The Mentor

Doing Students a Disservice? An Ethical Note on Advising Liberal Arts Majors

William Smith, Indiana University, Bloomington — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:29:23 +0000

William E. Smith III, Indiana University, Bloomington

Should an adviser discourage a student from pursuing a liberal arts degree? Or if the student is already a liberal arts major, should an adviser encourage the student to switch programs?

This line of inquiry is one advisers need to consider seriously, if for no other reason than students, parents, and public pundits are asking us versions of these questions. Indeed, it was an exasperated academic adviser’s defense of the liberal arts to parents that prompted his wife, Kim Brooks, to publish an oppositional piece in the online magazine Salon.com. Brooks answers the question in my title with a qualified “yes,” which might also be phrased as “perhaps.” Albeit more hyperbolically stated than her actual conclusion, Brooks (2011) proposes “kill[ing]” the liberal arts degree. She makes this claim precisely because she concludes that the degree fails to adequately prepare “kids for the world,” with “the world” being more or less synonymous with employment (Brooks, 2011, ¶ 5). In contrast, I offer a “no” to my question. I advance this claim by demonstrating that Brooks’ argument is flawed, that liberal arts majors remain employable, and that we need to challenge the tendency to frame an education’s worth primarily in economic terms.

Although she prepares the reader to expect a call for the immediate demise of the liberal arts degree, Brooks really wants something more modest. Brooks dreams of its recreation into a much more business-friendly education leading to a degree that, to borrow from Brooks’ (2011) psychology-degree-holding babysitter, would ensure a student knows “how to use Excel, write out a business plan, do basic accounting” (¶11). In light of a Harvard study about the curriculum, she even muses that perhaps the United States needs to become more like Europe and start making students discern their career paths in middle school. Additionally, Brooks (2011) implies that professors and advisers need to learn the “language of real-world career preparation” (¶ 16). All of this is necessary in light of the fact that so many graduates are surprised by “their utter unemployability” (Brooks, 2011, ¶ 10). Brooks primarily uses autobiographical narrative to illustrate the problems she ascribes to the liberal arts degree. Her post-undergraduate life story focuses on her continually changing jobs: restaurant hostess, English tutor for ESL students, paralegal, adjunct teacher, and freelance writer (Brooks, 2011, ¶ 7). According to her overt argument, the reason she shifts jobs is because her bachelor’s degree failed to prepare her for a career.

Yet Brooks (2011) reveals something about herself in this personal narrative—a self-admitted problem with “decision making”—that weakens her argument (¶ 8). This aspect of her personality appears to be a major obstacle to her obtaining “professional and financial stability” (Brooks, 2011, ¶ 5). In spite of their inability to talk about “career preparation,” Brooks’ professors and advisers would point to her having “completed summer internships in various journalistic endeavors” as well as her strong “writing, research, and critical-thinking skills” when they assured her that she would “land on [her] feet” after graduation (Brooks, 2011, ¶ 6). These journalistic internships indicate that as an undergraduate Brooks meant to parlay her English degree into a journalism career. Yet noticeably she does not even include attempts to get employment in this field. Brooks more explicitly points to indecisiveness as being a core problem for her life goals when she reflects on her professors telling her about the immense versatility of a liberal arts degree. “The possibilities were literally limitless. It was like being 6 years old again and trying to decide if I’d become an astronaut or a ballerina” (Brooks, 2011, ¶ 17).

If indecisiveness is the problem, why then does Brooks identify curriculum reform as the solution? Brooks wants the curriculum to force her to be different. Her undergraduate education, she argues, would not have “deprepared” her for the job market if alongside helping her develop her skills in “writing, reading, and analysis,” it had also redressed her “weaknesses in organization, pragmatic problem solving, and decisions making” (Brooks, 2011, ¶ 8). Partially Brooks appears to desire external persons and institutions to impose on and instill in her what she cannot do for herself. Yet Brooks acknowledges that she would refuse to submit to her own curriculum reforms. When her husband asked her what she would have done if her undergrad had “forced [her] to declare a career plan or take an accounting class or study Web programming instead of contemporary lit,” Brooks (2011) replied, “I probably would have transferred” (¶ 18, 19). Her commitment to what she views as an unemployable degree is so strong that she completed a master of fine arts program, even after years of unsteady employment. In short, Brooks cannot decide whether or not she really wants to be employable as she defines the term. Moreover, Brooks makes a fundamental but easy mistake. She confuses a personal problem (indecisiveness) with a systematic one (a school’s curriculum).

But Brooks’ concern over the unemployable liberal arts degree could be valid in spite of the indecisiveness issue. Based on people she knows, Brooks (2011) puts forth a 2:1 ratio for unemployed versus employed bachelor of arts degree holders (¶ 9). Moreover, she cites a New York Times article that adds more empirical evidence that liberal arts, and especially humanities, degrees are just not cutting it in the great recession. In this article, Catherine Rampell (2011) points out that for recent college graduates the employment rate has dropped from 90 to 56 percent between 2007 and 2010 (¶ 5). Area studies majors came in the worst with only 44.7 percent landing a job within the first year out of school (Rampell, 2011, ¶ 8). Between the top two fields (along with engineering), education programs saw 71.1 percent of their majors find employment (Rampell, 2011, ¶ 8). For the liberal arts, these are certainly less than ideal numbers.

Such troubling figures reveal at least two findings besides the fact that many students are not getting jobs: other students are and there is a structural problem internal to the economy. Rampell’s article implies that the humanities are somewhere close to but higher than area studies in employment numbers. If the humanities were among the worst, this also means that the social sciences and the natural sciences and mathematics (the other two branches of the liberal arts degree) did even better. Brooks (2011) herself admits to knowing people who “parlayed a degree in English or anthropology into a career-track gig” (¶ 9). Even when the United States was just beginning to crawl slowly out of the recession of 2001, Kimberly A. Taylor (2003) concurred with a 1993 study finding “marketing majors might be no more desirable than other business or liberal arts majors” to employers since the raw skills most marketing firms sought in graduates were non-discipline specific (p. 97). More recently the National Leadership Council for Liberal Education & America’s Promise (LEAP) (AAC&U, 2008, pp. 11–13) arrived at similar conclusions regarding desired skill sets when they surveyed a wider range of employers. In other words, the bachelor of arts degree holder is employable even in these exceptionally rough times (see also Rust, 2011, pp. 10–12).

Still Brooks’ call for liberal arts programs to revise their curricula to assist students develop more marketable skills, such as those that Taylor and the LEAP list, might actually help some students do better than graduates in other fields. Indeed Brooks’ recommendations align well with the career advising recommendations that Leigh S. Shaffer and Jacqueline M. Zalewski (2011 a, b) propose in two recent articles. It is in the student’s best interest to prepare as well as possible for the job market.

But there are very substantial limits to how much students can do to maximize their chances of obtaining a job. No matter how many different skills students acquire, collectively speaking, they run up against an intractable obstacle—there are not enough jobs, period. Furthermore, it behooves advisers to recall that even in good economic times, students face a system that always operates with less than 100 percent employment. This gap between the actually employed and the employable is the economy’s structural problem. Even if students in liberal arts shift to programs commonly seen as more practical, that would only lead to more unemployed people holding those other degrees. No matter what, many students will not get work, even though they are well qualified. Let me rephrase this point to ensure clarity: An employable student does not mean that a student will be employed.

If education can help with employability but not guarantee it, then advisers do their students a disservice if they accept framing the degree’s value solely or primarily in economic terms. An economic utilitarian paradigm threatens to make education appear useless if employers do not decide to recognize the student as a valuable person by offering them a job. Rather than decreeing the person among those “throwaway workers with throwaway skills” (Sheffer & Zalewski, 2011a, p. 69), no job offer connotes that the recent graduate failed to count as an employable worker. In a cultural and economic context in which an increasing number of employers are basically posting “unemployed need not apply” signs, many of these graduates are exposed to the possibility of being declared preemptively obsolete (NELP, 2011). The definitional constitution of this phenomenon asserts that since no other employer wanted you, neither do I. Operating under this logic skews an employer’s view of human potential in a way that disfavors the recent graduate.

This situation is symptomatic of a larger, longer-term, and perhaps more nebulous cultural problem. The value of employment and making large salaries has become inflated vis-à-vis other cultural goods. The good life has, in short, become nearly synonymous with the good job. If too much value is invested in employment, then people risk not being able to recognize that other aspects of their life are meaningful, especially when considering the future.

Now I am not saying employment and rewarding work are unimportant, which would be blatantly false. Instead, advisers might do well to remind students about the relationship between happiness and wealth that scholars have found. As Harry Brighouse (2006, pp. 45–46) summarizes, “The low status and stress that accompany relative poverty, and the lack of control over one’s conditions of life, diminish people’s ability to flourish. But once people have achieved a reasonable level of financial security, additional income and wealth do not make them happier.” Thus economic viability is necessary but also necessarily insufficient to living well.

How then can the liberal arts degree help prepare students to better achieve a rewarding life? I present two things, citizenship and culture, to illustrate the possible values of the liberal arts degree for students outside of the employability framework. Before I do so, however, I must state an important caveat: No institution of higher learning can guarantee that students will use what they learn to these ends. Unlike the employment issue, more of the impetus in developing citizenship and participating thoughtfully in culture resides with the student, not some other person or entity.

The liberal arts degree has traditionally aimed at helping students engage in the democratic process. In other words, the curriculum often strives to cultivate students as good citizens. Let us consider how this might work. Martha Nussbaum (2010) recently presented a version of this classic goal tailored to the “global citizen” that she views as necessary for twenty-first-century life. Out of the seven attributes that she marks as crucial for the educated citizen, let us consider just one. An enabled citizen should possess the “ability to have concern for the lives of others, to grasp what policies of many types mean for the opportunities and experiences of one’s fellow citizens, of many types, and for people outside one’s own nation” (Nussbaum, 2010, p. 26). Courses across the liberal arts can help prepare students to think about individuals and systems in the complex and informed ways that this recommendation demands. The ways of thinking and specific content from classes, for example, in biology, sociology, and political science could combine to assist a graduate determine if a politician’s new nutrition bill will likely have its intended consequences.

Another way that a liberal arts education, especially in the humanities, can benefit students is in how they engage with (popular) culture. As Matthew Guterl (2011) points out, “What we [i.e. Americans] do best—despite the near total absence of public support—is paint, and sing, and compose, and write, and read, and watch. And then argue and debate over all of it” (¶ 12). Literature, religious studies, and art history courses, for instance, can all assist the student in better understanding what cultural products mean to people and how they influence an individual. In other words, they can puzzle out how the viewer (or listener, reader, writer, etc.), the text (painting, poem, song, etc.), and the context relate to each other, which, in turn, can impact how graduates consume and create these cultural products.

Advisers would do well by their students, then, if they disrupt the employability framework and make students seriously consider additional ways education can impact their lives. Doing otherwise risks abetting a cultural logic that threatens to reduce people to components in a complex economic machine, as expendable as a broken keyboard.

References

Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2008). College learning for the new global community (Executive summary). Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/GlobalCentury_ExecSum_3.pdf

Brighouse, H. (2006). On education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Brooks, K. (2011, June 18). Is it time to kill the liberal arts degree? Salon.com. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/06/19/time_to_kill_liberal_arts.

Guterl, M. P. (2011, June 30). The humanities are more important. Insidehighed.com. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2011/06/30/essay_defending_the_humanities

National Employment Law Project (NELP). (2011). Hiring discrimination against the unemployed. Briefing Paper. Retrieved from http://www.nelp.org/page/-/UI/2011/unemployed.discrimination.7.12.2011.pdf?nocdn=1

Nussbuam, M. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Rampell, C. (2011, May 18). Many with new college degree find the job market humbling. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/pages/business/index.html

Rust, M. M. (2011). The utility of liberal education: Concepts and arguments for use in academic advising. NACADA Journal, 33(1), 5–13.

Shaffer, L. S., & Zalewski, J. M. (2011a). Career advising in a VUCA environment. NACADA Journal, 31(1), 64–74.

Shaffer, L. S., & Zalewski, J. M. (2011b). A human capital approach to career advising. NACADA Journal, 31(1), 75–87.

Taylor, K. A. (2003). Job market: An innovative course preparing undergraduates for marketing careers. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(2), 97–107.

O*NET Online as a Valuable Tool for Academic Advising

Frank Igou, Louisiana Tech University — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:29:07 +0000

Frank P. Igou, Louisiana Tech University

As The Mentor’s April 2006 “Advising Forum” revealed, there is a tremendous overlap between career counseling and academic advising (Advising Forum, 2006). The academic adviser often serves as the first line in helping students choose a major related to their future careers. Bates (2007) suggests that because students often associate majors with career choices, advisers need to have at least a basic knowledge of career counseling to be effective. Harris-Bowlsbey, Riley-Dikel, and Sampson (2002) tout the centrality of information resources in career decision making. The career resources available to the academic adviser may be somewhat limited as may be the adviser’s training in the use of the resources. An online resource that Bates recommends is the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) (Center, 2012), along with a series of activities to assist in career exploration. While Bates’ (2007) suggestion is an excellent one, she does not provide specifics about how general advisers unfamiliar with this career-oriented tool can employ O*NET.

O*NET is a website maintained by the Employment and Training Administration division of the United States Department of Labor. O*NET replaces the print-based Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT). Since O*NET is web based, the information is easier to access and is updated more frequently than is the DOT. It is an easy-to-use, cost-free comprehensive source of information for academic advisers and advisees.

Ease of Use

The O*NET main page is easily accessed at http://www.onetcenter.org. Of particular interest to advisers is a web-based application called O*NET Online, accessed at http://www.onetonline.org. At the top of the O*NET Online main page is a search box labeled Occupation Quick Search. Simply entering an academic discipline title such as “English major” or “psychology major” will produce a list of occupations rank-ordered using relevance algorithm for that discipline. For each occupation title listed, a relevance score (0–100%) appears, as well as the federal occupational code, title, and the job demand outlook for that occupation. The listed occupation title is actually a hyperlink to helpful information about that occupation. By clicking on the occupation title, O*NET Online displays a wealth of details. This resource’s ease of use also benefits the student. Gordon (2006) asserts that the most important use of career information is “to teach students how to obtain, evaluate, and use it” (p.74). O*NET Online easily accomplishes this.

Organized and Detailed Information

One of the great benefits of O*NET Online is that it addresses aspects of a career that may never appear in an employer’s job advertisement or in a catalog description of a major. O*NET Online includes the softer side of career information, including information that relates directly to an advisee’s personality and values.

The information contained in O*NET Online is divided into six domains. The domains include Worker Characteristics, Worker Requirements, Experience Requirements, Occupational Specific Information, Workforce Characteristics, and Occupational Requirements (Center, 2012). Although all of these content areas may be potentially useful for advising, the area of greatest interest to academic advisers is contained under Worker Characteristics. The characteristics contained under this dimension include:

Abilities. Enduring attributes of the individual that Influence Performance.
Occupational Interests. Individuals’ different preferences for types of work environments. The occupational profiles presented are compatible with Holland’s Model of Personality Types and Work Environment (Holland, 1997).
Work Values. Global aspects of work as specific needs based on Dawis and Lofquist’s Theory of Work Adjustment (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984).
Work Styles. Personal characteristics that can affect how well individuals are able to perform a job.

For more detailed information about the O*NET Online Content Model, visit http://www.onetonline.org/help/onet/database.

For more detailed information about the O*NET Worker Characteristics, visit http://www.onetcenter.org/content.html#cm1.

As noted, the information in O*NET Online goes well beyond the tasks, activities, and requirements of occupations. It also contains information of a more personal nature that may interest students, such as descriptors of work environments, styles, and values. Because advisers often get to know advisees on a more personnel level than do career counselors, it may be more appropriate for advisers to play a role in this area. This may be especially true after a student has decided on a specific major and needs more guidance than simply knowing what the educational and skill requirements are.

For a more detailed description of O*NET Online occupational content, visit http://www.onetonline.org/help/onet/database.

Using O*NET Online in Activities to Assist Students

Bates (2007) also briefly lists a number of activities to assist advisees in career exploration. These activities may be facilitated using information from O*NET Online. These include “Asking Questions”, “List Elimination” and “Typical-Day-at-Work Fantasy.”

In the “Ask Questions” activity, Bates suggests that advisers ask students to think about potential majors and career choices such as:

Which classes do you like best and least? Why?

What do you do in your free time?

What is most important to you in a career?

How long are you willing to go to school?

To expand on Bates, this exercise can be modified by asking students to record their answers so their responses can be used to search O*NET Online. O*NET Online’s references to values can be correlated with a student’s recorded values. The classes that students indicate are their most and least favorites could reveal which occupations or occupational areas might fit them best. In addition to helping students choose a major, this may also be useful when selecting the best or most useful electives. A hobby or pastime that students engage in during their free time may have important career implications and may shed light on an appropriate major, specific courses to take, or a particular track to follow within their major. When answering the question about what is most important in a career, advisees are likely to list things related to their personal styles or values. This type of information appears on each occupational page. Also, on every O*NET Online occupational page is a description of occupational requirements, which include complementary degree programs. O*NET Online contains information about which majors are needed, whether a bachelor’s degree is sufficient, or if a master’s or doctoral degree is required.

Another activity suggested by Bates (2007) is “List Elimination.” The student is given a list of all possible majors and asked to immediately cross out all majors that do not interest them. They then look at course descriptions from a university catalog for the remaining preferred majors and cross off any of those that they can eliminate due to course descriptions. The idea behind this activity it to reduce the list to a more manageable size.

Bates (2007) recommends that advisees then explore the remaining majors by using online and career library resources and by talking with faculty members in each major area. She does not specify resources. However, O*NET Online may serve as an excellent online resource here. The student can look for information from O*NET Online pertaining to the remaining majors on their list. Again, to examine the O*NET Online information, a student needs to merely access O*NET Online, type the name of the major in the Occupational Quick Search window, and O*NET Online will display associated occupations. In most cases, the degree type related to that major will be displayed when accessing the individual occupations. Degrees and educational requirements are also displayed. Students can make a list of potential majors, and the adviser can direct them to the appropriate department. Simplicity of O*NET Online frees the student to engage in independent exploration. Thus, the student is free to commit more time to his or her exploration than might be available with an academic adviser. The adviser then would be available for specific referral, clarification, and discussion rather than spending extensive time on computer searches.

Course selection at registration and general academic advising may also be facilitated. Students may be willing to move beyond their comfort zone and schedule more challenging courses if they see the course has direct applicability to their career interest. This is especially true if they perceive the target careers are in an occupational area that addresses their preferred working style, personal interests, and values.

Another activity suggested by Bates (2007) is “Typical-Day-at-Work Fantasy,” when advisers ask advisees to close their eyes and guide them through a typical day at work. In this activity, an adviser asks the advisee to picture important details, including the time of day the work begins, clothing styles in the work environment, and the types of interactions with others that occur. Bates suggests asking students to describe what they envision. The student or the student and adviser can write down and examine the “Work Style” and “Work Context” areas of occupations to find career that seem to fit the student’s descriptors. For occupations that seem to fit, the student or student and adviser can look at the knowledge, experience, and educational requirements, and develop or refine a plan of study using O*NET Online. O*NET Online can serve as a check to make the imagined resemble the real.

For more detailed information about Bates (2007) activities to assist advisees in career exploration, visit http://www.dus.psu.edu/mentor/old/articles/070725sb.htm.

The suggestion here is not that academic advisers attempt to replace career counselors, but as Bates (2007) suggests, advisers could acquire sufficient knowledge to integrate academic advising with knowledge of career advising. Suggestions in this article barely scratch the surface of the utility of O*NET Online for academic advisers. Given the breadth of information contained in O*NET Online as well as its accessibility and ease of use, it may be the most useful tool available for providing advice to help advisees achieve academic success and develop to their fullest potential.

References

Advising Forum. (2006, April). What’s the difference between academic advising and career counseling? The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor/archives/advising-forum-2006 http://dus.psu.edu/mentor/old/forum/foru0604.htm

Bates, S. D. (2007, July 25). Career advising: What academic advisers need to know. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor/old/articles/070725sb.htm

Dawis, R. V. & Lofquist. L. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment: An individual-differences model and its application. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Gordon, V. N. (2006). Career advising: An academic adviser’s guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Harris-Bowlsbey, J., Riley Dikel, M., & Sampson, J. P., Jr. (2002). The Internet: A tool for career planning (2nd ed.). Tulsa, OK: National Career Development Association.

Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

National Center for O*NET Development (Center). (2012). O*NET Resource Center. Retrieved from http://www.onetcenter.org.

A Visual Model of Academic Advising

Anthony Smothers, University of Northern Iowa — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 18:23:03 +0000

Anthony Smothers, University of Northern Iowa

Introduction

Academic advising has involved teaching students about decision-making processes and career choices beginning with Crookston (1972). The years since have enriched the profession with theories of developmental advising, appreciative advising, and involvement theory to strengthen the foundation of academic advising and provide a framework to evaluate the impact on students. Consequently, the field of academic advising has increasingly focused on research and professional development. The Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS) standards for academic advising (NACADA, 2012), addressing core values, best practices, and recognition of advising, have been critical components of student development and maintaining high quality of advising. However, academic advising rarely uses logic models to evaluate what practitioners do. Logic models allow us to visualize the programs and processes that deliver service, instruction, and assessment opportunities.

The purpose of this qualitative analysis is to address the question “What conversations do we have with students who are deciding or changing majors?” Often we find ourselves talking about the practical things such as student issues or requirements for the degree or major. How often do advisers present a visual picture of what they do? YouTube videos of advising sessions and professional reports are emerging that reflect the advising mission, goals, and quantifiable numbers of student appointments, as well as programs offered, assessments of satisfaction, and many more aspects that justify the need for academic advisers.

According to Kowlton and Phillips (2009), logic models are visual methods of presenting an idea. “Logic models support design, planning, communication, evaluation, and learning” (Kowlton & Phillips, 2009, p. 4). The purpose of composing logic models is to see programming/process inputs and outputs. Although there are two logic models with theory of change and programming, for our purpose we reviewed programming and resources that direct advising conversations with students. Logic models may also be known as idea maps, working models, mental models, action maps, pictures of activity, or visual perceptions. The benefits of logic models highlight them as strategic means to critically review and improve thinking (Kowlton & Phillips, 2009).

Methodology

Qualitative analysis traditionally has involved interviewing subjects in a natural setting concerning their life experiences and listening to their perceptions of reality. This basic qualitative study also included observations and documents. However, qualitative analysis may also use techniques of case study, critical qualitative research, narrative analysis, phenomenology, ethnography, and grounded theory (Merriam, 2009, p. 38). For this qualitative analysis, the use of documents and adviser expert knowledge provided the foundation for the logic model. Documents were used as the data source for many of the dimensions and visuals found in the model.

The method of reviewing documents and programs provided begins with those produced at the University of Northern Iowa, a comprehensive university with 13,201 students and more than 120 majors, as well as a multitude of minors and certificates. The university website is www.uni.edu. The institution’s Office of Academic Advising serves deciding majors, major-changers, intake students (first-year students in participating departments), and a variety of university-sponsored programs, including new-student and transfer orientations. The following will be used as evidence of the model:

UNI Office of Academic Advising sheet on services (yearly)
Academic advising syllabus (2011)
Academic Advising website resources (www.uni.edu/advising)
New student handbook (2011–12)
New student calendar
Peer Adviser in Residence (PAIR) newsletter
Academic Tidbits/Decision Maker newsletter
University catalog (http://www.uni.edu/catalog)
University of Northern Iowa Referral Resource Guide (2011–12) (http://www.uni.edu/advising/sites/default/files/referral.pdf)
Higher Learning Commission Accreditation—Academic Advising Report (2010)
Provost-commissioned NACADA Review of Academic Advising (2007)
University of Northern Iowa audit of academic advising report (2006)

Visual Model of Academic Advising

Reviewing these documents and programming in the Office of Academic Advising was the base for the model as a visual tool. A limitation of this logic model was a specific output, which is not represented. For example, an output for the model may be a declared major or increased self-efficacy for a student. This model represents the main processes and programs that share a common outcome and goal of students selecting majors and discovering career opportunities. The themes presented in the documents were reviewed and the Visual Model of Academic Advising verified by peer review by Jean Neibauer, director of Academic Advising; David Marchesani; Michele Peck; Angie Tudor; Josh Sankey; Kim Schirm; Joan Smothers; Paul Waterman; Robert Frederick, director of Career Services; and Dr. Karen Cunningham, coordinator of Individual Studies. This peer review supported the Visual Model of Academic Advising with discussions for improvement.

Results and Discussion

The top of the model represents academic advising in relationship with students’ development (Crookston, 1972; O’Banion, 1972, Habley, 1981; Gorton, 2000; Jones & Becker, 2002). Academic advising is a relationship in which students and advisers take responsibility for their partnership as described in the CAS standards (CAS, 2010) and National Academic Advising Association core values (NACADA, 2012).

What are the primary themes and elements within these documents that address student development, programs, and functions that advisers use when working with students? Reviewing the documents reveals that the main themes are teaching the purpose and rationale of the liberal arts core (general education requirements); educating students on majors, minors, and certificates; student involvement; self-assessment; career opportunities; academic skills; academic policies and procedures; and campus referrals. For example, the orientation program, new student handbook, advising website, advising syllabus, and appointment notes inform students of the (1) purpose and rationale of the Liberal Arts Core, and foundation of their education (http://www.uni.edu/vpaa/lac/, 2010). Additionally, each core area—Core Competencies; Civilizations and Cultures; Fine Arts, Literature, Philosophy & Religion; Natural Science and Technology; Social Science; Capstone Experience—presents its own purpose statement. Therefore, they are determined to be important enough to list separately in the model.

Advisers facilitate information about (2) majors, minor, and certificates using several resources. University departments provide plan of studies (www.uni.edu/pos). Advisers also refer students to faculty and department websites for more detailed information on the major. Major worksheets are provided to academic departments and to career services. Peer Advisers in Residence (PAIRS) are trained undergraduate students living in residence halls and working with advisers to provide programming on majors, minors, and certificate resources, referrals, and decision-making processes. The PAIRS provide a student-to-student interaction that may be more comfortable for some students. The Career Decision Making course, 170:050, offered by the College of Education and taught by academic advising professional staff, provides academic information on exploring majors, minors, and certificates. Additionally, the office of academic advising provides events like meet-and-greets with advisers, major meetings, Career Cruising (www.careercruising.com) workshops, and “Majors in Minutes” in which students learn about different majors by meeting with senior students in a speed dating format.

Academic advisers as advocates of student development theory understand the importance of students finding their “niches” on campus and learning more about themselves as described in Astin’s (3) Involvement Theory (Astin, 1984). Academic advisers promote involvement as a way to assist students in defining their interests and skills. Advisers at the University of Northern Iowa talk with students about the numerous opportunities available to them through the Student Involvement and Activities Center, which maintains contact with more than 300 student organizations. The Leadership Center provides programs to teach students about leadership styles, skills, and opportunities. Additionally, the Leadership Center coordinates with the Volunteer Center of Cedar Valley to publicize opportunities for students to volunteer.

Undergraduate research with faculty encourages students to explore areas of inquiry that may not be available in a major academic curriculum. The Study Abroad office provides students with experiences overseas that nurture a broader understanding of global cultures and economy. The National Student Exchange program allows students to experience another university or college within the United States and Canada. Student involvement not only creates an environment for students to discover their connections with the campus but also provides a positive impact on the university’s retention rates, matriculation, and citizenship.

Academic advisers use a variety of (4) self-assessment tools with students depending on where a student is in the decision-making process. The university uses Career Cruising (www.careercruising.com), an interactive self-assessment tool with 116 statements that rank career characteristics of thousands of professions. Career Cruising allows students to align areas of interest preferences with occupations, working conditions, education and training, college programs available, career path, advice from professionals in the field, and resources for questions. Another tool in use at the University of Northern Iowa is a simple paper worksheet on which a student writes down his or her interests, hobbies, talents, and abilities. This exercise often presents themes to consider and prompts conversations about student experiences or tips about gaining information to explore those areas of interest.

The Strong Interest Inventory (www.cpp.com) assessment tool is based on the work of John Holland’s Codes (Holland, 1985, 1992) that describe realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional themes. Holland’s work continued the personality research of Linton (1945) and Lewin (1935) and additionally took into account work environments and social settings. Advisers often use the Strong Interest Inventory when Career Cruising clusters or areas of interest are not clear. The benefits of using the Strong Interest Inventory include its cost effectiveness and its personalized fourteen-page profile of scales: General Occupational Themes (GOTs), Basic Interest Scales (BISs), Personal Style Scales (PSSs), and Occupational Scales (OSS).

The Myers Briggs Type Inventory (www.myersbriggs.org) organizes personality types into categories (Myers, 1980). The work of Katherine Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers (Myers & Briggs Foundation, n.d.) was continued based on the personality types introduced by Carl Jung (1971) and which people identified with to reflect the way they process information in their environment (Myers & Briggs Foundation, n.d.). Jung’s belief was that people’s behavior has order and they develop personality types based on environmental factors: extroversion/introversion, sensing/intuitive, thinking/feeling, and judging/perception (Myers & Briggs Foundation, n.d.). Advisers work with students to complete and interpret self-assessments to determine major options, careers, hobbies, interests, or even personalities.

The university’s academic advising office recently began to implement the Appreciative Advising Inventory as part of our self-assessment tool box (http://www.appreciativeadvising.net/AAI.pdf). The goal is to help students work through the stages of discover, dream, design, and destiny (Bloom, Hutson, & He, 2008).

In Academic Advising: A Comprehensive Handbook, Kristen Kennedy and Jennifer Crissman Ishler (2008) describe the importance of students’ values, beliefs, culture, and experiences and the role family contributes to students’ decision making. Advisers must be aware of those contributing factors when assisting students in finding majors. For example, often students will comment that their parents (perceived or communicated) believe they should major in business. After working with the student on Career Cruising, which indicates art as an area interest, and asking open-ended questions about the number of art classes taken in high school, the type of art they enjoy, and what concerns they would have as an art major, our conversation turns toward career opportunities in a field they would love. The importance of combining self-assessments with working questions allows the conversation to drill down to the issues the student is contemplating.

(5) Career opportunities are important factors in assisting students to define their interests, education, and ability to market their skills with the major they choose. Advisers working with career services programs assist students with job shadowing, part-time employment, internship/cooperative education, and connecting students with alumni. Career center handouts (www.uni.edu/careerservices) and career connections through Career Cruising are resources students and advisers may use to talk about careers associated with different majors, minors, and certificates.

Advisers often are the first people students will confide in about (6) academic preparedness or struggles with study skills, time management, writing, note taking, and test taking. Faculty members are important resources, too, as they can offer encouragement and advice about being successful in their courses. Additionally, the UNI Academic Learning Center provides tutoring, a math and science lab, and a writing center to help students gain the skills they need to learn effectively. Advisers may also relate personal stories (autoenthnography) to advisees about a difficult skill or course they completed and how they overcame those challenges.

Academic advisers assist students in learning (7) academic policies and procedures, including department admission requirements; degree requirements; and major, minor, and certificate requirements. Participation in presentations at orientation and advising sessions provide opportunities to talk with students about these requirements and share expectations pertaining to their chosen areas of study or exploration. Students depend on reliable information to make informed decisions about their educational choices. Advisers should also address important topics of academic standing, early warning (faculty d/f slips which are mid-term grades for new students), adding and dropping deadlines, and procedures regarding academic warning, probation, and suspension. For example, new students who receive deficient grades of “d” or “f” for a course at midterm receive letters from advisers with steps and resources for assistance. Advisers assist students with action plans, student requests for submission to the provost office, financial and academic appeals, and education decision making regarding future plans that may or may not include enrollment at UNI.

The last main theme focuses on (8) campus referrals that academic advisers make. The offices to which advisers refer students are not considered with any particular order of importance or ranking in mind. We refer students to academic departments where experts in a particular academic field can share major, minor, and certificate requirements; undergraduate research experience, information about clubs and activities sponsored by a particular department, and career opportunities. Various departments identify certain faculty members as referral resources in their respective areas of expertise. Advisers introduce the university’s Student Involvement and Activities Center to students as a way to join organizations and make connections and also help students become aware of the Office of Career Services and its CareerCat resource. Students with health documentation holds are referred to UNI’s University Health Services, which includes our health clinic, pharmacy, counseling, and disabilities services.

Academic advisers at UNI work with the admissions office on transfer credits, visit-day presentations, and student transition efforts in support of the Admission Partnership Program involving our fifteen Iowa Community Colleges. Students often ask advisers questions about financial aid or their university bill, and they are referred to the Office of Financial Aid and Business Operations, both housed in our student services center for “one stop shopping”. The Registrar’s Office is a key referral for students who need to ask their record analysts questions about graduation, adding/dropping courses after advising deadlines, and course availability. Our rising international population has led to increased referrals to International Services where advisees’ questions range from credits to visa status. The various student-exchange participants, degree-seeking students, and Culturally Intensive English Program (C.I.E.P.) students add other dimensions to our advising responsibilities.

Future Analysis

The process of creating a Visual Model of Academic Advising led to staff discussions about programs and processes used when guiding deciding majors, major-changers, and intake students. One conclusion from these discussions is that many relationships across campus arise from assisting students in finding their majors and career opportunities within academic departments, student service departments, and the community. A visual model may clarify which programs and processes to assess for effectiveness and efficiencies. The importance of visualizing the inputs to a logic model is just as important as assessing the outputs. Although many of the program and process representatives in the UNI Office of Academic Advising constructed learning outcomes and developed assessments to measure those outcomes, the purpose of this particular analysis was to visualize and start conversations with students.

The next step will be to conceptualize a complete logic model, including visual outputs (assessments), and display a flow of activities. This may be a difficult task, as students are unique individuals with varying needs. As developmental advisers, we form a partnership with students and are responsible for responding to their questions, which leads to identifying the categories discussed above.

References

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297–308.

Bloom, J. L., Hutson, B. L., & He, Y. (2008). The appreciative advising revolution. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing.

Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS). (2010). Retrieved from http://www.cas.edu/

Crookston, B. B. (1972). A developmental view of academic advising as teaching. Journal of College Student Personnel, 13, 12–17.

Habley, W. (1981). Academic advising: Critical link in student retention. NASPA Journal, 28(4), 45–50.

Holland, J. L. (1985). Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Holland, J. L. (1992). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (2nd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessments Resources. (Original work published in 1985).

Jones, R., & Becker, K. (2002, April). Getting prepared for the underprepared. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal, 4(2). Retrieved from http://www.psu.edu/dus/mentor

Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types. (R. F. C. Hull, Ed.; H. G. Baynes, Trans.). Volume 6 of The collected works of C. G. Jung. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published in 1923).

Kennedy, K., & Ishler, J. C. (2008). The changing college student. In V. Gordon, W. Habley, T. Grites, & Associates. Academic Advising: A comprehensive handbook. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kowlton, L. W., & Phillips, C. C. (2009). The logic model guidebook: Better Ssrategies for great results. New Dehli, India: Sage Publications, Inc.

Lewin, K. (1935) A dynamic theory of personality. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Linton, R. (1945). The cultural background of personality. New York, NY: Century.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.). MBTI Basics. Retrieved from www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics

Myers, I. B. (1980). Introduction to type (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

National Academic Advising Association (NACADA). (2012). NACADA statement of core values. Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu

O’Banion, T. (1972). An academic advising model. Junior College Journal, 42(6), 62–69.

Vertical Peer Mentoring and Advising: A Structure for Student Involvement in Multi-Level Advising

Alexandra Kurepa, North Carolina A&T State University — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:41:24 +0000

Alexandra Kurepa, North Carolina A&T State University

Abstract:

This case study describes a recently instituted learning community at North Carolina A&T State University supported by a National Science Foundation grant that has developed varied methods of mentoring and advising. This new multi-level structure and associated procedures improved mentoring and advising satisfaction among students and faculty and improved student achievement. In addition to faculty learning-community leader assistance in mentoring and advising, the students are also actively involved in the process. Their participation helps to build a stronger sense of belonging within the discipline, which in turn provides faculty with more dedicated and informed partners in the advising and mentoring process.

Introduction

Finding sufficient and appropriate time for mentoring and advising remains a critical problem for many faculty members. As Dorothy Burton Nelson (2006) and others point out, “A quick to-do checklist for career advising” could easily include “establish a caring, working relationship;” “encourage thinking about life and career goals;” and “provide rationale for course and curriculum requirements” (¶ 6). For faculty mentors and advisers of declared majors, the mentoring session could easily include a micro-tutoring session to help with a discipline-specific concept, monitoring academic progress, an attempt to clarify the student’s goals, as well as diplomatic and careful guidance in course and section selection. The adviser needs to try to quickly discover and just as quickly match the student’s interests and abilities to appropriate academic and career plans both within the discipline and outside of the selected discipline.

Unfortunately, as Nelson (2006) succinctly notes, “Three out of four students entering the university for the first time have no clear career/occupational goals, and only 8 percent of declared students have an understanding of their majors” (¶ 1). As a result, the need to work through a number of prescriptive tasks often reduces the potential effectiveness of the adviser and the advising sessions. Of the various models of advising (prescriptive, developmental, and integrated) described briefly by Heisserer and Parette, (2002), advisers may find themselves pushed into using a prescriptive model instead of the developmental or integrated models that might be more appropriate for a particular student or group of students.

Nevertheless, some students come to the advising session well prepared, knowledgeable about options open to them, aware of the problems they face, and prepped to ask the right questions. How does this happen? Generally, these ready-for-the-advising-session students are those who are successful and share a particular set of characteristics. Frost (1994) describes these characteristics by saying “… involvement and commitment are two important attributes of successful students, and willingness to take responsibility for the future is a third” (p. 54). It then appears that the problem for advisers and departments is to find ways to create a situation in which all of the students are involved, committed, and willing to take responsibility for their future.

A Structure to Improve Advising

The Mathematics Learning Community at North Carolina A&T State University

The academic structure described below may prove useful in creating environments that aid the mentoring and advising process. Designed to accomplish a number of educational goals, including an improvement in advising satisfaction for both students and advisers, the Mathematics Learning Community has helped to develop in the students the characteristics cited by Frost (1994) as crucial to academic success. While the individual aspects of the program may be neither new nor unique, together they form an unusual and effective resource community at North Carolina A&T State University (NC A&T) and could provide ideas for development at other institutions. Although some of the procedures do not seem to touch directly on advising, an awareness of all aspects of the program is important when judging the impact on advising.

In action for three years, the Mathematics Learning Community at NC A&T is a faculty-mentored, student-cohort learning community supported by the National Science Foundation Scholarships in the Sciences, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM) program. It involves up to thirty students—first-year through graduate level—with approximately five to seven students at each level. The program is only open to mathematics majors and requires the students to participate in research projects and enrichment activities. Problem sessions and study teams are part of the program’s regular activities. The students are required to engage in vertical peer mentoring, tutoring, and advising. Social activities are a regular part of the program. Three faculty members (grant primary investigator and co-primary investigators) serve as advisers to the group. These advisers are available to the students in addition to their regular assigned adviser. There is a physical space available to the students for presentations, meetings, peer tutoring, advising sessions, and “hanging out.” Not all majors in the department are part of the community.

Advising Aspects

In relation to advising, a number of important aspects deserve discussion.

First, the students each gain faculty advisers. The three faculty members who work with the group are considered by the students to be their additional advisers and mentors. These faculty members help coordinate and prepare student class schedules by explaining the links between the courses, the logic of a certain sequence of courses, and the importance of each course in the discipline. The faculty members help to organize tutoring sessions and advise senior students on how to conduct tutoring interventions for students struggling in difficult proof-based mathematics courses. They provide enrichment programs that help introduce students to research or prepare students for professional exams such as actuarial exams or the Graduate Record Examination. Most importantly, they help coordinate student peer mentoring and advising activities that build student self-confidence and a sense of belonging to the discipline and the department. Students who participate in this program are well prepared and have necessary knowledge of their professional options when they meet with their regular assigned adviser and sign up for classes. The use of two faculty advisers—one who serves as a learning-community adviser and the other a regular adviser—provides a more successful academic advising and mentoring process. In addition, as the students move through the program, they change their learning-community adviser and thereby expand their network of advising links to the major, the discipline, and the institution. This can be particularly important because as Heisserer and Parette (2002) note, “… contact with a significant person within an institution of higher education is a crucial factor in a student’s decision to remain in college” (¶ 2).

Second, students are required to participate in mentoring and advising, not only as the recipient, but also as the advising provider. The term “vertical peer mentoring” means that while non-faculty members of the learning community are peers in the sense that they are all students, they are also all able to provide some kind of advising to the other students. This works in a number of ways. Obviously, students in their third or fourth years can provide advice to the first- and second-year students about required courses, their own experiences in taking certain courses concurrently or sequentially, and other similar items. They can explain how the courses underclass students take are relevant to future academic work. The more senior students can discuss the importance and implications of certain concepts and ideas. In addition, if needed, the more senior students can provide help in the form of tutoring sessions or provide a platform for some team research work. A number of students who participate in research activity learn to work in groups and present their joint results at the annual Math Awareness Day conference.

Third, the involvement of students in vertical mentoring/tutoring gives the students a sense of ownership of the project. While students are asked to provide this kind of advising service to each other, they do not look upon it as an onerous task. Instead, they perceive the effort as an extension of their own personal networking. They take pride in the combination of advising, mentoring, and tutoring efforts and display a kind of team mentality toward meeting academic goals.

Fourth, because the project involves both graduate and undergraduate students, the range of advising can be extended. Undergraduates, particularly those who plan to go on to graduate school, gain a different perspective on the experience by interacting in formal and informal ways with the graduate students. One example directly related to advising is that because of the harried schedules of many faculty members, graduate-level students might be aware of or working on faculty projects of which even other faculty would not necessarily be apprised. Consequently, a graduate student might offer advice of the following nature to an undergraduate student: “If you are going to take course X next semester, you might try to get into section Y with professor Z, because her current research is on that topic.” Or “if that topic really interests you, but you can’t take that section, you might ask professor Z if she needs an undergraduate research assistant.” This could be invaluable advice not necessarily available to the student’s adviser.

Fifth, this kind of multi-level advising is helpful with advising students with significant out-of-class time commitments as described by Kotowski and Laird (2010). In the case of mathematics, many students need to take advantage of undergraduate research experiences, which take place at other universities around the country and are formal, typically ten-week or semester-long programs. These experiences could take place during a long semester or during the summer and require considerable advance planning. The availability of multiple advisers has made the task of preparation for such an event much easier.

Advising Research Goals, Questions, and Techniques

Brett McFarlane (2009) addressed the advising community when he stated “As always, the most significant challenge we face is that much of the available research shows that high-quality academic advising has an ‘indirect’ rather than ‘direct’ relationship with student persistence” (¶ 1) Taking a cue from McFarlane, one of the goals of this study is to determine if a different structure for advising can improve retention and student outcomes at the undergraduate level and beyond.

With that idea in mind, it is hoped that this study will help to answer some of the questions McFarlane (2009) asks, paraphrased as follows: How do we determine if academic advising can increase student commitment to educational goals and to the institution? How can we know that academic advising aids students in negotiating the paths of their chosen discipline? And finally, can a connection of all these pieces show a distinct relationship between advising and retention?

In order to begin documenting the results of the Mathematics Learning Community as an advising structure, a survey tool was created. It was administered to students in the learning community and to those students outside the learning community (the control group) who participated in the standard advising system. The anonymous survey consists of standard questions about experience level (first-year student, second-year student, graduate student, etc.); their membership in student organizations, particularly math organizations; their participation in undergraduate research experiences; and other rather straightforward, census-type data that are nevertheless useful and revealing. In addition, the students respond to some questions that deal with their thoughts or feelings, their sense of belonging, their belief that they know what they want to study in graduate school, and their confidence, among other things.

Results

With the caveat that the program has not been in place for an extended period of time, it is possible to say that the Mathematics Learning Community at NC A&T has, so far, produced a number of important results. Some results are directly or closely related to advising. In terms of students’ attachment to the department/major/institution, 87.5 percent of the students in the program report a “strong sense of belonging” when they think of the Mathematics Department. By comparison, only 50 percent of the mathematics majors who are not part of the program report a “strong sense of belonging.” Of those majors who are in the program and plan on attending graduate school, 75 percent report that they know what they want to study in graduate school. By comparison, only 33 percent of the mathematics majors who are not part of the learning community and plan on attending graduate school report that they know what they want to study in graduate school. While 50 percent of those in the program rate themselves as “very confident” when tutoring/mentoring other students, none (0 percent) of the majors not part of the learning community are “very confident” when tutoring/mentoring other students. In addition, 70 percent of the students in the program are members of the student chapter of the national professional organization, in this case, the Mathematics Association of America, while only 20 percent of the majors not in the program are members. Finally, 32 percent of the undergraduate members of the learning community have taken part in an undergraduate research experience, while only 14 percent of those majors not in the program have been able to enroll in an undergraduate research experience.

Impacts on Advising

The impacts of this study on advising mirror the characteristics delineated by Frost (1994): involvement, commitment, and a willingness to take responsibility for the future. The students are more involved with their major, more committed to their field, and display a clearer understanding of their own responsibility for their future careers. Anecdotal evidence indicates that students are more satisfied with their advising experiences. Having multiple advisers available to them with different viewpoints appears to encourage them to seek out the resources they need. Being called upon to advise others gives the students a better sense of the questions they need to ask when receiving advice. Meanwhile, faculty member advisers report greater satisfaction with advising when assisting students in the learning community. They note that the students in the learning community display a better understanding of the culture of the discipline. Since these students have a better knowledge of their opportunities and possible career paths, the advising sessions become more of a discussion rather than a rushed lecture on what it means to be a professional—in this case, mathematician. The fact that 87.5 percent of the students in the program report a strong sense of belonging in the Mathematics Department makes advising easier and bodes well for retention and graduation rates.

Conclusion

The Mathematics Learning Community at NC A&T has produced a noticeable improvement in the advising environment for both the students and faculty. The program requires substantial initial and some continuing effort on the part of the faculty advisers, but early evidence suggests the results in terms of student academic success are significant. As the program continues and more longitudinal data become available, further reviews will be conducted in order to quantify and confirm the advances in advising and its relation to academic success.

Acknowledgment

This work is supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation grant: DUE 0728410.

References:

Burton Nelson, D. (2006). Career advisors: A new breed. NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources. Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/search.htm

Frost, S. H. (1994). Advising alliances: Sharing responsibility for student success. NACADA Journal, 14(2), 54–58.

Heisserer, D., & Parette, P. (2002). Advising at-risk students in college and university settings. College Student Journal, 36(1), 69–83.

Kotowski, N. J., & Laird, C. (2010). Advising students in majors requiring significant out-of-class time commitment. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal, 11(3). Retrieved from http://www.psu.edu/dus/mentor.

McFarlane, B. (2009). Advising & student persistence: The pressure rises …. Academic Advising Today, 32(1). Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/AAT/index.htm.

What protocols should academic advising units establish to identify and help troubled students?

The Mentor Staff — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:07:43 +0000

Academic advisers sometimes suspect or know certain students are dealing with personal issues that not only impact their academic performance but may threaten their own or others’ well being. At times a student clearly reaches out for help, but in some cases, an adviser only senses something is “off.” Does your advising unit and/or institution have a best practice in place to identify troubled students and safely, effectively connect them to the resources they need? What are advisers’ responsibilities and limits when working with this kind of student?

Reinvigorating Faculty Advising on Your Campus

Michelle M. White, Millersville University of Pennsylvania — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 18:45:36 +0000

Michelle M. White, Millersville University of Pennsylvania
Ralph G. Anttonen, Millersville University of Pennsylvania

In the award-winning entry for the Ninth Annual Academic Advising Writing Competition, Don Carlton (2010) gazed into his crystal ball and hypothetically looked at the world of academic advising in the year 2019. He stated,

Budgets for many or most schools will lead to fewer advisers seeing more students. Advising space and support services will be pinched. Most advisers will increasingly rely on mass advising techniques—e-mail, interactive degree charts, interactive computer programs that suggest courses and majors. Schools that now use professional advisers will likely force faculty to assume a greater advising load. (Carlton, 2010, p.1)

If one examines the current budget crisis pervading institutions of higher education, this projection might be occurring at colleges and universities that are primarily teaching rather than research institutions. These institutions may require faculty to be more involved in advising, as advising centers and programs are cut and are not, in administrators’ opinions, essential to institutional survival. While one can emphatically espouse the necessity of advising centers, such debate may be moot as higher education administrators seek to curtail non-instructional costs and trim what they see as unessential to their core instructional mission. While the literature (Allen & Smith, 2008) argues that “good advising” helps in the retention of students and actually saves money, such research may fall on deaf ears as pressure builds to find alternatives to achieving this result with models that return to the early days when faculty did the advising as part of their expected position responsibilities.

The question “What’s in it for me?” refers to faculty’s desire to participate in initiatives that lead to promotion and tenure and must be addressed if faculty are to become effective academic advisers (Engelkemeyer & Landry, 2001, p. 10). A possible answer to this might be found at Millersville University. Five years ago, Millersville University approved a three-credit first-year seminar course (UNIV 103) for exploratory students. This course allowed professors from all disciplines to develop a proposal around a topic of keen interest to them and designed with the same academic rigor as all MU courses include. Each of these course proposals went to the college curriculum committees before receiving approval for inclusion in the general education curriculum. The UNIV 103 course was required of all first-year exploratory students and could be taught for five years. In addition, this concept provided that the faculty member teaching the course would also serve as adviser to the twenty-two to twenty-six students enrolled in the particular innovative venture. Such an approach would allow the students to be in direct contact with their adviser two or three times per week. Since faculty members had advisees in their major fields, they were given the option to choose how many first-year students they would advise. During the past five years, some opted to advise all and some chose anywhere from none to 10–12 students. When faculty member chose not to advise all the students, the director of the Exploratory (Undecided) Program assigned advisers from its pool of more than one hundred faculty/staff with advising professional development backgrounds to work with the exploratory population.

A faculty member who had chosen to teach a UNIV 103 course was able to count the three credits as part of his/her full-time teaching load. Another benefit was that these faculty members were able to teach outside the required curriculum of their departments and pursue an area of interest that would not be possible within the confines of their discipline. Faculty members, from new to veteran and from assistant to full professors, participated in the ongoing first-year seminar initiative. The seminars were offered in the fall and spring semesters for new students. Examples of recent seminars can be viewed at http://www.millersville.edu/undprgm/freshmanseminars.php.

Yet “What’s in it for me?” (Engelkemeyer & Landry, 2010, p.10) must also examine whether teaching such a course had any benefits in the world of promotion and tenure. McGillin (2003) pointed out that “the answer most frequently given is that faculty will seek out opportunities to advance as advisors if and when that activity is significantly recognized, evaluated, and rewarded” (p. 88). An example of this phenomenon can be explored by examining the original faculty involved in the early years of teaching this seminar course. Four of the associate professors have now attained the rank of full professor and four of the assistant professors attained the rank of associate professor.

A past chair of Millersville’s University Wide Promotion and Tenure Committee was one of the professors who taught the one-credit seminar, the precursor of the current three-credit seminar course. He was a strong advocate who served on the committee for individuals teaching the first-year seminar course. Other members of the campus committee overseeing this initiative had taught either the one-credit or three-credit course and also had served on the university-wide promotion and tenure committee. They were very supportive of those individuals who risked teaching the first-year seminar outside their departmental curriculum structure. It can be argued that participating in the seminar venture enhanced the prospects for faculty to be rewarded in the promotion and tenure process at MU. It should also be noted that some of these faculty members made presentations and workshops on this initiative at both the national and international First-Year Experience and Students in Transition conferences from 2003 to the present. They highlighted their work in the components of the courses, including the living/learning, community service, and civic engagement concepts; both qualitative and quantitate assessment efforts; and the process used in building such innovative ventures. Specific sessions and presenters were excluded in this paper to maintain the anonymity of the participants.

The first-year seminar initiative would not have happened if the current president of Millersville had not been an advocate for such an initiative at the time she was the provost. With the leadership of the associate provost, who was also an advocate, the president guided the process through an eight-year period from the one-credit seminar to the present general education-approved three-credit, first-year seminar course. As research by Anttonen and Chaskes (2005) has shown, people who build such programs must gain the support of either the president or provost and must be willing to let the faculty develop the actual structure. This program building involves risk taking and patience as the politics of academia must be played. At MU, faculty members voted by a clear majority to approve a new general education curriculum with the inclusion of the three-credit first-year seminar course (UNIV 103).

There is more work to be done at Millersville as issues have emerged that threaten the continuation of this course. It was originally believed that by embedding the effort in the general education curriculum and making it a required course for all incoming first-year exploratory students, all interested faculty would be available to teach it. It was not anticipated that departmental “turf” issues would pose a potential serious problem. While there were enough faculty members interested in teaching the first-year seminar courses, some academic departments were reluctant to release them from their departmental general education and major curriculum courses. Only through the creative leadership and negotiations of top academic administration was it possible to include twelve courses on the fall 2011 schedule. This number of courses met the needs of 99 percent of all incoming first-year exploratory students in 2011. As the budget picture may worsen in future years, the prospect of finding enough faculty approved for release from their departments to teach the first-year seminar course will only become more challenging. By capitalizing on collaboration efforts with faculty and administrators, program leaders established trust, and when coupled with patience and persistence each year, these factors will help to overcome any challenges (Anttonen & Chaskes, 2002). The financial bottom line needed to support this endeavor rests with top campus administrators and the appropriate allocations and negotiations within departments to ensure its continued success.

As you read this article, you may be thinking, “My institution does not have such a first-year seminar. How can faculty become more engaged in advising?” Faculty involvement in advising may be promoted through intrinsic motivators—appeals to logic, altruism, and the creation of opportunities for faculty input or sense of ownership—and extrinsic motivators, such as public recognition (promotion and tenure), monetary compensation, or course release time. The importance of extrinsic motivators is underscored by research indicating that a key to negotiating effective change is addressing the question above, “What’s in it for me?” (Engelkemeyer & Landry, 2010, p. 10). Here are some suggestions to consider:

Your administration, if it truly wants to improve and encourage more faculty advising, must set up a campus-wide initiative that has, as its leader, a trusted tenured senior faculty member or administrator capable of working with both faculty and administration. This person must clearly articulate the tenet, ADVISING IS TEACHING. This is defined as teaching in its highest form and its ideal context: a teacher-student ratio of one-to-one; a relevant subject—the student’s own future; and an open-ended, problem-based learning task that requires decision making (i.e., a student’s decision about what major, career, and future life path to pursue) (Cuseo, 2007). The faculty adviser becomes an important guide in this experience, as “advising is the intersection of the teaching and learning experience” (Myers & Dyer, 2007, p. 284). In addition, Marc Lowenstein (2005, p. 69) suggests, “an excellent advisor does the same thing for the student’s entire curriculum that the excellent teacher does for one course.”
The dreaded cry “let’s form a committee” must be heard and acted upon to improve faculty advising. No one person in isolation ever succeeds! Although frustrating and slow, major constituents and opposing voices must be involved and encouraged to speak. Such a committee must include those with the political power to bring about collaboration. Consider involving key people such as administrators, union leaders, faculty senate presidents, chairs of important curriculum committees, and student leaders. Ultimately, a working committee must create a coalition, forge a shared vision and goals, share the benefits and costs of this initiative with the institution, and align the mission of strong faculty academic advising with the institution’s mission statement (Anttonen & White, 2010).
The program builder(s) need to gain support from key administrators, such as the president, the chief academic officers, and other key campus individuals (Chaskes & Anttonen, 2005). High-level administrators need to demonstrate visible support for faculty involvement with advising. Administrators can do this without investing large amounts of time or money by calling attention to the importance of effective faculty advising in formal addresses and written messages to the college community. This recognition allows advising to be part of the institutional culture, contributes to faculty morale, and draws attention to advising campus-wide (Hemwall, 2008). Administrators must also create incentives and provide rewards for faculty involvement in advising students. Faculty incentives, recognition, and reward structures may include the following: certificates of recognition to outstanding faculty, public recognition of faculty out-of-class contributions to advising at well-attended college functions like graduation or convocation, letters of commendation for inclusion in faculty’s personnel file or professional portfolio, and faculty release time or workload reduction for their involvement in advising. Also, administrators may award travel funds targeting faculty participation in state, regional, or national conferences that focus on advising, such as the National Academic Advising Association (NACADA) conferences (McGillin, 2003; Kerr 2000). Consideration in tenure, promotion, and merit evaluations is the paramount critical strategy. This consideration, according to Kerr (2000), is the “ultimate in extrinsic rewards” for faculty (p. 352).
At many colleges and universities, power is decentralized and resides heavily in autonomous academic departments that operate by their own rules and reward systems. The higher educational reform movement has “lacked any plan for transforming middle-level university structures, most notably the academic department. Yet the department is arguably the definitive locus of faculty culture” (Edwards, 1999, p. 18). In addition to seeking support from high-level administrators to promote faculty involvement, support should also be sought from mid-level administrators and department chairs, because they exert significant influence on faculty attitudes and behavior. Strategies for enlisting the support of middle-level leadership include asking deans and department chairs to encourage their faculty members’ involvement with students, publicly recognizing their involvement, and rewarding it in faculty promotion-and-tenure decisions. In addition, requesting that deans and department chairs consider faculty candidates’ history of involvement with advising students is one criterion in new-faculty recruitment and hiring decisions (Cuseo, 2008; Edwards, 2007).
Development efforts to engage faculty in quality advising efforts may be offered in conjunction with, or as a component of, the college’s faculty development program like Millersville University’s Center for Academic Excellence. If your campus has a faculty development program, the director may be willing to collaborate, since faculty development efforts involve promoting faculty behavior that contributes to student learning and success.
The establishment of a standing college committee whose explicit charge is to oversee and promote faculty involvement with advising students is imperative. Ideally, this university-wide advising committee should be built into the college’s operational structure or organizational chart, thereby ensuring that attention to this issue becomes institutionalized and enduring rather than episodic (Cuseo, 2008).
Encourage faculty members to join the National Academic Advising Association (NACADA) to enhance their advising skills, conduct advising related research, and interact with other faculty interested in quality advising across institutions of higher education. Your campus may have an institutional membership already. In 2001, the NACADA Faculty Advisors Commission was formed, because faculty members are the largest group of college and university professions with advising as part of their contract/teaching responsibilities. The commission was established to assist and train faculty members in their advising responsibilities through its web page, e-mail lists, and sponsored workshops. This commission provides venues at local, state, and national conferences to engage faculty involvement in the process of effective advising.

In the words of Boyer in Scholarship Reconsidered, Priorities of the Professoriate, (1991), “the most important obligation confronting the nation’s college and universities is to break out of the tired old teaching versus research debate and define, in more creative ways, what it means to be a scholar” (p. xii). Boyer’s work is still relevant in our institutions today. Faculty research and scholarship could be more broadly defined to include research on the advising process, and such scholarship could be counted in decisions about promotion and tenure in a fashion similar to discipline-driven research. Such an expanded view of scholarship would be consistent with Boyer’s call for a “new scholarship” that includes the scholarship of teaching and the scholarship of application (i.e., advising) (Boyer, 1991). Research has shown that student interactions with faculty in an advising relationship are important to overall student learning. Our institutions will benefit from fostering such a learner-centered context, which allows faculty to realize their potential as advisers (Hemwall, 2008).

In conclusion, consider Don Carlton’s 2010 prediction that ten years hence, as budgets get tighter, teaching faculty may be called upon to play a more active role in advising. Make plans through professional development initiatives to aid faculty in becoming engaged in quality academic advising. Examine the successful first-year seminar program at Millersville University and its approach to further engage faculty advisers (http://www.millersville.edu/fye/). Consider the various strategies we discuss to bring faculty advising to new levels. Become an advocate to facilitate excellent faculty advising on your campus!

References

Allen, J. M., & Smith, C. L. (2008). Faculty and student perspectives on advising: Implications for student dissatisfaction. Journal of College Student Development, 49(6), 609–624.

Anttonen, R. G., & Chaskes, J. (2002). Advocating for first-year students: A study of the
micropolitics of leadership and organizational change. Journal of the First-Year
Experience, 14(1), 81–98.

Anttonen, R. G., & White, M. M. (2010). The advocates skills set: Lessons learned for
building, maintaining, or restructuring advising programs in lean budget times.
Academic Advising Today, 33(2), 1–3.

Boyer, E. L. (1991). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton,
NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Carlton, D. (2010). What do you think academic advising will be like in ten years? The
Mentor, 12(1). Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor/

Chaskes, J., & Anttonen, R. G. (2005). Advocating for first-year students. In M. L.
Upcraft, J. N. Gardner, & B. O. Barefoot (Eds.), Challenging & supporting the first-year
student (pp. 191–203). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cuseo, J. (2007). The Power of Advising. Campus workshop delivered at Murray
State College, Tishomingo, OK.

Cuseo, J. (2008, September). Got faculty? Promoting faculty involvement in FYE
programs & initiatives. E-Source for College Transitions (Electronic Newsletter of
the National Resource Center on the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition),
6(2). Retrieved from http://u101tech.sa.sc.edu/NRC/esource/index.php

Edwards, R. (1999, September/October). The academic department: How does it fit into the university reform agenda? Change, 31(5), 17–22.

Edwards, T. S. (2007). Practice what we preach: Advising and the hiring process.
Academic Advising Today, 30(1), 1–2

Engelkemeyer, S. W., & Landry, E. (2001). Negotiating change on campus. AAHE
Bulletin, 53(6), 7–10.

Hemwall, M. K. (2008). Advising delivery: Faculty advising. In V. Gordon, W. Habley, T. Grites and Associates (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (2^nd ed.) (pp. 253–266). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Kerr, T. (2000). Recognition and reward for excellence in advising. In V. Gordon & W.
Habley (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 349–362). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Lowenstein, M. (2005). If advising is teaching, what do advisors teach? NACADA
Journal, 25(2), 65–73.

McGillin, V. A. (2003). The role of evaluation and reward in faculty advising. In G.
Kramer (Ed.), Faculty advising examined: Enhancing the potential of college faculty
as advisors (pp. 88–124). Bolton, MA: Anker.

Myers, B. E., & Dyer, J. E. (2005, December). A comparison of the attitudes and perceptions of university faculty and administrators toward advising undergraduate and graduate
students and student organizations. NACTA Journal, 49(4). Retrieved from
http://www.nactateachers.org/vol-49-num-4-dec-2005.html

Guide to Advising International Students about Academic Integrity

Gabriela M. Gillespie, University of South Carolina — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 18:44:39 +0000

Gabriela M. Gillespie, University of South Carolina

According to the 2011 Open Doors Report on International Educational Exchange, the number of international students in the United State increased 4.68 percent over the previous year for a total of 723,277 students” (Institute of International Education, 2011). More and more institutions of higher education are intentionally seeking to increase their international student population by actively recruiting students from other countries. Reasons cited for this burgeoning interest in international students include maintaining the United States’ competitiveness in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, improving the image of the United States globally, and aiding U.S. national security efforts (Pandit, 2007).

The rising influx of international students studying in the United States has impacted colleges and universities in a variety of ways. A notable impact has been the “pedagogical benefits of having international students in the classroom” (Pandit, 2007, p. 157). For U.S. students who are unable to study abroad, having the opportunity to interact with international students on their own campuses is invaluable in terms of learning about different cultures and perspectives. Through exchange agreements and research collaboration, universities are benefiting from the international research capacity and connection provided by the students (Pandit, 2007). Another benefit, beyond that of higher education, is the fact that international students contribute $15 billion to the U.S. economy in the form of money spent on tuition and living expenses (Douglass & Edelstein, 2009).

However, universities also face challenges in hosting international students, notably in the realm of cheating, because the Western construct of plagiarism differs from that of other countries. As a social construct and a culturally embedded assumption, the idea of plagiarism is foreign to many international students but can result in serious consequences for students so accused in the United States. The purpose of this article is to discuss how different cultures view plagiarism and to provide tools to help international students understand how to comply with U.S. standards regarding plagiarism.

The Prevalence of Plagiarism

In the United States, the issue of plagiarism—including the relationship between honor codes and the prevalence of academic dishonesty on college campuses—has been heavily researched for decades (McCabe & Makou’ski, 2001; McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 1999). Organizations such as the Center for Academic Integrity, housed in Clemson, South Carolina, claim that more than 70 percent of students surveyed in large-scale inquiries admitted to some form of cheating (East, 2010). However, according to Lambert, Hogan, and Barton (2003, p. 2), in the United States, “there is significant variation in the total number of students who admit to cheating.” A study done by Lambert et al. (2003) concluded that 83 percent of students admitted to some form of cheating, some students more than once. Recent studies and anecdotal evidence among researchers in the field suggest plagiarism in on the rise in Western countries (Ashworth, Freewood, & Macdonald, 2003; Hayes & Introna, 2005). In general, students plagiarize for a variety of reasons, including academic pressures, poor planning, poor preparation, excessive or mindless workload, opportunity, cultural background, and prominent bad examples (Thomas, 2004).

Are international students plagiarizing more or less than American students? Regardless of the answer, the factor contributing to their cheating may be different than for the traditional U.S. student. The studies presented above revealed that the errant student was aware and admitted to cheating, whereas an international student faces a different problem: he or she is most often unaware of any wrongful behavior. Not only are these students unaware but due to cultural differences, as mentioned by Thomas (2004), students may not regard plagiarism in the same light as Western students.

Cultural Issues to Consider for New Incoming International Students

Overseas students transport to the United States their values, religious beliefs, customs, and assumptions, all of which are products of their societal upbringing. Social norms, academic practices, and communication styles are a few of the many differences newcomers to the United States encounter in this country. International students often experience initial culture shock upon arriving in the United States. Their cultural adjustment process is further complicated by having to learn to navigate their host institution’s culture and expectations, including enrolling in classes, learning about campus policies and procedures, and overcoming any language barriers that might exist (Duff, Rogers, & Harris, 2006).

One campus policy that many international students may not be aware of at American institutions is the institution’s definition of plagiarism. Duff et al. (2006) found that perceptions of plagiarism are based on historical and cultural assumptions. This is especially true for international students who did not grow up in Western society. Given that international students have left their homes and travelled many miles to pursue their academic dreams, they often feel enormous pressure to be very successful. This pressure combined with differing cultural assumptions of plagiarism and students’ lack of knowledge about plagiarism policies can potentially lead to scholastic disaster.

It is important to remember that plagiarism is a Western ideal. For example, “… the notion of ‘stealing’ another’s work has its origins in the peculiarly Western conjunction between the ‘growth of the notion of human right’ (freedom of speech) and the ‘stress on individual property’ (copyright)” (Duff et al., 2006, p. 675). Not all cultures subscribe to this point of view. For example, Scollon (1999) explains that students from Confucian-heritage countries, such as China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam, value their source with the utmost authority, yet do not believe in citing their sources as expected in Western society (Duff et al., 2006). In addition, in the Confucian culture, using an author’s own words is a form of respect, making it difficult for students to understand Western standards and change their perspectives on this matter (Hayes & Introna, 2005). Furthermore, Hayes and Introna (2005) documented the case of an Indian student who declared that in his undergraduate institution more points were awarded to students who could reproduce from class notes and textbooks than to those who paraphrased. Lastly, researchers have proposed that students from overseas feel they cannot improve on what has already been said (Hayes & Introna, 2005). Thus international students in the United States may have difficulty truly understanding what plagiarism is, because it may have been an expected and highly regarded cultural norm in their home country.

How Can Academic Advisers Help Educate International Students about Plagiarism?

Given the challenges that international students studying in the United States may face when it comes to plagiarism, what can academic advisers do to help? Below are specific suggestions that advisers can adopt to help educate international students about plagiarism and guide them toward success at their host institutions.

Provide Information About Plagiarism to New Students

Academic advisers charged with orienting new international students should intentionally include information about the host university’s standard and the American concept of plagiarism (Duff et al., 2006). Even if plagiarism is not covered in the orientation, academic advisers can share information and resources on this topic during their individual advising sessions with international students. Large institutions may have an academic integrity office or an international student services office that may have materials about plagiarism available for distribution to students during orientation or individual advising sessions. If there is an honor code on campus, make sure international students have a copy of the code, since “… honor codes may lead to lower levels of academic dishonesty because they clarify expectations and definitions of cheating behavior” (McCabe et al., 1999, p. 212).

Share the Consequences of Plagiarism

Academic advisers should be direct and frank in explaining that plagiarism is considered a violation of student conduct rules. It is important for advisers to emphasize to international students that ignorance is not an excuse for plagiarism. One way to start such a conversation is to say, “Every country has its own ideas about scholarship and cheating. In the U.S. we have a high standard for academic integrity. Your professor will expect you to complete your work on your own and that you will appropriately cite your references. I acknowledge that U.S. is neither right nor wrong in our Western ideal of what academic integrity is, but as a student in the U.S., it is in your best interest to be aware of, and abide by, these rules in order to be successful academically here. Here are some handouts from our academic integrity office that explain what plagiarism is and that provide examples of what constitutes plagiarism.” Students, including international students, will avoid plagiarism once they understand why it is important that they comply with the rules as well as how to properly express themselves in writing (Sabieh, 2002).

Refer International Students to Appropriate Campus Resources

If either the academic integrity or international student services office hosts workshops on plagiarism and/or other academic integrity topics, advisers should strongly encourage international students to attend. Academic advisers should also notify international students of other campus resources, such as writing center or professors.

Notes on Other Cultural Differences

Advisers working with international students should mention that the classroom etiquette in the United States is likely going to be different than in their home country. For example, in the U.S. professors typically expect students to actively participate in classroom discussions. Another example of different academic norms regards the availability and informality of the relationships between students and professors. Unlike the classrooms in other countries where the professors are considered masters of information and should never be challenged, in the United States, many professors welcome scholarly discussions and invite students to give their opinions. Academic advisers should encourage international students to visit faculty members during their office hours to ask questions about the class.

Conclusion

Plagiarism is a complex and troubling issue faced by institutions of higher education. The focus of this article has been on providing specific suggestions to academic advisers who wish to help international students avoid violating institutional policies on plagiarism. By adopting some of the strategies presented in this article, academic advisers can enhance their international students’ knowledge of the Western construct of plagiarism. This knowledge could mean the difference between expulsion and graduation for international students. The choice is clear—an ounce of prevention in this case can be worth a college diploma in the end.

References

Douglass, J., & Edelstein, R. (2009). Whither the global talent pool? Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 41(4), 36–44. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Duff, A. H., Rogers, D. P., & Harris, M. B. (2006). International engineering students—avoiding plagiarism through understanding the Western academic context of scholarship. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(6), 673–681.

East, J. (2010). Judging plagiarism: A problem of morality and convention. Higher Education, 59(1), 69–83. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9234-9

Hayes, N., & Introna, L. D. (2005). Cultural values, plagiarism, and fairness: When plagiarism gets in the way of learning. Ethics & Behavior, 15(3), 213–231.

Institute of International Education. (2011). Open doors 2011 fast facts. Retrieved from http://www.iie.org/en/Research-and-Publications/Open-Doors/Data

Lambert, E., Hogan, N., & Barton, S. (2003). Collegiate academic dishonesty revisited: What have they done, how often have they done it, who does it, and why did they do it? Electronic Journal of Sociology, 7(4), 1–27. Retrieved from http://www.sociology.org

McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L., & Butterfield, K. (1999). Academic integrity in honor code and non-honor code environments: A qualitative investigation. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(2), Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2649128

McCabe, D. L., & Makou’ski, A. L. (2001). Resolving allegations of academic dishonesty. About Campus, 6(1), 17. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

McCabe, D. L., Feghali, T., &Abdallah, H. (2008). Academic dishonesty in the Middle East: Individual and contextual factors. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 451–467. doi:10.1007/s11162-008-9092-9

Pandit, K. (2007). The importance of international students on our campuses. Yearbook of the Association of Pacific Coast Geographers, 69, 156–159. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Sabieh, C. (2002). An ELT’s solution to combat plagiarism: “Birth” of CALL. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Technology and Universities in Asia (ITUA 2002), Bangkok, Thailand, 3-5 April 2002. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Thomas, D. A. (2004). How educators can more effectively understand and combat the plagiarism epidemic. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal, (2), 421–430. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Making Change Work: Empowering Students Who Are Changing Majors

Jennifer L. Bloom, University of South Carolina — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:52:05 +0000

Helen Mulhern Halasz, University of South Carolina
Dawn Sizemore Traynor, University of South Carolina
Jennifer L. Bloom, University of South Carolina

“I’ve wanted to be an engineer since I was a kid obsessed with LEGO building blocks. My high school didn’t offer AP calculus, so I am taking it this semester. Nearly everyone else took calc in high school. I am about to fail this course, which could mean the end of my engineering major.” – Jack

“I came in as an undeclared major because I really wasn’t sure what direction I wanted to go. Now that I’ve taken some courses and done a little research about possible careers, I am ready to declare a major in psychology.” – Jorge

“I liked my econ courses well enough, but my finance class this semester makes so much more sense to me. I love this stuff, and now I’m tutoring a couple of friends to help them understand the material.” – Elizabeth

Given that nearly 75 percent of entering students will change their majors during their undergraduate careers (Gordon, 2007), academic advisers hear stories like the ones above from students every day. Whether students are seeking to change majors of their own free will or are being forced to leave their current program due to not meeting departmental progression requirements, switching majors can be quite difficult. As a result, academic advisers are often the “go to” campus representatives that students turn to for assistance. Students who switch majors are prone to falling through the cracks of the institution, feeling their previous majors no longer want them, and being unsure who to see or how to proceed in their newly declared major. This is one of the most important times for academic advisers to step in and help students go through what can be a scary transition between majors. The purpose of this article is to adapt William Bridges’ (2009) transition model as a theoretical framework to guide academic advisers as they help students successfully transition to a new major. In addition, we will provide a resource guide template for students to introduce the phases of transition and support services that facilitate the change to a new major (see Changing Your Major?).

Changes and Transitions

The old saying “change is hard” is one worth remembering as academic advisers assist students as they transition to a new major. Even if students want to make the change or meet the GPA required to finally enter their chosen major, they must still react to and process the situation. Typical reactions to change include passively resisting, aggressively undermining, or embracing the change. Reasons for these reactions include the wish to hold onto something they value, confusion about what the change will mean, lack of understanding why the change needs to be made, or simply a dislike of change in general (Kotter, 1999).

Though academic advisers typically are not trained as counselors, Reynolds (2004) advocated that they turn to grief and loss theories to help major changers deal with their feelings and make the transition more easily. Reynolds (2004) argued that students who are changing majors experience a significant loss, regardless of whether the student or the academic department prompts the decision. She suggested before advisers recommend alternative majors or career exploration courses, they make time to simply acknowledge the students’ loss associated with the change. For example, an academic adviser can simply say to a student who needs to change majors, “Changing majors for some students can be a major life transition. I just want you to know that it is normal to feel a range of emotions as you go through this process, and I want you to know that I will be here to help ease your transition into this new major.” Again, academic advisers typically are not trained therapists and can refer students who appear to be having deeper psychological issues to the counseling center, but advisers are in an ideal position to help students reflect, process, and move forward in a new direction. Advisers can also share stories about other students’ successful negotiations of the major-change process to instill confidence in advisees, a sense of comfort, and knowledge that they are not alone.

Organizational behavior consultant, William Bridges, offered another framework that can be adapted to assist students who are changing majors. He suggested that individuals can be taught specific techniques for helping them deal with change, as “transition management is based on some abilities you already have and some techniques you can easily learn” (Bridges, 2009, p. x).

William Bridges’ Transition Model

Bridges’ (2009) model can assist academic advisers gauge where students may be in the transition process as well as help advisers understand and interpret the behaviors of students who are changing majors. In addition, academic advisers can use this model to help students anticipate and understand some of the typical emotions they will likely experience when changing majors and to identify proven strategies for moving through these stages. The three phases of Bridges’ (2009) Transition Model are: Endings, Neutral Zone, and New Beginning. People must deal with their losses (Endings), experience the period of uncertainty between the unavailable past and the uncomfortable future (Neutral Zone), and do what is necessary to make the change begin to work and move beyond the transition (New Beginning) (Bridges, 2009).

Phase One: Endings

All transitions begin with an ending, a letting go, and leaving the old situation behind. In discussing Bridges’ theoretical framework in a corporate setting, Tichy (2002) identified common feelings people experience during Bridges’ three phases of transition. Typical emotions students may experience as they leave their current majors are disengagement (“I don’t belong at this institution”), disidentification (“I’m lost now that I can’t be a psychology major anymore”), disenchantment (“if only my chemistry professor was a better teacher, I wouldn’t have to change majors”), and disillusionment (“I’m a victim of the system and wasted two years in pre-architecture, pre-med studies, etc.”).

Academic advisers are ideally positioned to help students recognize what is happening by helping them acknowledge the loss they feel in leaving their majors. Peer advisers can be invaluable in normalizing this process for their classmates, particularly if they themselves have gone through a change of major. For this reason, the University of South Carolina has added peer advisers (PAs) to its Cross Campus Advising program. These PAs are trained to share personal stories and experiences to help students see themselves as one of many who are students working through this process and not as a victim or failure.

Tichy (2002) offers two “Breaking Out Strategies” to help people move through the Endings phase. First, academic advisers can give students permission and the opportunity to react to the end of their time in their initial major rather than pretend the change does not impact students. Advisers can ask questions that prompt students to reflect, such as, “What will you miss most about your previous major?” In addition, advisers can encourage students to prepare for confusion in the Neutral Zone and understand that uncertainty is part of the process. Advisers can guide students toward a new source of stability and guidance, such as an academic adviser in the new major or one dedicated to working with students “between” majors and can help them successfully navigate between the two degree programs. For example, at the University of South Carolina, members of the Cross Campus Advising staff work with students to devise a list of questions to ask the academic adviser in the new major and help students begin to determine how the courses they have previously taken can be used to meet their new major’s degree requirements.

Phase Two: Neutral Zone

The Neutral Zone is characterized by discomfort, when the previous situation is no longer available but the new way is not yet familiar (Bridges, 2009). It can be a painful and disorienting time for students. Bridges (2009) argued this is the best time for individuals or organizations “to be creative, to develop into what they need to become, and to renew themselves” (p. 9). Typical emotions identified by Tichy (2002) and adapted for major changers include confusion (“I’m not sure what I should major in”), resolution (“I need to graduate as soon as possible and will use better study habits to be successful in my new major”), and bipolar reaction (“one minute I love my new major and the next I want to go back to the old one”). Academic advisers working with students in the Neutral Zone can reaffirm that confusion is integral to successfully moving through this phase. Nudging students to think outside the box about possible majors may facilitate a decision more closely aligned with their interests and talents than anticipated. Within USC’s Cross Campus Advising program, advisers challenge students to think critically about why they are feeling a particular way and encourage them not to discount those feelings but, rather, use them in a positive way along with Tichy’s “Breaking Out Strategies” (2002). Advisers can also refer students to the campus career center for assistance in considering possible new careers.

As he did in the Endings phase, Tichy (2002) outlined several “Breaking Out Strategies” for the Neutral Zone that can be modified when working with major-changing students. First, academic advisers should encourage students to find a regular time and place to reflect on the impact of the change. This may take shape as a weekly meeting with an academic adviser, career adviser, or with friends. Second, advisers should encourage students to review their lives, enabling them to begin to understand how their past has influenced their present situation. For some students, a referral to counseling resources may be appropriate. Third, academic advisers can assist students to come up with a way to symbolically mark their passage from the old to the new major. This can be as simple as having the student set up an “exit interview” with his or her academic adviser from the old major. Fourth, advisers can assist students identify sources of support to help them make sense of the transition and sort out their understanding of the new world. In addition to academic advisers, family members, career advisers, faculty mentors, or counselors may help major changers deal with this time of uncertainty. USC’s Cross Campus Advising staff and Peer Advisers use Changing Your Major? to give students concrete information about specific campus resources that can assist with the major change process. The Cross Campus Advising staff member or peer adviser highlights the resource(s) that best meet the student’s needs and discusses the value of using the Changing Your Major? resource guide to successfully identify options and transition to a new major.

Phase Three: New Beginnings

The third and final phase requires emotional commitment by individuals to do things the new way and see themselves as new people (Bridges, 2009). This new beginning is typically signaled by announcements, such as the list of applicants admitted to the upper division nursing major for the fall semester or notification of the student’s assignment to a new academic adviser. Students with limited new major choices, those who do not meet minimum GPA requirements, may need extra help to come up with new plans. For example, applicants not selected for the upper division nursing program need advising to, gather information, make decisions about whether to remain at the institution and, if so, choose a new degree program. As people come out of the transition, those in the New Beginning phase “develop the new identity, experience the new energy, and discover the new sense of purpose that makes the change work” (Bridges, 2009, p. 5). In this phase, major changers may experience understanding (“I enjoy the creative side of things and this major is a better fit for my talents”), acceptance (“I was a little wary of this new major initially, but I really loved my first week of classes in this major”), hope (“I am looking forward to future classes in my new major”), and fondness (“even though I didn’t do well in that class, my lab partner and I became close friends”) (Tichy, 2002). Advisers working with students in the New Beginning phase should keep in mind the three phases may overlap or occur simultaneously.

Tichy (2002) suggests two “Breaking Out Strategies” in the New Beginnings phase, which can be adapted for major-changing students. First, advisers should encourage students to take bold new actions, such as join a major-related club and seek friends in their new major. Academic advisers can warn students that the road to the new major may be bumpy at times and they will likely make mistakes. Students in new majors may need some time to become familiar and comfortable with concepts and terminology commonly used in the new academic discipline. Students should be aware of this period of adjustment and resist the urge to let frustration overshadow their learning during the transition. Advisers can reassure students that this is normal and share with them the advisers’ confidence in the students’ ability to perform well in the new major. The second “Breaking Out” strategy recommends seeking opportunities to help others. By assisting students who may be new to the institution, major-changing students can put their own emotions in context. Advisers can encourage students to attend group advising sessions or workshops designed for students changing majors, or to meet with peer mentors involved with academic and/or career advising resource offices. Group support can reduce isolation and normalize the emotions major changers may experience individually. For this reason, USC’s Cross Campus Advising often recruits student assistants and peer advisers who are going or have gone through the major-change process. In addition to helping others, taking on this responsibility allows the major changer to finalize his or her move into and through the New Beginnings phase.

Conclusion

The purpose of this article was to introduce Bridges’ Transition Model to academic advisers as a theoretical framework for understanding how major-changing students may experience the transition of switching academic programs. Individuals move through a transition at different rates and levels of ease, although some generalizations can be made. The three phases Bridges outlines in the Transition Model—Endings, Neutral Zone, New Beginning—can be another tool utilized by advisers working with major-changing students. For academic advisers interested in a more in-depth examination of Bridge’s Model of Transition, including checklists for each phase, we recommend Bridges’ (2009) Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change as a resource. The straightforward presentation of the theoretical framework enables academic advisers to incorporate the concepts into their daily work and academic advising administrators to consider using Bridges’ Model in training programs for faculty and staff. When advisers can identify where students like Jack, Jorge, and Elizabeth are in the transition process, they can empower students to move toward their new majors with an appreciation for the past and excitement about the opportunities that accompany a new beginning.

References

Bridges, W. (2009). Managing transitions: Making the most of change (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: DaCapo Press.

Gordon, V. N. (2007). The undecided college student: An academic and career advising challenge (3rd ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Kotter, J. P. (1999). John P. Kotter on what leaders really do. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review.

Reynolds, M. M. (2004). Now what? Some thoughts on advising students in selective majors from a faculty member with no training as a counselor. Retrieved from NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources: http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/AdvisingIssues/SelectiveMajors.htm

Tichy, N. M. (2002). The leadership engine. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

Increasing Community and Success in Advising Units by Conducting Effective Meetings

Jeffrey L. McClellan, Frostburg State University — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 20:36:09 +0000

Jeffrey L. McClellan, Frostburg State University

Why Meet?

Higher education in general and academic advising in particular are interesting fields. One of the things that makes them interesting is that very few people receive much formal training to do the work they perform on a daily basis. Professors are rarely taught how to teach, administrators have rarely received much formal training in administration or leadership, and many advisers have received little to no training in advising. As a result, much of the organizational learning that advisers and advising administrators experience comes via trial and error. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, as on-the-job training is an important way to learn, much of the potential efficiency and overall effectiveness of our day–to-day efforts can be lost trying to learn through experience what might be better learned via effective training. This statement is particularly true as it relates to conducting organizational meetings in advising units.

Academic advising is a profession that involves a significant amount of one-on-one interaction and engagement with students (Nutt, 2000). Much of what advisers do on a daily basis is individualistic in nature. Furthermore, advising can be stressful, particularly given the tendency for many offices to experience high volumes of traffic, accompanied by highly redundant interaction. These frantic times often cycle into less busy times, which in some offices can leave advisers doing things that are less enjoyable than the interactive work they enjoy. Thus the nature of advising can create contexts in which people work independently but in close proximity to others within the workplace. In a context such as this, it becomes critical that people come together in a collective space to build community, to strategize about ways to improve the work they do, and to learn from one another. This can only happen when advising administrators develop the capacity to facilitate such interaction through meetings.

Unfortunately, however, anyone who has spent significant time in advising or advising administration has likely spent a lot of time in meetings that were likely less effective than they could have been. As Bradford (1976) explained, “Many meetings waste a lot of time. Even the best meetings are not as productive as they could be” (p. 15). This may leave some wondering why we even hold meetings.

The primary purpose of departmental meetings is to provide a forum for advisers to come together to accomplish work. While the specific work addressed may vary, the key to whether or not advisers efficiently and effectively accomplish their work depends largely upon how well they engage in the process of planning and conducting a meeting. Success depends on the clear delineation and ongoing pursuit of specific purposes for meeting by creating and using effective agendas and meeting plans. To promote such outcomes, the following suggestions are offered: First, be clear about the agenda items; second, be clear about what must be accomplished; and third, use effective techniques to get things done.

Be Clear About the Agenda Items

The most common means of developing a meeting plan and conducting departmental meetings is to simply develop a list of the items to address in an outline format. More in-depth agendas may include time allocations for addressing these items. Topic selection is essential and represents a good first step, as administrators must identify what needs to be discussed or accomplished in the meeting (unless it is a meeting intentionally designed for surfacing concerns and insights in an agenda-free manner, which can also be very valuable when done intentionally). Planning based on this approach results in agendas that look a lot like the following:

10:00	Welcome and Intro
10:01	Information Items/Reporting
10:20	Discuss Item 1
10:50	Break
11:00	Discuss Item 2

While useful, such an agenda represents a one-dimensional approach to planning and leading meetings and often results in little more than organized chaos. Consequently, a second dimension to understanding meeting planning and agenda setting is worth exploring—one that clarifies what exactly needs to be achieved in relation to the items discussed.

Be Clear About What Must Be Accomplished

As mentioned previously, meetings occur for multiple purposes. In addressing any particular agenda item, the goal might be to accomplish any one or a multiple of the following:

Report on assignments
Share information
Training and development
Brainstorm ideas
Discuss/analyze options
Develop plans
Make decisions
Work together on projects
Evaluate effectiveness
Make assignments
Foster community/build culture

To the extent that advising administrators are clear about desired outcomes relative to each item, they become more effective at structuring the meeting to achieve outcomes and to progress toward the action-oriented work they are trying to achieve. An agenda that takes this into consideration might be organized by either agenda topic, with clarity about what is to be achieved in relation to each topic, or by categorizing the agenda according to what is to be achieved and placing the topics within these categories. Consider the following examples (please note these are very generic agendas that lack the specific details necessary in actual agendas):

10:00	Welcome and Intro
10:01	Information Items/Reporting Report on assignments (Bob and Sharon) Share information from directors meeting
10:20	Discuss Item 1 Report on status Analyze options Make decision
10:40	Discuss Item 2 Brainstorm ideas

10:00	Welcome and Intro
10:01	Share Information Directors meeting
10:10	Reporting on Assignments Bob and Sharon
10:20	Decision-Making Items Item 1: Report, analyze, and decide
10:40	Brainstorming Ideas Ideas for item 2

In the first example, administrators address topics in chronological order with the details about what is to be accomplished in relation to each. Topics are prioritized on the agenda with the most urgent items addressed first. This allows for focused topic-oriented discussion but can leave important decisions in relation to a topic incomplete if the topic falls later in the agenda and is not covered due to time constraints. In the second example, items are arranged according to the priority of desired outcomes, with the specific topics appearing as bullet points. Decision items come first and should include those that must be finalized in the meeting. Advising administrators provide clarity regarding what needs to be accomplished to achieve that outcome.

Both approaches have strengths and weaknesses. Regardless of the approach, however, the additional clarity provided by detailing what is to be accomplished makes achieving objectives easier and less chaotic.

Use Effective Techniques

Once advising administrators determine the topics and the relevant desired outcomes, they then need to determine the techniques necessary to accomplish results. This requires some understanding of basic group dynamics and facilitation techniques relative to each desired outcome. While an extensive discussion of specific principles and techniques is beyond the scope of this paper, the following process-specific insights will hopefully prove valuable.

Reporting on Assignments

Reporting on assignments is an important aspect of all meetings that should not be overlooked. Nonetheless, administrators should recognize this can take a significant amounts of time—especially if teams are larger than five to seven people—and can become burdensome if reporting is not relevant or is not viewed as relevant by all involved. In response, leaders may consider requesting that teams send progress reports to a group secretary for compilation and distribution to the large group prior to or at the outset of the meeting. Reporting items can then be discussed when they are most relevant to the parties involved. Some may be introduced right up front (or at least the floor might be opened up for questions about specific items), others may be resolved in small group/team conversations and project work during the meeting. In many cases, the leader and the individuals involved should simply address the reporting items one-on-one.

Sharing Information

Sharing information, including calendaring, should be handled carefully. Meetings are a good place to share information that is truly essential for the entire group or when consistency and awareness by all or confidentiality are absolutely essential. Nonetheless, information sharing alone is not a good reason to hold a meeting. There are so many less time-consuming and less intrusive ways to share information, especially when the information it is not truly significant or broadly relevant to all in attendance. Consequently, other means of conveying information should be used when possible instead of calling a meeting with the sole purpose of sharing information.

Some suggestions for moving quickly through information items include: typing information items on the agenda and briefly responding to questions regarding any of the items at the outset of the meeting or sending information items to participants in advance of the meeting. Regardless, unless the situation is truly an exception, few meetings should spend more than perhaps 5-10 percent of the meeting time sharing information beyond what is involved in engaging in the other processes discussed.

Training and Development

A key benefit of meeting is to promote professional development to improve advising processes and outcomes. Unfortunately, in many meetings this aspect is addressed briefly and superficially with the assumption that telling equals training. If training needs to occur, it is essential that administrators dedicate adequate time and effort to training, designing, and delivery to ensure improved performance and behavior change (Stolovitch & Keeps, 2002). Follow-up on training through performance management meetings and observation of staff in action is essential to achieving these desired results (American Society for Training and Development, 2006; Boss, 2000).

Adequate training cannot normally be conducted in fewer than 20 to 30 minutes. Even this, however, is rarely sufficient to engage in active learning-oriented training or to address complex needs. Attempts to train with inadequate time usually results in information sharing as opposed to training and little to no performance improvement. Nonetheless, while training requires an up-front time commitment, when it is done well, it usually results in more efficient ongoing time use and improved performance.

Brainstorming Ideas

Brainstorming is one of the most common practices in which groups engage. Unfortunately, it is rarely done well. Some key insights about the process of brainstorming can help to improve the practice.

First, traditional brainstorming can be done in large groups but may not be as productive as that done by small groups. As groups increase in size the time required to brainstorm increases, as does the likelihood of distracting side conversations and the potential for thought stifling criticism (Gallupe et al., 1992; Osterhout, 1992). Large groups may benefit from breaking into smaller groups that report back to the large group. In most cases, individual brainstorming—whether conducted before or after group brainstorming—increases idea generation and creativity (Bouchard & Hare, 1970; Thornberg, 1991).

Second, brainstorming is a creative endeavor. Like all such endeavors, it shrivels amid criticism and analysis (Gallupe et al., 1992). Consequently, brainstorming and analysis of the options proposed in brainstorming should be treated as separate processes (Bradford, 1976; Schein, 1998; Yukl, 1998). Furthermore, effective brainstorming requires broad involvement and a willingness to postpone consensus.

The following ground rules for conducting brainstorming sessions may prove valuable. First, ideas only may be given. Participants should simply state ideas without advocacy or analysis (Senge, 1990). Second, participants should be encouraged to offer ideas and to not parrot, support, or criticize the ideas of others (Napier & Gershenfeld, 1999; Osterhout, 1992). Third, a process should be established to ensure all members participate. Fourth, insights and ideas should be gleaned from outside the group when possible to ensure broad involvement and diversity of ideas and interests. Fifth, ideas should be recorded so that analysis and discussion can address every idea developed. Finally, wild ideas should be encouraged as they sometimes lead to the most creative solutions (Osterhout, 1992).

Discussing/Analyzing Options

Once groups brainstorm sufficient options, analysis may begin. When a large number of options exist, some sorting might need to occur to focus on items the group most wishes to pursue. Once this occurs, boundaries that limit the possible implementation of ideas should be outlined, so participants know what constraints they must operate within. Then participants should explore the benefits and positive aspects of each idea. Afterward, negative aspects are discussed. Separating these discussions ensures both advocacy and criticism receive equal attention and draw upon the creative powers of positive emotions (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; Seligman, 2002). This is essential because analysis often becomes overly focused on the easier process of criticism as opposed to the more challenging work of advocacy. Further, once the groups explores positive and negative aspects, members can attempt to combine ideas to maximize strengths and diminish weaknesses.

Once again, analysis becomes more challenging as group size increases. Groups larger than five to six members often become unwieldy, particularly if discussion is controversial. Often large groups should be broken into smaller groups that then report back on the results of their conversations.

Developing Plans

Once group members discuss and analyze options, they should then create comprehensive, detailed plans for moving forward. Details should be laid out so everyone knows what will be done, when, how, and by whom (Patterson, Grenny, McMillan, & Switzler, 2002). This is often best accomplished in very small groups or by individuals. It is frequently a good idea to make general decisions and outlines of plans as a group and then delegate the detailed creation of a plan to a smaller group or individual. This detailed work can then be brought back to the larger group for additional analysis, discussion, and decision making.

Making Decisions

Decision making is an important reason for bringing people together. Nonetheless, in order for decision making to be effective, all of the prior work of brainstorming, analysis, planning, etc., must have already occurred. Trying to engage in decision making before a group is prepared to do so is an exercise in futility. On the other hand, when decision making is based on a solid foundation of these previous processes, it is much easier. Whether decisions are made by consensus, voting, or other means depends on the issues at hand and the needs of the group (Patterson et al., 2002).

Working Together on Projects

Many hands make light work, so it is not unusual for individuals to combine efforts to get things done. Once again, however, work groups are most effective when small, often no larger than three to five people. Otherwise, work groups tend to suffer from social loafing, the tendency for some to contribute less to the work of the group (Lussier & Achua, 2007). When work is to be accomplished by large groups, it is best to divide responsibilities for specific tasks with instructions to return and report.

Evaluating Effectiveness

Though similar to discussing and analyzing options, this process focuses less on evaluating options and more on the effectiveness of the group in order to promote group learning. As groups complete assignments, finalize work projects, conclude activities, etc., they should dedicate time to analyze and discuss what went well, what could have been improved, and what they learned from the process. Once again, keeping positive and negative discussions separate is important to ensure adequate time and attention is available for both. These conversations should be carefully documented so insights and significant learning can inform future group efforts.

Making Assignments

As meetings progress, participants receive assignments that require work beyond the meeting. The specifics of these assignments (who is involved, what is to be done, when it should be completed, etc.) should be documented as they are discussed. At the conclusion of the meeting, a general review of these action items verifies that all participants are aware of what is expected of them prior to the next meeting. Once again, assignments should be documented to facilitate the reporting process for the next meeting.

Foster Community/Build Culture

As discussed previously, the individual nature of much of the work that characterizes advising can impact the work environment for advisers. In particular, it can limit the growth of community and the rich cultural contexts that typify great workplaces (Bolman & Deal, 2003; Freiberg & Freiberg, 1996; Palmer, 2004; Peck, 1987; Schein, 1992). Such environments are pregnant with meaning characterized by engagement, and they foster positive relationships, allow people to draw on their strengths, and encourage celebration and success (Cameron, 2008; Cameron, Dutton, Quinn, 2003; Csikszentmihalyi, 2003; Freiberg & Freiberg, 1996; Glashagel, 2009; Seligman, 2011; Ulrich & Ulrich, 2010). Consequently, great leaders realize that every act of leadership has both practical and symbolic value (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002). Thus a leader’s actions both accomplish results and build culture, and sometimes the symbolic building of culture is more important than the practical significance of a specific act. What this implies is that at times meetings might be held solely for the purpose of fostering the kind of interaction that is needed to build community. Such interaction is characterized by open communication, freeform dialogue, discussion of meaning, and positive emotional engagement and celebration (Cameron et al., 2003; Csikszentmihalyi, 2003; Palmer, 2004; Peck, 1987).

With these insights in mind about the actual work processes of departmental meetings, advising administrators are better prepared to facilitate effective meetings and avoid the chaos that occurs when these separate and distinct processes become intertwined and, thereby, result in diminished performance. While agendas need not include details regarding all processes a leader will use, his or her notes may need to contain information about ground rules for processes and descriptions of the techniques the leader will use.

Advising administrators should also keep in mind that the nature of the meeting and its purposes and processes should reflect the broader needs of the office and its staff, individually and collectively. When administrators regularly engage their employees in collaborative, group efforts such as developing plans, making decisions, or working on projects, it is easier to develop a sense of community within the group. Unfortunately, because much of advisers’ work involves one-on-one interaction with students, opportunities for community building within the office can be difficult to achieve, unless administrators intentionally design meetings to include such collaboration.

Additional Details

Once advising administrators have achieved clarity regarding items to address in a meeting, what they need to accomplish relative to these items, and how they will facilitate these processes, some additional details are worth considering.

First, who should be invited to the meeting? Most meetings have specific purposes and are attended by specifically designated individuals based on roles and responsibilities. However, once an agenda and meeting plan is established, leaders should discuss whether to invite additional participants to improve the quality of the meeting or to improve the discussion and work of the group. Sometimes individuals may need to be invited to attend only specific portions of a meeting. Nonetheless, considering whom to involve is a significant step.

A second consideration is the amount of time to schedule for the meeting. Adequate time should help to accomplish specific purposes. For example, brainstorming typically takes less time than analysis, and training adds considerable time to any meeting. Furthermore, as groups increase in size, so does the time necessary to adequately engage in all work processes. This is especially true when large groups try to carry out the work of small groups. At the same time, additional time is required when smaller groups are created with return-and-report responsibility within the confines of the meeting.

Third, leaders should consider what work should be done behind the scenes for the meeting to be effective. Is there is a need to hold conversations, work out details, discuss constraints, and consider items of potential concern prior to the meeting? Are there topics that might emerge and should be handled in specific ways? Leaders should carefully review their plans to make sure they are prepared for any foreseeable contingencies.

Lastly, when items emerge during a meeting that could sidetrack the conversation, suggesting the need for an additional agenda item with related accomplishments to pursue, the leader should work with the group to assign a place in the agenda or a future meeting to discuss it.

Broader Application

While the primary emphasis of this article is on conducting meetings from the perspective of advising administrators, the principles apply across the breadth of advising meeting settings. From the day-to-day sessions advisers conduct with students to group advising and the more formal meetings of task forces, departments, and divisions, the need to clearly articulate agenda items, objectives, and desired outcomes, plus the selection and use of effective techniques remain constant. Consider the example of an adviser preparing to conduct a group advising session.

To begin with, he or she should identify the key topics and agenda items to address in the session. These might include general education requirements, institutional support resources, policies and procedures, use of the registration system, etc. Having clearly identified these areas of focus, the adviser should then determine what needs to be accomplished in relation to each. Thus, communicating policies and procedures might be largely informational, whereas addressing institutional resources might focus on helping students make decisions about seeking assistance and support to meet their needs. As a result, advisers could use appropriate techniques to ensure they achieve desired goals. Advisers thus might select some frequently asked questions regarding policies and procedures and allow students to identify those that pertain to them most and ask questions about them. Students could then hear a brief overview of resources and provide feedback about those they regard as most helpful based on either generic cases or their own situations. Advisers would encourage them to visit the most relevant offices associated with their needs during the first week of classes. Thus information would be dispensed in ways that facilitate informational. This same procedure could help advisers plan an individual student appointment, lead or participate in a task force meeting, and conduct departmental meetings, as emphasized above.

Conclusion

In conclusion, meetings can be an effective and efficient part of academic advising and advising administration. Importantly, advisers and advising administrators must engage in careful planning to carry out the work of the meeting so as to minimize disorder and maintain efficiency and effectiveness. It is not; however, through the mere review of an article such as this that advisers acquire these skills. The ability to conduct meetings that foster the kind of community necessary to create strong advising cultures is a procedural rather than a cognitive skill. Consequently, advisers and advising administrators develop these skills by putting the principles above into practice over time.

Fortunately, an abundance of opportunities exist to do so, as advising largely involves the use of meetings, and the principles described above are broadly applicable—to individual advising meetings with students, group advising sessions, task force meetings in which one becomes involved, and/or departmental meetings. With focused learning and practice, advising administrators and advisers can eliminate meetings that waste time and instead use meetings to build community, effectively lead others, and accomplish results.

References

American Society for Training and Development. (2006). Improving human performance. ASTD learning system. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Boss, R. W. (2000). Preventing regression in teambuilding: A longitudinal study of the personal management interview. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational consultation (2nd ed., pp. 107–117). New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.

Bouchard, T. J., Jr., & Hare, M. (1970). Size, performance, and potential in brainstorming groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(1), 51–55.

Bradford, L. P. (1976). Making meetings work: A guide for leaders and group members. La Jolla, CA: University Associates.

Cameron, K. S. (2008). Positive leadership: Strategies for extraordinary performance. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). Good business: Leadership, flow, and the making of meaning. New York, NY: Viking Penguin.

Freiberg, K., & Freiberg, J. (1996). Nuts:Southwest airlines crazy recipe for business and personal success. New York, NY: Broadway Books.

Gallupe, R. B., Dennis, A. R., Cooper, W. H., Valacich, J. S., Bastianutti, L. M., & Nunamaker, J. F., Jr. (1992). Electronic brainstroming and group size. Academy of Management Journal, 35(2), 350–369.

Glashagel, J. (2009). Servant-institutions in business. Westfield, IN: Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line: Staying alive through the dangers of leading. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Lussier, R. N., & Achua, C. F. (2007). Leadership: Theory, application, skill development (3rd ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson/SouthWestern.

Napier, R., & Gershenfeld, M. K. (1999). Groups: Theory and experience (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Nutt, C. L. (2000). One-to-one advising. In V. N. Gordon, Habley, W. R., & Associates (Ed.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 220–226). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Osterhout, J. M. (1992). 8 steps to effective brainstorming. Women in business, 44(3), 18–19.

Palmer, P. J. (2004). A hidden wholeness: The journey toward an undivided life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Patterson, K., Grenny, J., McMillan, R., & Switzler, A. (2002). Crucial conversations: Tools for talking when stakes are high. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Peck, M. S. (1987). The different drum: Community making and peace. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco, ca: Jossey Bass.

Schein, E. H. (1998). Process consultation. Boston, MA: Pearson Custom Publishing.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. New York, NY: Free Press.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York, NY: Free Press.

Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday/Currency.

Stolovitch, H. D., & Keeps, E. J. (2002). Telling ain’t training. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.

Thornberg, T. H. (1991). Group size and member diversity influence on creative performance. Journal of Creative Behavior, 25(4), 324–333.

Ulrich, D., & Ulrich, W. (2010). The why of work: How great leaders build abundant organizations that win. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Yukl, G. A. (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

How Do Students Define “Good Advising”?

The Mentor Staff — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:04:29 +0000

Advising professionals frequently reflect on the meaning of effective academic advising as it applies to higher education, and the conversation often generates new and interesting perspectives, debates, and research. Aiming at this question from a different vantage point, how do you think students define “good” advising, and what do you think they want and expect from advisers?