” as being the individual going

through the process. The person is defined by four unique characteristics, which will either aid or

inhibit development. The first characteristic is whether the individual “invite or inhibit responses

from the environment” (Evans et al., 2010, p. 161). The characteristics represents that different

students will have different interactions with the same people. Second, it will depend on whether

the individual ventures out into the environment more and how he or she will react as the

individual chooses to do so. Third, would be how the individual responds to increasingly

complex challenges. Finally, the development will be affected by the level and type of control

that the individual exhibits. While these characteristics are important for the analysis of

development, it is important to remember that the characteristics are not static, and someone can

become more or less pronounced when it comes to certain aspects.

Context

As defined by Bronfenbrenner (1994), context is the different environments in which the

individual interacts. There are four spheres that define context which are the microsystem,

mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem. Each of these spheres lies within the next largest,

with order from smallest to largest being given.

Microsystem. The microsystem as a whole represent the day-to-day interactions that we

directly have with people, things, or activities. Examples of the microsystem could include

friends, classmates, video games, or even food. Each of these things that individuals interact with

help shape a person psychologically, and with everyone having different interactions, the

individual will as well have different developments (Bronfenbrenner, 1994, p. 39).

ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 4

Mesosystem. The mesosystem is important to an individual’s development due to the

nature of it being the way in which the separate microsystems interact with one another. This

means the way your friend group and your classmate group overlap or mesh could be either

inhibitory for the individuals development, or could promote it (Bronfenbrenner, 1994, p. 40).

Exosystem. The exosystem is processes that affect the individual indirectly, i.e. the

process affects someone in the microsystem, whose reaction or development will affect the

individual. These interactions vary greatly from the aforementioned due to the nature of the locus

of control being external as opposed to internal (can’t control what happens to others, but direct

interactions can be controlled.) The exosystem is exemplified by the parent’s workplace

environment, due to what the parents may interact with at work, it could change the environment

for the developing individual at home (Bronfenbrenner, 1994, p. 40).

Macrosystem. The macrosystem is the major encompassing sphere, upon which many of

the process that take place in lower contexts. Specifically defined by Bronfenbrenner (1994) the

macrosystem includes, “belief systems, bodies of knowledge, material resources, customs, life-

styles, opportunity structures, hazards, and life course options’ (p. 40). For every culture, there

exists some definitive characteristics that will guide many if not all processes, whether the

interactions are seen in a positive or negative light, and how someone will develop due to the

interaction. These influences would include things like religious upbringing, or being below

poverty line. These are things that are have far-reaching implications, and that some individuals

may not even realize are playing a considerable role in their development (Bronfenbrenner, 1994,

p. 40).

Time
ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 5

As described by Evans et al. (2010), the time aspect of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological

model has not always been recognized as a significant attribute, however, in the most recent

iteration it played a significant role. Bronfenbrenner and Morris (2006) considered time as

having three aspects, microtime, mesotime, and macrotime, which demonstrate how the

processes and contexts can change throughout intervals. Microtime is explained as whether the

process possess continuity or not, i.e. do the processes experienced remain the same or do the

processes evolve dramatically over time. Mesotime describes whether events are recurrent over

longer time intervals. Mesotime asks whether a process happens more than once in several days

or weeks, or is it a one-time occurrence. Finally, macrotime references the change overarching

expectations of a society, and how the expectations change based on interactions with individuals

over the course of development. In these terms, it would include religious ideals changing,

cultural expectations being modified, as well as other grand scheme alterations (Evans et al.

2010, p. 165-166)

Research and Applications

Uses

Tudge, Makrova, Hatfield and Karnik (2009) describe how Bronfenbrenner’s work in its

most developed state can be readily applicable in a variety of way, but users must be careful not

to misuse it. First, a detail the authors mandate for the theory to be used appropriately, is that the

most recent edition should be utilized, and that most aspects need to be considered. This means

that the research methodology needs to evolve as the theory does. For results to be reliable by

their standards it must also account for each of these areas, meaning that under the PPCT model,

three of the four must be utilized within the analysis.

ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 6

Tudge et al. (2009) place great emphasis on the time aspect of Bronfenbrenner’s PPCT

model, due to the nature of change. Tudge et al. analyzed 25 studies, and found that only two

utilized a time component. Due to the nature of environments changing, it was considered

important for research to understand that the results obtained during one period, may vary over

time, and without consideration, the data cannot reliably be extrapolated to the general

population.

Misuses

The first example of Bronfenbrenner’s theory being misused, was attempting to apply old

editions of his theory to modern populations. Bronfenbrenner’s theory grew to include the PPCT

model, as well as to discuss proximal process, however Tudge et al. (2009) describes how several

studies negated these characteristics by comparing their data to the 1970s version of

Bronfenbrenner’s model which lacked these important aspects.

Another issues that arises with the analysis of research with Bronfenbrenner’s model is

lack of consideration of proximal processes in terms of psychological development. Tudge et al.

(2009) describes how development only typically occurs when processes occur consecutively,

and become increasingly difficult. Many of the studies the authors analyzed only considered the

immediate process the researchers could see, or that children engaged in while making a

decision. However Bronfenbrenner’s newest model place more weight on the individual making

the choice as well as how that choice will shape their answer the next time the individuals face a

similar circumstance.

Parent Involvement Research

Bronfenbrenner’s Theory of Ecological Development is a very broadly applied theory in

that people of all ages and cultures are shaped by the interactions people have almost every day.
ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 7

One of the key areas that stands out in this research is child development, specifically parent

involvement, and how these interactions benefit and shape them. Kim (2010) did an evaluation

of Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) study of early child parent involvement. Kim’s study reached a

conclusion that parental involvement in child development results in faster growth than without.

The influence was assessed following parents being encouraged to read with their children for

six weeks. The data supported the hypothesis that kids benefit from these interactions. The data

also rejected the hypothesis that the child’s initial literacy, and the parent’s initial literacy has an

effect. The results mean that any child will benefit from these interactions regardless of starting

point.

Counseling Usage

Bronfenbrenner’s model has also found great footing in counselor training according to

Lau and Ng (2014). Their work emphasizes using Bronfenbrenner as a framework for training as

opposed to psychological development. Here the trainers utilize the different interactions the

students can have in the ecological model, and transform them slightly to represent the field and

environment the counselors find themselves in at training. The example also demonstrates the

theory’s applicability in fields outside of psychological development. It also emphasizes that the

theory needs evaluation to be considered reliable. While the researchers noticed a benefit, there

was not a specific quantitative assessment for its validity in the field.

Medical Disparities

Reifsnider, Gallagher, and Forgione (2005), also demonstrated the model use in physical

fields as well, with their research on medical cases and other work. The authors demonstrated

that growth during physical development can be handled by similar contexts to the psychological

development model, i.e. the microsystem could include the activity the child engages in to
ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 8

prompt physical growth. Similar to Lau and Ng, Reifsnider et al. demonstrates the validity

Bronfenbrenner’s theory has in a variety of fields, as well being tangibly valid.

Higher Education Implications

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model could easily be applied to any aspect of university

culture and interactions. Due to the nature of the students, each and every one will deal with

struggles that are unique to them, and each will also handle the situation differently.

Microsystem Interactions

As mentioned, every student will have unique conflicts, and these often will begin with

the microsystem, or those people and things that the individual directly interacts with. As

students are shaped by the interactions they are part of, it is important that the interactions be

positive, or at least have positive development. As a student affairs professional it is possible to

reach out to students who may seem to be following a troublesome path due to who the

individual recognizes as peers or friends pushing them to do such. While these professionals

possess no authority to say the individual cannot associate with a specific group, sometimes an

authority’s influence can be enough of a nudge to a student to evaluate the path the individual

has chosen. As such, peer groups as a microsystem interaction are a vital piece of student

development, and represents a major opportunity to step-in and offer guidance if it is desired.

As well, interactions with parents for students can be a great aid or detrimental to the

student’s development, depending on how it proceeds. Parents play a major role for some

students in deciding what path the child follow, and the parents’ influence can become

overbearing for some students, or lose its meaning for others. It is important to recognize how

these interactions shape students, due to the possibility for professionals to reach out to the
ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 9

students. While in many cases, parents desire what is best, knowing that the “overbearing”

aspects of it can push students in a complete opposite direction (i.e. some students want to break

from the parents’ rule and seek drugs and alcohol out as an outlet. As student affairs

professionals, there is a possibility for direct interactions with the parents as well. This is an

example of a microsystem for the professional, and mesosystem for the student due to these two

somewhat unlikely groups interacting. The interactions can affect the student however, as it

could feel like they are having their control taken away, or the student may not experience

development in confrontation skills.

Overall the microsystem may be the easiest area to visualize as having an impact on

student development, but it is far from the only area of impact. The microsystem could for the

student, be the only interaction sees shaping them. Due to this, it is important to reach out and

shape these interactions if the professionals can, but also to inform student about the many

different things that can affect them, i.e. the different contexts.

Exosystem Interactions

The exosystem may not be evident to students as its events don’t happen to them, but the

interactions will shape the students potentially to a major degree. One area that really stands out

is professors, and the interactions they will have outside of those with the student. These

instructors are all people, and as such they have their own lives where things can and will occur.

One such area that can affect a student is the instructor’s illness or family issues. Student in most

cases rely on the classroom interactions with professors to learn and develop their knowledge

and understanding. However, illness or family issues have impacts on the classroom, in that the

professor may not be around (too sick to come in, family member needs attending to) and as such

the student cannot have these interactions. Also, if the professor is distracted or sick, the
ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 10

environment of the class can change dramatically. Because of what it going on in the professors

life (Out of the control of the student) can alter the development path of a student if the student

misses information, or lose interest due to the environment change, it is important that emphasis

is put on student involvement, and that the student takes the time on their own to learn as well.

It is also important to recognize with roommate relationships that what happens to a

student’s roommate can shape the student. Similar to professors, the roommate’s microsystem

can affect the student, with it being an almost completely external locus of control. There is a

typical environment expected of a room atmosphere, and if one roommate has an attitude change

(the attitude change could incited by relationship issues, poor grades, or any number or other

issues) and he or she takes it out on the other roommate, it can make the room a less “safe” place,

cause a domino effect of misdirecting their stress, or even permanently change the relationship

between them. Each of these things could shape the student, one example being if the room feels

unsafe, the student may reach out to other areas for security, which could be beneficial or

harmful depending on the course of action. As professionals in a roommate setting, managing

roommate relationships is important for making students feel safe in their environment, but also

helping them to understand how things can happen beyond someone’s control. This is a major

example of how an event that shapes one person’s life can have far-reaching consequences or

effects. The consequences are evidenced by a student getting irritated by the roommate due to his

personal problems, but the same student could go and affect another due to his attitude, causing a

potential chain reaction.

Macrosystem Interactions

One overarching idea with higher education that affects students is the university

mission, and values. When students elect to attend a specific university, they sign up to live by a
ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 11

certain set of values, or at least the student will be held to specific standards that the university

will uphold. Depending on a university’s system, students may find themselves making decisions

that they normally wouldn’t, due to a school expectation set for them. While it may not sound

like a massive issue, schools must be careful to adequately identify their policies, and to uphold

them, as students will grow to fit the standard, or hide the behaviors that do not align with the

mission. A major goal for the professionals would be to design missions and initiatives that will

best lend themselves to the student’s development, and will shape them to society. These

missions however, can drive students away however, and prompt them to hide behaviors. Some

students may feel that the things they do will go against the school (drinking, drugs, etc.) and as

such may put themselves more at risk by being in bad environments to avoid the schools watch.

An important thing to consider about macrosystems with higher education, is the wide

variety of cultures from which students will originate. As mentioned previously, all cultures have

their own beliefs and expectations, and universities serve as a melting pot for all of these various

ideologies. As such, there is no specific method for handling situations with students, and

attempting to follow a specific plan for solving an issue could be disastrous.

The idea of a variety of macrosystems could be a major learning experience as well. As

students learn and develop from their interactions with others, introducing these other cultures to

students gives them an opportunity to develop a more worldly culture, which could serve as a

good experience in almost any field. While it is easy to get caught up on negative developments,

Bronfenbrenner’s theory easily allows for those interactions to shape students in a positive way,

creating a more positive chain reaction.

ANALYSIS OF BRONFENBRENNER 12

References

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American

Psychology. 32. 513-528.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development. International

Encyclopedia of Education, 3(2), 37-41. Retrieved from

http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~siegler/35bronfebrenner94.pdf

Bronfenbrenner, U., Morris, P.A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development.

Retrieved from

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/psychology/courses/3615/Readings/BronfenbrennerModelof

Development.pdf

Evans, N.J., Forney, D.S., Guido, F.M., Patton, L.D., Renn, K.A. (2010) Student development in

college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA; Jossey-Bass.

Kim, Y.B. (2010). Dialogic reading as homework for parents of children in child care: A test of

Bronfenbrenner's hypothesis about parent involvement. Ann Arbor, MI; ProQuest

Dissertations Publishing.

Lau, J., & Ng, K. (2014). Conceptualizing the counseling training environment using

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory. International Journal for the Advancement of

Counselling, 36(4), 423-439.

Reifsnider, E., Gallagher, M., & Forgione, B. (2005). Using ecological models in research on

health disparities. Journal of Professional Nursing, 21(4), 216-222.

Tudge, J. R., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B. E., & Karnik, R. B. (2009). Uses and misuses of

Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory of human development. Journal of Family Theory

& Review, 1(4), 198-210.