Research Motivation and Objective

In the 21st century, higher education is increasingly expected to cultivate not only technical expertise but also students’ capacity for autonomous thinking, ethical decision-making, and personal meaning-making. This expectation is particularly pressing in the context of globalization and post-pandemic uncertainties, where adaptability and agency are essential. While the concept of self-authorship—the internal capacity to define one’s beliefs, identity, and social relations—has been extensively studied in Western contexts, its development in East Asian cultural settings remains underexplored. This study investigated how undergraduate students in Taiwan and Japan develop self-authorship, focusing on how they navigate the transitional “Crossroads” phase where external influences are questioned and internal voices begin to emerge. The study sought to understand the cultural and institutional factors that shape this developmental journey and to identify strategies students use to move toward greater self-authorship.

Literature Review

The theoretical foundation of this study is rooted in Kegan’s (1982, 1994) constructive-developmental theory and Baxter Magolda’s (1998, 2001) self-authorship framework. Kegan emphasized that adult development involves a transition from externally defined identities to internally constructed meaning making systems. Baxter Magolda expanded on this work through longitudinal studies, identifying three phases of self-authorship: External, Crossroads, and Internal. In the crossroads phase, individuals begin to question external authorities and explore their own values, often experiencing cognitive dissonance and emotional discomfort. While these frameworks have been validated in Western contexts, their applicability in East Asia is less clear. Research suggests that collectivist values, filial piety, and social harmony— central to Confucian traditions—may influence how self-authorship manifests in Asian students (Bohon, 2015; Cen, 2012; Liang & Matthews, 2021). For example, students may prioritize familial expectations over personal aspirations or interpret autonomy through the lens of relational responsibility. This study builds on these insights by examining how Taiwanese and Japanese students experience and respond to developmental challenges within their cultural contexts.

Research Methodology

This qualitative study utilized semi-structured interviews with 58 undergraduate students—28 from Taiwan and 30 from Japan—enrolled in their second to fourth years at two prestigious universities. These institutions were chosen to reduce institutional variability and concentrate on cultural influences. Participants were recruited through campus flyers and snowball sampling. The interviews examined students’ motivations for selecting their majors, their campus experiences, and their aspirations for the future. Data were analyzed using a deductive coding approach based on Baxter Magolda et al.’s (2012) framework. The analysis centered on identifying students’ positions within the self-authorship continuum, particularly in the crossroads phase. Coding was performed independently by three of the authors to ensure reliability, and discrepancies were addressed through discussion. Thematic analysis was applied to identify recurring patterns and strategies students used to navigate developmental challenges.

Research Results

The majority of students were in the crossroads phase for both interpersonal and intrapersonal dimensions. Specifically, 66% of students fell into the crossroads phase interpersonally, while 57% did so intrapersonally. Only a small minority had advanced to the internal phase, and a handful remained in the external phase. These findings suggest that most students were actively dealing with conflicting external and internal influences. Four primary strategies emerged as ways students navigated the crossroads: (1) Making a detour: Some students delayed facing difficult decisions by pursuing alternative paths, such as enrolling in graduate school or taking temporary jobs, hoping that time and experience would bring clarity. (2) Taking exploratory actions: Others engaged in trial-and-error learning, starting projects, negotiating with parents, or experimenting with various academic or extracurricular pursuits to evaluate their emerging values. (3) Resorting to responsibility and harmony: Many students made decisions based on ethical considerations or the desire to maintain familial or social cohesion, even at the expense of personal aspirations. This was particularly evident in students who prioritized being a “good” child or maintaining group harmony. (4) Seeking assistance from others: Some students found guidance and affirmation through meaningful relationships with professors, mentors, or peers. These relationships helped them build confidence and clarity, often acting as catalysts for developmental progress.

Discussion and Recommendations

This study contributes to the literature by offering a culturally grounded understanding of self-authorship development in East Asia. It challenges the universality of Western developmental models and emphasizes the need for culturally responsive educational practices. In East Asian contexts, where the self is often understood relationally, self-authorship may not always manifest as a rejection of external influences but as a nuanced negotiation between personal values and social responsibilities. The findings underscore the vital role of educators in supporting students through the crossroads phase. Educators can act as developmental partners by engaging students in reflective dialogue, validating their experiences, and encouraging them to explore alternative perspectives. The Learning Partnership Model (Baxter Magolda & King, 2004) provides a useful framework for such engagement, emphasizing mutual respect, shared meaning-making, and the co-construction of knowledge. Moreover, this study emphasizes that self-authorship is not a linear or uniform process but a dynamic, context-sensitive journey. For East Asian students, authenticity may be expressed not only through independence but also through fulfilling relational and ethical responsibilities. This insight has significant implications for higher education institutions aiming to cultivate holistic student development in culturally diverse settings. Future research should expand the scope of inquiry to include a broader range of East Asian countries and institutions, as well as longitudinal studies that track students’ developmental trajectories over time. Such research would deepen our understanding of how cultural, institutional, and individual factors interact to shape the journey toward self-authorship. Ultimately, by embracing a more inclusive and context-aware approach to student development, higher education can better fulfill its mission of preparing students to lead meaningful, autonomous, and socially responsible lives.