A Short Course on Modern Academic Advising

Gleaned from quotes and notes from the Summer 2003 NACADA Institute (written by Dana Vaughan, shared with the ACCAA in Fall 2003).

First and foremost: NOTHING THAT WE ARE CHARGED TO DO MUST BE DONE FROM SCRATCH. THERE IS NO NEED TO RE-INVENT THE WHEEL! In particular, NACADA is an organization of advising professionals with many resources to offer us as we adapt best practices to our own institution.

The 1960s model of academic advising is the prescriptive model (“to finish that major, take these courses”).

o Advising at UW Oshkosh has been prescriptive for many years and has (not coincidentally) accompanied our campus’s current regrettable situation with respect to student persistence (i.e. retention) and satisfaction with advising.

Research clearly shows that institutions that (a) consciously reach out to establish personal bonds among students, faculty, and staff, and (b) emphasize frequent and rewarding contacts outside the classroom, are those that most successfully retain students.

Personal bonds may occur between students and staff advisors or between students and faculty advisors, but only when the numbers of persons involved are conducive to personal bonds. NACADA recommends a maximum load of 300 students per academic advisor.

o At UW Oshkosh, the loads on each “Dempsey advisor” (in current campus slang) are three and sometimes four times the recommended ratio.

Modern advising is developmental, whereby advising activities progressively promote the student’s ability to claim her education, pursue her goals, and make independent use of institutional resources.

Developmental advising proceeds as a series of steps: exploration of life goals; exploration of career/educational goals; selection of an educational combination; selection of classes; and scheduling of classes.

Students who report the highest degree of satisfaction with college (and highest retention rates) are those who have established a meaningful relationship with a member of the faculty. Such interaction is the single strongest predictor of student persistence.

Academic advising by faculty is a form of teaching, inasmuch as advisors teach students: to value the learning process; to apply decision-making strategies; to put the college experience into perspective; to set priorities and evaluate events; to develop thinking and learning skills; and to make choices.

Advising, rather than an extension of the educator’s role, is integral to it. Advising is teaching that stretches beyond instruction. Advising should be at the core of the institution’s educational mission, rather than layered on as a service. Think of advising as the hub of the University wheel.

Just as emergency room personnel speak of the “Golden Hour” (the first hour after a trauma, in which treatment is most likely to improve the prognosis), so does advising have its “Golden Six Weeks”: the key time in which a new student decides to persist, or not. Student persistence (i.e. retention) is a desirable outcome. Therefore, developmental advising “front loads” the advising process with intensive activities in the “Golden Six Weeks” and indeed in the first semester.

Developmental advising produces self-sufficient upper division students who are constantly supplanted by newly arrived lower division students needing more intensive services.

o One possible model for developmental academic advising at UW Oshkosh might be the “Total Intake Model”. Total Intake is demonstrably successful for students and cost-effective for institutions. With Total Intake, students in their first 3 semesters at UW Oshkosh would receive the most advising services, in the form of “one stop shopping”, at the UARC (a new entity established under the guidance of Director of Academic Advising Lynn Freeman). Thereafter, students would receive the most advising services from a designated faculty member in the department that offers their chosen majors.

o With Total Intake (or any similar model), a critical predictor of student success is the student’s orderly transition from UARC to faculty advisor. This should ideally be done with a formal ritual followed up by proscribed faculty-student interactions that are overseen by the department. For example:

q The UARC might be expected to: act as consultants for departments that are developing their own advising process; provide development services for faculty seeking to become advisors; craft a handbook and/or website for faculty advisors; manage the student’s transition from UARC to the department; provide a framework for campus-wide assessment of advising effectiveness; provide rewards and recognition for advising excellence;

q The department might be expected to: produce a student handbook for majors (see Criminal Justice for an excellent example); maintain a major-specific advising library and/or website; assign students to faculty advisors and to organize transition rituals each semester; monitor advising effectiveness; dispense advising awards.

q The faculty advisor might be expected to: participate in transition rituals; maintain current knowledge about advising issues perhaps in the form of updated major planning sheets; know how advising functions in the particular department; provide a group advising session once per semester; moderate an advisee listserv for announcements and questions; review advisees’ academic records each semester and to follow up as appropriate (“well done”, “what went wrong”, etc.); be available for individual appointments as needed.

o NACADA recommends that all faculty advisors participate in a suitable development program (provided by a central entity such as UW Oshkosh’s UARC) before assuming their roles as advisors.

o At UW Oshkosh, the loads may be two and sometimes three times the recommended ratio.

o NACADA recommends that only faculty who are willing and able to advise be designated as advisors.

o NACADA recommends that faculty advisors receive appropriate and formal recognition and reward for their advising work.

o NACADA recommends that, if the voluntary faculty advising load exceeds 30 advisees, additional forms of recognition or remuneration be implemented. At some campuses, this has translated to reduced instructional load, additional pay, or professional development funds.