MEMORANDUM
To: Craig Fiedler, Interim Dean, COEHS
From: The Advisory Council for Comprehensive Academic Advising
Date: November 3, 2004.
Re: Deans’ plan to offer a Faculty/Staff advising training proposal to DTC
The ACCAA was delighted to hear of the Deans’ interest in working with the Council to craft a Differential Tuition Committee proposal creating Faculty and Academic Staff advisor development programs. We fully support this cooperative effort.
Inasmuch as the so-called UARC-Faculty Workgroup has already been tasked with designing such UW Oshkosh-specific programs, that Workgroup is the particular body with which the Deans should communicate most directly. Indeed, to date, two ACCAA members (David Jones and Mike Godfrey) are part of that Workgroup, whose efforts are coordinated through the UARC. The ACCAA will receive regular reports from the Workgroup and will continue to offer recommendations and support.
At this time, the ACCAA wishes to communicate a synopsis of Faculty Advisor training program best practices (see below), gleaned from the pertinent chapters of the Academic Advising Handbook published by the National Academic Advising Association. This synopsis suggests a logical and efficient progression to follow; indeed, some of the steps have already been completed or begun.
We look forward to a competitive proposal that will benefit UW Oshkosh students by providing optimally prepared Faculty and Academic Staff advisors for years to come.
SYNOPSIS (prepared by Dana Vaughan):
Programs MUST include:
q Informational (“how to”: programs & course offerings, policies, academic integrity, referral services; too many training programs end with this part)
q Conceptual (definition of advising, its role in student development, rights & responsibilities of all participants, characteristics of our students, attrition & retention patterns, student expectations of advising, special populations such as adult/part-time/undecided/at risk, etc.)
q Relational (accessibility, attitude of warmth & welcome, asking questions that invite student involvement in discussion, demonstrating decision-making strategies, verbal & nonverbal communication, multicultural communication skills, interviewing; the least attended area in training programs)
Possible progression:
i. low priority compared to research or classroom or committee work
ii. no perceived reward
iii. sink or swim philosophy
iv. just not interested
Possible pre-service program topics for NEW faculty:
Possible in-service program topics for EXISTING faculty: