Introduction

In 2011, Kimmel suggested by taking a “community-minded” approach, academic advisers can play a role in preparing students for citizenship in a democracy (¶ 1). While Kimmel is to be commended for his efforts to demonstrate the potential for academic advisers to contribute to citizenship learning, academic advising has more to offer students than referrals. Academic advisers interested in maximizing students’ civic learning can engage students in ways that enhance the knowledge, abilities, and dispositions needed to effectively participate in a democratic society. When they focus on student learning, advisers help students make connections across the curriculum, teach them how the university functions, and support them in complex decision-making processes. By approaching student-adviser interactions from a learning-centered philosophy and with a dedication to preparing active citizens, academic advisers can contribute greatly to the civic mission of higher education.

Learning-Centered Academic Advising

With its focus on student learning outcomes, learning-centered academic advising has the potential not only to increase students’ understanding about the curriculum, but also to support citizenship learning. Learning-centered advising connects the literature on classroom pedagogy with what advisers do when meeting with their advisees (Hemwall & Trachte, 1999, 2005; Lowenstein, 1999; Reynolds, 2010). Advisers engage students in constructing an understanding of their whole curriculum just as an instructor engages students in constructing an understanding of the content of a single course (Lowenstein, 2005). The focus of learning-centered advising is student learning and understanding the purpose of higher education and how the courses a student takes come together to form a coherent whole, rather than a set of diverse units used to fill requirements.

Learning-centered advising is characterized by advisers engaging students in reflecting on their coursework, which includes considering how the concepts within different courses fit together, as well as what skills students learn in class (Lowenstein, 2011; Schulenberg & Lindhorst, 2008). A learning-centered approach also supports the student as a decision maker. Advisers provide relevant information and ask probing questions designed to engage the student in dialogue about possible outcomes and provoke critical thinking. With advisers’ guidance, students then make and act on their own decisions. Advising that is learning centered—on student decision making, drawing connections between ideas, and calling attention to ways knowledge and skills gained in one domain can be applied to a different domain—gives academic advising the potential to be a vehicle that supports civic learning. Civic learning through academic advising comes not only from calling students’ attention to knowledge they are gaining through advising but also from applying techniques from democratic classrooms during the advising interaction.

Democratic Classrooms

Learning-centered advising supports the idea that best practices in classroom teaching can be applied to academic advising by teaching students about the whole of the curriculum just as an effective teacher applies these best practices in a course. It therefore follows that if the best practices of democratic classroom teaching are applied to academic advising, advising can effectively support the development of attitudes, skills, and knowledge needed by citizens in a democracy. There is an expanding literature on incorporating citizenship learning in the classroom that applies to academic advising interactions.

Researchers and practitioners are sharing the techniques they use to create democratic classrooms. With guidance from instructors, democratic classrooms get students involved in shaping the learning process for themselves and their classmates. Instructors let students know their expectations and then, to a greater or lesser degree, let them set the agenda for the class (Girgin & Stevens, 2005). Some instructors have used their classrooms as a forum to identify problems, brainstorm possible solutions, and create formal proposals that are later presented to university or government officials (Dunbar, 2005). Students learn to solve problems, navigate government systems, and leverage their voices. Others describe working with each student individually to identify her goals for the course, including the knowledge and skills to be learned and how that learning will be assessed (Freie, 1997). These techniques for citizenship learning have direct applications in academic advising settings.

Thus, on a campus that has made a commitment to produce active citizens for a democratic society, academic advising has a role to play beyond referrals. Indeed, for some aspects of citizenship learning, such as practicing decision making and learning how government systems work, academic advisers are uniquely suited to facilitate student learning.

What Would Democratic Advising Look Like?

Kimmel (2011) suggested academic advisers adopt a “community-minded” approach in their work and outlined the need to prepare students to engage in civic life. He included compelling recommendations that advisers dispense information on community service opportunities, encourage students to participate in service learning, and act as role models by engaging with the community themselves (Kimmel, 2011). However, Kimmel failed to address the ways well-constructed academic advising interactions can prepare students for participation in a democratic society. Academic advising can support students in learning the knowledge, abilities, and dispositions conducive to becoming active participants in a democracy.

University as a Model of Governance Structures

Academic advising provides numerous opportunities for gaining knowledge about navigating government structures. Certainly, advisers recommend courses that contain content on governance structures, including political science, sociology, justice studies, or history, but advisers can do much more. Colleges and universities are large organizations with complex governance systems similar to municipal and state governments. For most traditional-aged college students, the university is the largest system within which they have ever worked. An important facet of the adviser’s role is teaching students how to navigate the university system. Three important areas of learning coincide with indicators of civic and political knowledge used by Schugurensky (2006): the students’ rights and responsibilities, jurisdictional differences, and nuances of how things get done.

The literature indicates that understanding how government agencies work is an important component of learning to be an active participant in a democratic society (Merrifield, 2002; Westheimer & Kahne, 2004), and is analogous to understanding how the university works. An academic adviser, often the first person a student will reach out to when he or she has a problem, is in a unique position to teach students how bureaucratic systems work. Knowledge shared might include the university’s decision-making processes, as well as its hierarchical structure. If a student has a concern to air, the learning-centered adviser teaches him or her how to navigate the offices and representatives involved. For example, if a student has a complaint about a grade received in a class, the student may bring that complaint to the adviser. The adviser’s role is to describe the steps for addressing the complaint—first to the professor presenting the course, then to the chair of the department, and, if necessary, to the grievance committee of the college. In addition, the adviser teaches the student how to professionally present the issue at each level of the system, whether the interaction is conducted in person or in writing. In this way, the adviser educates the student on effective ways of contacting government agencies, another important outcome of citizenship education (Schugurensky, 2006).

In addition, advisers demonstrate how systems work when they explain how administrators make curriculum decisions or adopt certain rules or policies. In some cases, advisers may talk with students about how they have worked within the system themselves to accomplish tasks. Clearly, in such cases students are learning much more from their advisers than what courses to take. They are learning how complex bureaucratic systems work and how to work through bureaucratic channels to achieve their goals.

Academic advisers also help students learn about their rights and duties as students/citizens (Schugurensky, 2006). Learning-centered advisers who take a democratic approach will find opportunities to engage students in discussions about the reasons certain rules and policies are in place. A student with a health issue may learn about her right to request and, with proper documentation, receive a medical withdrawal from classes. Another student may learn that although the college has the authority to allow a student to drop a class after the deadline, his circumstances to do not fit the criteria for such an exception; it was his duty to drop the class before the deadline. An adviser taking a democratic approach could use such situations as springboards to discussions about self-interest versus the common good. Often, students who do not receive what they want from the university (e.g. approval to drop a class after the deadline, avoid taking math, schedule a class for which they do not have the prerequisites) cannot see beyond their own situation and view the university’s policy as unfair. These are teachable moments for an academic adviser. The adviser can engage the student in a dialogue about why the policy is in place and how the student’s degree might be devalued if, for example, all students were permitted to graduate without completing the required math class. Discussion of the value society places on the degree, the trust employers put in the institution, and what it means to have a university degree can open students’ eyes to the common good served by the enforcement of university rules. In such cases, students not only learn about their rights and duties as students/citizens, but also are provided with an opportunity to reflect on the long-term needs of society as a whole in relation to their own immediate self-interest.

In educating students about the university, academic advisers teach students how to interact with large bureaucracies. This can include teaching students how to understand and interpret official documents such as the academic catalog or student code of conduct. In addition, part of learning to navigate bureaucratic channels includes understanding jurisdictional differences. Knowledge of jurisdictional differences incorporates information on who has the authority to make decisions or enforce particular rules or policies. Here, again, advisers are in a position to teach students what they need to know to effectively participate within the university structure. One political science adviser teaches her advisees where to address their concerns through analogy. She draws a parallel between the federal, state, and local governments in the United States and the university, college, and department jurisdictions of the institution.

Advisers who take the time to explain these connections educate students about which jurisdiction has authority over specific areas of concern. Moreover, academic advisers can also help students develop effective self-advocacy skills across a variety of situations. Students prepared in this way have the opportunity, as Merrifield (2002) described, to engage in solving problems, working within systems, and experiencing government processes for themselves, rather than just passively reading or hearing about governance. In these examples of citizenship learning through academic advising, the university itself functions a microcosm of larger governance systems. It serves as a laboratory for learning how to participate in a democratic society, with the academic adviser as a guide to navigating the system.

Academic Advising Interactions

When academic advisers meet with students, opportunities abound for citizenship learning. Because advising interactions are primarily one-on-one meetings, they are not the sole locus of civic education. Nonetheless, academic advising can take an active role in a campus-wide commitment to prepare students for citizenship in a democracy. Advisers who take a learning-centered, democratic approach in their work can engage students in discussions about values (Merrifield, 2002), decision making, as well as reflection on and integration of their experiences and education (Finley, 2011), all skills and attitudes important for an engaged citizenry.

Gathering information, weighing consequences, and considering possible outcomes are all part of a thoughtful decision-making process. The decisions students make in consultation with their academic advisers have immediate and lasting effects on their day-to-day lives, therefore providing the perfect setting for practicing this skill. Advisers invested in student learning will assist students in gathering information and ask probing questions meant to help them anticipate possible consequences. For example, a student may consider withdrawing from a course. A learning-centered adviser will help a student gather information about the deadline and policies. She will then probe the student regarding the pros and cons of this action to ensure he or she has anticipated all consequences: Will withdrawing affect the student’s financial aid? Will it prolong the time to graduation? Will the student need to take summer courses as a result? Just as in a democratic classroom, students must take responsibility for their own learning.

In democratic classrooms, faculty and students work together to determine assignments and appropriate learning outcomes, as well as assess whether the course meets learning outcomes.  Freie (1997) accomplished this by meeting with each student to develop an individual learning contract. Learning-centered advisers can adapt this method to their practices by using advising meetings to develop an individual curriculum plan for each advisee. The process would involve the student working with an adviser to first identify his or her academic, personal, and career goals, including the things he likes to learn about, the skills he wants to develop, and the questions he has about the world. After identifying his goals, the student would gather information from a variety of resources about available courses and, in turn, discuss them with the adviser. The adviser, through questioning and deliberating, would assist the student in making decisions about constructing a curriculum contract that helps the student extract the most from his academic experiences (Lowenstein, 1999). Moreover, through the process of creating the contract, the student engages in deliberation with the academic adviser and practices solving problems—knowledge and abilities identified by Merrifield (2002) as necessary for active citizenship in a democracy.

Merrifield (2002) also suggested citizenship learning incorporates opportunities to become aware of the problem-solving process and to reflect. As advisers meet with students on a regular basis, they have opportunities, as Lowenstein (2005) suggested, to help students reflect on not only the knowledge, abilities, and dispositions they are learning through their courses but also the knowledge, abilities, and dispositions they are developing through their advising experiences. Advisers can ask students to represent their experiences in different ways to deepen their understanding of their learning, as they will use it as citizens in a democracy (Finley, 2011). By asking students to reflect on what they have learned in the context of democratic participation, students will understand the intentional connection between what they are learning in school and its applications to active citizenship in a democratic society. By bringing this information to the forefront, advisers will help students understand how their education contributes not only to their own interests but also to the common good.

Conclusion

People learn citizenship best by applying knowledge, abilities, and dispositions in real-life situations. Academic advising settings provide not only a setting to learn about the way governmental organizations work but also opportunities to put that knowledge into practice. Academic advisers can engage their students in deliberation, problem solving, and decision making, all important skills for effective participation in a democratic society (Merrifield, 2002). In turn, advisers can guide students in reflecting on what they have learned through the process, a key component that ensures students understand how they can apply their learning in other areas of their lives (Finley, 2011).

Clearly, academic advising can do much to support the civic mission of higher education. While Kimmel (2011) was correct in suggesting advisers should encourage students to participate in service learning and other community activities, there is much more advisers can do to support citizenship learning. Through their daily interactions with students, advisers who take a learning-centered approach will teach students how to navigate government systems, appreciate jurisdictional differences, and engage in effective decision making and self-reflection, representing important knowledge and abilities for citizenship in a democratic society.

References

Dunbar, J. B. (2005). The praxis of democracy in undergraduate education. In A. Pearl & C. R. Pryor (Eds.), Democratic practices in education: Implications for teacher education (pp. 81–95). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Finley, A. (2011). Civic learning and democratic engagements: A review of the literature on civic engagement in post-secondary education. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/civic_learning/documents/LiteratureReviewFinleyFINAL.pdf

Freie, J. F. (1997). Democratizing the classroom: The individual learning contract. In G. Reeher & J. Cammarano (Eds.), Educating for citizenship (pp. 153–170). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Hemwall, M. K., & Trachte, K. C. (1999). Learning at the core: Toward a new understanding of academic advising. NACADA Journal, 19(1), 5–11.

Hemwall, M. K., & Trachte, K. C. (2005). Academic advising as learning: Ten organizing principles. NACADA Journal, 25(2), 74–83.

Girgin, K. Z., & Stevens, D. D. (2005). Bridging in-class participation with innovative instruction: Use and implications in a Turkish university classroom. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(1), 93–106.

Kimmel, C. M. (2011). Toward a philosophy of advising: Examining the role of advising in preparing students for citizenship in a democratic society. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal, 13. Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor

Lowenstein, M. (1999). An alternative to the developmental theory of advising. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal, 1(4). Retrieved from http://www.psu.edu/dus/mentor

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

Lowenstein, M. (2011). Academic advising at the University of Utopia. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal, 13. Retrieved from: http://dus.psu.edu/mentor

Merrifield, J. (2002). Learning citizenship (IDS Working Paper 158). Brighton, Sussex, England: Institute of Development Studies. Retrieved from http://www.ids.ac.uk/files/dmfile/Wp158.pdf

Reynolds, M. M. (2010). An advisor’s half dozen: Principles for incorporating learning theory into our advising practices. Retrieved from the NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources website: http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/AdvisingIssues/learning.htm

Schugurensky, D. (2006). This is our school of citizenship: Informal learning in local democracy. In Z. Beckerman, N. Burbules, & D. Silberman (Eds.), Learning in hidden places: The informal education reader. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Schulenberg, J. K., & Lindhorst, M. J. (2008). Advising is advising: Toward defining the practice and scholarship of academic advising. NACADA Journal, 28(1), 43–53.

Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237–269.

The undergraduate experience is greatly enriched by attaining research experience early and often. Recently this has been demonstrated empirically and discussed at length in a variety of disciplines, including but not limited to engineering (Narayanan, 1999), medicine (Murdoch-Eaton et al., 2010), biology (Reynolds, Smith, Moskovitz, & Sayle, 2009), physiology (Desai et al., 2008), neuroscience (Frantz, DeHaan, Demetrikopoulos, & Carruth, 2006), psychology (Wayment & Dickson, 2008), as well as in multidisciplinary discussions in prestigious journals (e.g., Carrero-Martinez, 2011; Russell, Hancock, & McCullough, 2007). However, while the benefits of undergraduate research are numerous and far reaching, the majority of articles on the topic focus on a retrospective viewpoint of undergraduate research initiatives at specific universities. This paper looks forward, offering the students’ perspective on how academic advisers can advocate for undergraduate research and engage junior and senior undergraduates in research, as well as how advisers can promote undergraduate research within the faculty.

How does undergraduate researcher experience benefit the student?

There are numerous benefits for undergraduate students who get involved in research. Research experience allows undergraduate students to better understand published works, learn to balance collaborative and individual work, determine an area of interest, and jump start their careers as researchers. Through exposure to research as undergraduates, many students discover their passion for research and continue on to graduate studies and faculty positions.

First and foremost, a direct benefit of research starts in the classroom. When investigating any phenomenon in class, it is useful to know how the original study was performed. By engaging in research firsthand, students find it easier to understand the rationale underlying others’ research. For example, only after forming one’s own hypotheses does one truly understand the nuances of research designs and better conceptualize course material. Additionally, undergraduate research can provide students with an ongoing source of one-on-one mentorship that is otherwise unheard of in the undergraduate curriculum.

A less direct benefit, and one that is more difficult to teach in the undergraduate curriculum, is the balance between independence and collaboration. Research is often performed in teams, and one must learn to balance a collaborative effort in the laboratory with what one is capable of accomplishing independently. Interdisciplinary work is difficult to teach in the classroom, and on-the-job experience with teams is a bonus for any workplace environment. The nature of research today is such that interdisciplinary teams are becoming the norm, and gaining firsthand experience in teamwork should be promoted in the undergraduate education.

Exposure to an area of research undoubtedly also helps students explore career fields. If one is considering research as a career path, experience in a research setting is invaluable. Exposure to research guides some students toward research after graduation, as well as allows other students to make informed decisions not to pursue careers in research. Additionally, the earlier students become involved, the more experience they attain, which enhances their career choice. Many students considering careers in medicine will also benefit greatly from exposure to research. Many medical schools value research experience for admissions. Perhaps more importantly, a solid basis in hypothesis-driven research is what evidence-based medical practice is built upon. Experience in this area can enhance an understanding of both the medical curriculum and the medical literature.

Exposure to research as undergraduates can also increase the likelihood of becoming successful researchers in the future. Some undergraduates, unsure what to do upon degree completion, proceed to graduate school with the ill-fated idea that it is the next logical step after undergraduate studies. If they have undergraduate experience in research, they are more likely to know if they actually enjoy research. Usually, however, undergraduate students discover a passion for research they did not know existed. Institutions of higher education have a way of attracting the most curious minds, but asking questions and finding answers is a calling that many discover only after they first test the research waters.

How the adviser should engage undergraduates

Awareness is first and foremost the key to success in engaging the undergraduate student. Academic advisers need to be aware of their students’ potential interest in research as a career, as a work-experience opportunity, or in the classroom. The adviser can intermittently gauge interest in research during students’ meetings, and when necessary, provide the right guidance about getting involved. On the students’ part, they first need to be aware of advising services, as well as know academic advisers are able to provide research connections, in addition to general course/degree advice. This is a little known fact and can be fixed by advertising campaigns: “Interested in research? Your academic adviser can help!”     

Faculty, administration, and academic counselors often overlook the level of “unawareness” among undergraduate students. For someone in an institution of higher education, it often seems obvious what research is and that undergraduates play a key part in it. However, a quick poll of undergraduate students paints a very different picture. Many are open to the idea of doing research but do not know the first thing about attaining a student research position. Again, institutions should look to change this mindset early, both in the classroom and in the academic advising office.

Junior undergraduates often do not really know what the research process is. We suggest that faculty make a point not only to incorporate primary research into their junior courses, but also to highlight research conducted at their own universities. Professors should also provide junior undergraduates with some guidance on getting involved in research, perhaps incorporating this information in a short lecture. If possible, professors should also describe their own research on a more detailed level within their courses.  Professors should also be open to attending and aiding in organizing “Meet the Prof” nights held by the department. Advisers should expose those with even a passing curiosity to faculty research..

Advisers can also recruit senior students to help mentor their junior colleagues. Peer education can help senior students explain their mistakes and successes and detail how to go about getting the experience necessary to succeed in academia and industry. Such a mentoring system would also have benefit in the classroom, representing yet another way advisers can help junior undergraduates get the most out of their education.

Conclusion

A significant number of first-year students are overwhelmed by the academic process and do not even know that research is an option for them, let alone how to get involved. This is a tremendous opportunity for the adviser to help to open the doors to a research experience. By explaining the process and available employment opportunities, academic advisers can help to de-mystify the procedure and ignite a passion for research. Many students get involved in research late in their undergraduate careers, often by chance and learning the hard way that there are opportunities for determined students. Any academic institution can enhance its undergraduate curriculum by promoting research to those who show an interest but who might not otherwise know how to get involved.

References

Carrero-Martinez, F. A. (2011). Rethink summer student research. Science, 334, 313.

Desai, K. V., Gatson, S. N., Stiles, T. W., Stewart, R. H., Laine, G. A., & Quick, C. M. (2008). Integrating research and education at research-extensive universities with research-intensive communities. Advances in Physiology Education, 32, 136–141.

Frantz, K. J., DeHaan, R. L., Demetrikopoulos, M. K., & Carruth, L. L. (2006). Routes to research for novice undergraduate neuroscientists. CBE Life Sciences Education, 5, 175–187.

Murdoch-Eaton, D., Drewery, S., Elton, S., Emmerson, C., Marshall, M., Smith, J. A., … Whittle, S. (2010). What do medical students understand by research and research skills? Identifying research opportunities within undergraduate projects. Medical Teacher, 32, e152–e160.

Narayanan, R. M. (1999). Use of objective-based undergraduate research project experience as a graduate student recruitment tool. Journal of Engineering Education, 88, 361–365.

Reynolds, J., Smith, R., Moskovitz, C., & Sayle, A. (2009). BIOTAP: A systematic approach to teaching scientific writing and evaluating undergraduate theses. BioScience, 59, 869–903.

Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., & McCullough, J. (2007). Benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science, 316, 548–549.

Wayment, H. A., & Dickson, K. L. (2008). Increasing student participation in undergraduate research benefits students, faculty, and department. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 194–197.

Imagine the person you care about most in the world has been in a terrible car accident and is rushed to the hospital with a severe head injury. The surgery lasts for hours, and afterward you talk to the surgeon, whose bedside manner leaves something to be desired. You have many questions, but the surgeon insists you should be patient, wait for updates, and follow her recommendations. She asks that you trust her expertise and guidance and grows irritated as you persist, making you feel intrusive when you just want information and assurance that your loved one is receiving the best care possible.

How would you feel in this situation? The most important person in the world to you is in a critical situation, and you are the caretaker. You do not deny that the surgeon is the expert in this scenario, but you believe you should have some input as well. You feel that your opinions and concerns should be respected and that you should be informed immediately of your loved one’s progress.

Hopefully this hypothetical situation helps advisers understand a parent’s point of view. While a student starting college is not in a life-or-death situation, some similarities are clear. Parents are sending their students into an environment about which they know very little. It is a crucial time for new students—one in which their decisions can have a significant effect on their educational journeys. It is understandable for parents to be concerned and to take a vested interest in their students’ well being.

It is also understandable that advisers find that some parents fit the definition of “helicopter parent”—overly involved, overbearing, annoying, and sometimes rude. Often, advisers’ responses to them reflect this frustration, and defenses go up. This may result in pushback from parents and collectively lead to a failed parent-adviser relationship.

According to Marc Cutright (2008), “parents are not a monolithic crowd” (p. 40). This is important to remember as advisers interact with parents, because acting on stereotypes can damage the parent-adviser relationship. Cutright (2008) added, “Parents are rational and emotional, informed and misinformed, deeply interested and distressingly distant, seeking solutions to and being part of various problems” (p. 40). Cutright (2008) also pointed out that parents of incoming students have different levels of knowledge about the campus experience based upon their own experience. A parent might be overbearing because he or she has never been to college, but also might be overbearing because he or she is very familiar with campus life and wants to be sure that their student gets all the help the parent knows is available.

Of course, not all parents are alike and one should not infer that every encounter with parents is contentious. However as advisers increasingly interact with parents, it can help them to remember a few points about interpersonal relationships that have proven effective over the years. This paper frames the overall approach to adviser-parent interaction within the context of Stephen Covey’s groundbreaking book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Written in 1989, this book is revered for its good sense and no-fluff approach to self-improvement. Specifically, this paper will explore Covey’s Habits 4 and 5 (Covey, 1989) and will also refer to Dale Carnegie’s book, How to Win Friends and Influence People, in which many of his ideas dovetail nicely with Covey’s approach.

Covey’s Habit 5 states, “Seek First to Understand, Then to be Understood” (Covey, 1989, p. 237). Most of the time when an adviser encounters an issue with a parent, it is the parent who makes the initial contact regarding a problem. Immediately, the parent seeks to be understood. Many advisers are quick to anticipate the problem and provide a quick response; however, by remembering a few things about human nature, advisers can communicate key points and recommended solutions while also disarming parents in a way that makes the process more agreeable.

To begin to understand another person, “remember that a person’s name is, to that person, the sweetest and most important sound in any language” (Carnegie, 1981, p. 113). If advisers begin by using the parent’s name, an immediate connection is made and respect for the parent as an individual is shown. Carnegie recommends being a good listener and encouraging parents to talk about themselves and their problems in detail before interjecting (1981). Showing parents interest in what they have to say can immediately start the relationship in a positive direction.

To put this concept in perspective, think about a complaint or problem that is voiced to someone such as a customer service representative or spouse. The speaker likely feels better simply by having the opportunity to vent and knowing the other person is listening and interested in what the concern is. On the other hand, the speaker can become frustrated if the listener interrupts, rolls his or her eyes, or is quick to disagree.

Taking the time to be interested in another point of view is called empathetic listening. Not only does this skill disarm the other person (in this case, a parent), the act of listening will clarify the issue for the adviser and allow time to reflect on the variables involved. Perhaps the adviser did not have enough information or may have made inaccurate assumptions about the problem. Empathetic listening allows the adviser to put the issue(s) in proper context and, thus, deal more effectively with the concern, regardless of the final outcome.

Carnegie (1981) also stated one should be sympathetic to others’ ideas and desires. Many times parents simply care deeply for their students and are only advocating for what is in their best interests. Even if parents’ ideas are misguided or their actions extreme, advisers should appreciate (Carnegie, 1981) the fact that parents care enough to make contact and acknowledge the tremendous support they are giving to their children, which is certainly better than the alternative of no support at all.

When advisers take the time to listen, they can acquire more information and allow the parent to vent. When advisers are sympathetic to parents’ viewpoint and see them as well-intended caretakers rather than overbearing annoyances, they are more likely to treat parents with kindness and respect.

After the initial contact, the adviser should use recommended strategies to manage and resolve the issue or problem about which the parent called. If advisers use empathetic listening in the initial interaction, parents are much less likely to be belligerent than if the adviser had responded defensively. Applying Stephen Covey’s Habit 4—“Think Win-Win”—would mean allowing the parent to feel good about trusting the expertise of the adviser (1989, p. 207). This is actually “win-win-win” because a satisfactory resolution mollifies parents and alleviates their worries, allows the adviser to do his or her job without feeling marginalized, and provides students with the best advising possible.

As advisers interact with parents, they would be wise to follow Carnegie’s advice and not “criticize, condemn, or complain” (1981, p. 46) and only “call attention to people’s mistakes indirectly” (1981, p. 239). If parents are misinformed or wrong about an issue, or even if they simply disagree with the adviser’s approach, to chastise them will only make them defensive and less open to new ideas, perspectives, or information.

One effective way to indirectly point out a misinformed viewpoint or mistake is to address it in the third person. Instead of saying “you need to leave your son alone allow him to explore his interests,” it might be better to ask, “If parents allow their students to explore their interests, how might they benefit?” This makes the adviser’s point less accusatory and more hypothetical, thus allowing the parent to be open minded and admit they may be wrong without overtly admitting defeat. Carnegie (1981) mentioned two points directly related to this when he suggested “ask questions instead of giving direct orders” (p. 247) and “let the other person save face” (p. 251). Additionally he encouraged readers to “talk in terms of the other person’s interest” (p. 128) and “make the other person happy about doing the thing you suggest” (p. 273). If advisers can avoid framing the issue as “I am right and you are wrong” and instead gently point out how certain actions might benefit the student (and therefore the parents), they will more likely agree with the proposal.

Too often, advisers rely on the protection of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) to avoid talking to parents, which, while legally sound, may tend to disenfranchise the parent and make them feel even more disconnected from their student’s experience. In her article on helicopter parents, Lydia Lum (2006) revealed that parents may not even be aware of FERPA, or at least what FERPA means. Parents are used to the hands-on approach they had with their students’ education records in high school, so when they encounter the privacy laws associated with FERPA, the restrictions may come as a shock. Advisers should bear this in mind if explaining the details of FERPA to a parent.

Occasionally advisers will find that they have made a mistake or an inaccurate assumption. In this case, the parent has called and has good reason to be upset; the adviser can only concede the point and admit to error. This can be difficult, especially if the parent is belligerent. Carnegie (1981) recommended we “admit it quickly and emphatically” (p. 170) if we are wrong. If the situation is not clear about who is right and who is wrong, Carnegie (1981) said one should “talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person” (p. 244). Imagine a similar situation at a restaurant when something is not right. A patron is much more likely to be agreeable if the manager comes to the table and takes full responsibility for the situation—immediately and sincerely attempting to right the transgression—than if he or she were to become defensive and try to excuse bad food or poor service.

Covey (1989) reminded readers that a win for both parties is far better than a situation in which only one person gets his or her way. Even if an adviser “wins” the argument, the parent is left feeling negative and resentful, and this does nothing to help to loosen the tie between parent and student while advisers guide that student toward developing independence.

Aside from the interpersonal communication tools described above, advisers can also positively interact with overactive parents by sharing informative links and other resources with them. A copy of the advising syllabus would help parents to know what information their students have received. Being willing to stay in contact creates an air of openness that can prevent parents from becoming accusatory or overly persistent. While some parents truly are  too involved, many are simply anxious during the first few weeks of school. When they find out their students have access to all the tools they need to be successful, parents frequently step back. For those who persist, Karen Levin Coburn (2006) recommended offering education about student development and ways in which parents might best support that development without acting inappropriately.

Coburn (2006) also conceded that parents will continue to be actively involved in their students’ lives at college and will maintain regular contact with them. Before the proliferation of email, texting, and wireless phones, students communicated through letters and occasional, expensive long-distance phone calls. Nowadays communication has become far too easy and inexpensive to expect that parents will not attempt to connect with their students on a daily basis. In short, these parents are not going away.

Conclusion

The interpersonal techniques of Stephen Covey and Dale Carnegie do not guarantee a positive relationship with all parents. Sometimes parents seem intolerable, and advisers must endure unpleasant interaction with them. By disarming parents with empathetic listening, however, and then pursuing a win-win solution, many interactions with them can be improved and in the end, better serve the student, which is the entire point of advising.

The teachings of Covey do not only work in an advising setting. These approaches work with bosses, coworkers, friends, significant others, and family members. It is a philosophy of life that, with practice, can greatly enhance all interpersonal relationships.

References

Carnegie, D. (1981). How to Win Friends & Influence People. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Coburn, K. L. (2006). Organizing a ground crew for today’s helicopter parents. About Campus, 11(3), 9–16.

Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. New York, NY: Free Press.

Cutright, M. (2008). From helicopter parent to valued partner: Shaping the parental relationship for student success. New Directions in Higher Education, 2008(144), 39–48.

Lum, L. (2006). Handling “helicopter parents.” Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 23(20), 40­–43.

What is your opinion?

Academic advising typically consists of one-on-one relationships between students and faculty or staff members. However, in response to changing student populations and institutional needs, colleges and universities are reexamining their academic advising delivery systems (Self, 2008). One way of doing so is by using peer advisers and, in fact, the use of peer advising has grown in recent years. According to a February 2004 National Academic Advising Association survey, “over 65% of institutions surveyed have peer advising or peer mentoring programs; over 36% of the institutions without formal peer-advising programs are considering implementing such a program” (Koring, 2005, ¶ 2).

Peer advising generally refers to programs in which students assist other students. Koring and Campbell (2005) offered a more formal definition: “Peer advising is an educational process in which students are intentionally connected with other students to support learning and success” (p. 11). They suggested that peer advisers “are students who have been selected and trained to offer academic advising service to their peers. These services are intentionally designed to assist in student adjustment, satisfaction, and persistence toward attainment of their educational goals” (p. 11). In addition, because students play an important role in other students’ college experiences, peer-advising programs take advantage of the benefits of peer-to-peer interaction.

This article advocates for the use of peer advising as an effective strategy in academic advising. It highlights the advantages of the practice and addresses potential concerns related to peer advising. In developing peer-advising programs, many practical considerations must be addressed, but the overall benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks.

Advantages of Peer Advising

The advantages of utilizing peer advising as a component in academic advising systems include flexibility in delivery methods, peer-to-peer interaction, development of peer advisers, and financial benefits.

Flexibility in Delivery Methods

Peer advising is not a replacement for faculty or staff advising, but rather a supplement. While it is important for a student to have a faculty or staff adviser to provide guidance throughout the educational experience, peers can contribute to student success in ways that complement faculty/staff advising services. Because peer advising is flexible and can fit any program model, peer advising practices vary from institution to institution. For example, types of peer advising include friendly contact programs, programs that pair peer advisers and faculty or professional staff advisers, peer advisers as paraprofessionals within a centralized advising center, and peer advisers as paraprofessionals within residence halls (Koring & Campbell, 2005).

Meeting formats can include group, one-on-one, formal, informal, in-person, and online sessions. Additionally, meetings can take place outside traditional business hours and outside office settings (e.g. in coffee shops or in residence halls), which increases opportunities to connect students with advising services. Although faculty or staff advisers may also hold meetings at various times and locations, multiple responsibilities and time constraints often prevent them from implementing such practices.

Peer-to-Peer Interaction

Another advantage of peer advising is that peers may be better equipped to address certain aspects of advising than faculty or staff members who serve as advisers. Peer advisers view the institution through a different lens than do faculty/staff and are more familiar with the student experience. Likewise, peers can better relate to students’ concerns, because they likely went through the same experiences. Because of their ability to relate, peer advisers can form personal connections with other students and facilitate peer interactions. For example, peer advisers may organize group activities or introduce students to each other outside the classroom. Some students are more likely to trust information from other students, so peer advisers who are equipped with accurate information can share this knowledge, and students will trust their insights.

The importance of peer-to-peer interaction has been documented in research on peer advising. For example, Kuba (2010) found that interactions with peer advisers contributed to first-year students’ retention at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. In particular, peer advisers provided useful academic support and facilitated on-campus involvement (Kuba, 2010). In an earlier study, Russel and Skinkle (1990) examined a peer-advising orientation program and found that participation in the program increased students’ sense of membership in the university community.

Development of Peer Advisers

In addition to the advantages that peer advising offers advising systems and advisees, peer advising contributes to the development of students who serve as advisers. The role of peer adviser is comparable to other paraprofessional roles in departments such as residential life, and peer advisers develop skills such as leadership, time management, and organization. Furthermore, by serving as peer advisers, students may become more committed to the institution and clarify their own goals. For example, a study conducted on peer mentors in the First-Year Interest Group Seminar (FIGS) program at Rutgers University revealed that mentors developed increased personal confidence and learned a great deal from their mentees (Boice-Pardee, 2005). Similarly, another study at the University of Tennessee demonstrated that peer advisers increased their competencies in a variety of areas such as interpersonal, planning, administrative, and technology skills (Diambra, 2003).

Financial Benefits

From a financial standpoint, peer advising can be a cost-effective addition to an academic advising program. Depending on the responsibilities of a peer adviser, the role may be a volunteer position. Using volunteers would work best if the time commitment is relatively small and the position is in line with other unpaid student roles at the institution. In this case, benefits to peer advisers would be mostly intangible. For example, peer advisers could gain transferable skills that would help them in the future. The Department of History at the University of Oregon highlights this in an online advertisement for potential peer advisers: “Besides helping your fellow man or woman, Peer Advising also looks good on resumes” (UO, n.d.).  In this example, the program is relatively small and is for for a specific department, so using volunteers is feasible.

At most institutions, implementing peer advising programs will require hiring paid staff members, but it is still a cost-effective move for an institution. Hiring student staff is less expensive than hiring additional full-time employees, especially considering the cost of benefits. Peer advisers can take on certain tasks such as paperwork and communications to reduce the workload of faculty and staff advisers, thus increasing efficiency. Furthermore, Federal Work Study dollars may help to offset the cost of student salaries within a department or institution.

Potential Concerns

The advantages of using peer advising are clear, but several concerns must also be addressed, including ethical and legal issues, time and energy requirements, and turnover of peer advisers.

Ethical and Legal Issues

One area of concern relates to ethical and legal issues in academic advising. For example, potential issues include breach of confidentiality and the potential for peer advisers to give bad advice or information (Smith, 2004). In response, professional staff members must establish clear expectations and ensure effective training and supervision of peer advisers. For example, a document that outlines the responsibilities of the faculty/staff adviser, peer adviser, and student could be a helpful resource for all parties involved in advising. Also, peer advisers’ training should include information on interpersonal communication skills, campus policies and procedures, and Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) regulations.

Time and Energy Required

Another concern is the time and energy required to implement a peer advising program (Self, 2008). Granted, any new program requires time and energy expenditure, but ultimately peer advising can improve advising practices and support the mission of the department and institution. To ensure that peer advising is effective and tied to the organization’s mission, planning is highly important, and ongoing assessment can help to determine if a program is worthwhile. Many institutions and departments that have implemented peer advising programs cite the positive results of peer advising (Boice-Pardee, 2005; Diambra, 2003), which implies that the programs are worth the investment of time and energy.

Turnover of Peer Advisers

Another possible concern is the turnover of peer advisers and subsequent training burden for the department or institution. While this is an issue for any student position, it does not negate the benefits of a peer advising model. Peer advisers can potentially serve up to three years (sophomore through senior year) and can help to train new peer advisers after their first year, thereby mitigating some of the training burden for faculty/staff. Also, effective training and support can increase retention rates of peer advisers from year to year.

Conclusion

Peer advising is an effective strategy in academic advising. While it does not replace faculty/staff advising, peer advising can complement other advising services. The advantages of using peer advising include flexibility in delivery methods, peer-to-peer interaction, development of peer advisers, and financial benefits. In developing peer-advising programs, administrators must address many practical considerations, such as ethical and legal issues, time and energy requirements, and turnover of peer advisers. Despite these concerns, the overall benefits of peer advising far outweigh the potential drawbacks. As institutions strive to improve retention rates and enhance the student experience, peer advising is an important strategy to consider.

References

Boice-Pardee, H. (2005). Assessing peer education: What can we learn? Retrieved from http://www.sc.edu/fye/resources/assessment/essays/Boice-Pardee-3.10.05.html

Diambra, J. F. (2003). Peer advising: An opportunity for leadership and competency development. Human Service Education, 23(1), 25–37.

Koring, H. (2005). Peer advising: A win-win initiative. Academic Advising Today, 28(2). Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Portals/0/ePub/documents/28-2%20June%202005.pdf

Koring, H., & Campbell, S. (2005). An introduction to peer advising. In H. Koring & S. Campbell (Eds.), Peer advising: Intentional connections to support student learning (Monograph No. 13) (pp. 9–19). Manhattan, KS: National Academic Advising Association.

Kuba, S. E. (2010). The role of peer advising in the first-year experience. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED522152)

University of Oregon (UO) (n.d.) Peer Advising in History. Retrieved from http://history.uoregon.edu/undergraduate/peer-advising

Russel, J. H., & Skinkle, R. R. (1990). Evaluation of peer-adviser effectiveness. Journal of College Student Development, 31(5), 388–394.

Self, C. (2008). Advising delivery: Professional advisors, counselors, and other staff. In V. N. Gordon, W. R. Habley, T. J. Grites, & Associates (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 142–156). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Smith, L. W. (2004, April 2004). “PAT on the back”: Developing and implementing a peer advising team. The Mentor: An Academice Advising Journal.  Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor

A Population in Need

Clark and Kalionzes wrote, “It is one thing to be aware of our diverse students and to know how to address their issues thoughtfully and appropriately. It is an even greater task to learn to genuinely value and affirm diversity in advising work and commit to transform institutions to better support students of color” (2008, pp. 211–212). Academic advisers need to respect the unique backgrounds of all students they advise. Further, they need to understand that diversity is more than race and skin color. All populations of students may be recognized as having diverse characteristics, and advisers need to understand how to advise every type of student. An increasingly relevant student population is veteran students. Veteran students are those transitioning from the military culture to the campus culture and present a unique student population in the field of higher education. With the number of veterans attending college expected to increase, academic advisers need to learn more about veteran students and utilize best practices to serve them well.

To work with veterans, advisers must understand what makes them unique. Morreale (2011) mentioned, “1.6 million military veterans have served combat deployments since September 11, 2001. There were approximately 660,000 military veterans and 215,000 military service members enrolled in undergraduate education during the 2007–2008 academic year” (p. 31). These statistics show veterans are becoming a significant student population in colleges and universities; however, the statistics do not tell us much about who veteran students are. We must also understand their pre- and post-military experiences and the transitions faced when moving from military to civilian life and college to fully grasp what makes veterans a diverse student population (Morreale, 2011). Once academic advisers have established who veteran students are, they need to use the information they have learned to better serve veterans in transition. Academic advisers often use various student development theories to guide and inform their practice. Schlossberg, Waters, and Goodman (1995) explain that transition theory can be applied to many adult populations. Through this framework, Schlossberg’s transition theory can provide insights into best practices for serving veterans. After setting the context of veteran students, advisers can apply Schlossberg’s transition theory to further understand of veteran students.

The GI Bill

The GI Bill enables many veterans throughout the United States and from all branches of the military to attend institutions of higher education to develop themselves and enhance their lives beyond military service. The GI Bill can be traced back to World War II. Bound and Turner (2002) state “The flood of veterans enrolling in college at the end of World War II contributed to widespread rhetoric that the GI Bill brought about the democratization of American higher education” (p. 784). The GI Bill ultimately set the foundation that enabled today’s veteran students to attend colleges and universities.

GI Bills are ever changing and have evolved through the years. Because all veterans are eligible for GI Bill benefits, advisers need to be aware of the GI Bill when working with veterans. This is essential, because advisers work in diverse environments and are often faced with questions about which they are not always familiar. If advisers understand the premise of the GI Bill, they can better assist veterans with whom they come in contact. At minimum, advisers should be knowledgeable about where to direct veterans who need assistance with their benefits and what the GI Bill offers to veteran students.

It is clear the GI Bill has been a significant piece of legislation that it has provided veterans the opportunity to seek advanced education. However, the GI Bill often serves as a stressor for those who utilize its benefits. The American Council on Education (2008) explains a significant number of veteran students are unaware of the types of benefits provided by the GI Bill. Veteran students are also confused about the steps to take to receive their benefits (Strickley, 2009). The fact that veterans do not fully understand what their benefits include or how to receive them suggests academic advisers need to build a basic knowledge about the GI Bill so they can assist veterans in locating the best place to help them receive their benefits. If advisers are able to make the proper referrals, they will help to alleviate some of the stress felt by veterans when coping with the structure of the GI Bill.

Combat to College

Veteran students face many challenges throughout their tenure in colleges and universities. A key factor in these challenges is the transition from one environment to another. Veterans are accustomed to the military lifestyle and may have difficulty adjusting to a new atmosphere. The culture of higher education presents veterans with changes that make it difficult for them to establish comfort and belonging. To effectively serve veterans, academic advisers must learn about the transitional issues veterans confront during their academic careers.

When serving veterans it is necessary to understand they may have endured difficult life experiences that have shaped the lens through which they are viewing their educational journeys. Strickley (2009) describes how veterans may be dealing with the psychological aspects of war or a serious injury or disability as a result of combat, all of which can shape their views on life and higher education. Further, the National Center for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder describes a percentage of veterans who have experienced war-related experiences by stating “60 percent have been attacked or ambushed, 86 percent have received incoming fire, 80 percent have been shot at, 36 percent have discharged a weapon, 63 percent have seen dead bodies or remains, and 79 percent have known someone who was seriously injured or killed” (Strickley, 2009, p. 4). Advisers need to be aware that veterans may have experienced some or all of these events. Further, advisers should understand that not all veterans will cope with their issues in the same manner (Strickley, 2009). To be fully prepared to advise veterans, it is fundamental that all academic advisers are aware of the physical and psychological health needs of these students.

The transition from a daily military lifestyle to becoming a member of the civilian society presents an interesting component of veteran student life. Ackerman, DiRamio, and Mitchell (2009) explain that veterans who go to war often face difficult transitions because they are taken away from their relationships and routines and placed into combat. In addition, once they have established comfort within the military lifestyle, they can experience the same transition when re-entering the civilian life. Veterans have experienced a new lifestyle and set of routines as well as built new relationships while serving in the military. Once their military careers are finished, they are faced with yet another transition; military to civilian life. Re-entering civilian life is difficult enough, but veterans who move on to become students face a new lifestyle they have never before experienced.

Veteran students often must resolve social anxieties that make it difficult connect with peers, faculty], and staff (Coll, Oh, Joyce, & Coll, 2009).  Keeping these difficult transitions in mind, advisers can interpret and follow Schlossberg’s transition and make these students’ journeys a little smoother.

Schlossberg’s Transition Theory to Best Practice

Ackerman, DiRamio, and Mitchell (2009) describe a veteran’s time in the military as one that molds them into a unique population. Thus, veteran students on college campuses are a special group within student bodies. As outlined previously, they bring with them distinct challenges and experiences that distinguish them as a diverse population about which academic advisers need to know more. Once advisers have a base knowledge on what makes veterans students unique, they will have a better understanding how to best advise them.

Schlossberg (as cited in Evans, Forney, & Guido-DiBrito, 1998, p. 111) defined transition as “any event, or non-event, that results in changed relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles.” This definition can apply to veteran students as they enter a new experience by becoming college students. Their relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles will certainly change as they are no longer soldiers, but are instead students.

A key component of Schlossberg’s theory addresses the four S’s: Situation, Self, Support, and Strategies (Schlossberg et al., 1995). With regard to Situation, advisers need to understand that veterans are entering a new environment with a different set of roles and responsibilities. Veterans are no longer soldiers on the battlefield; rather, they have become students in the classroom. Advisers therefore need to recognize that veterans are dealing with a role change that may pose a difficult task. If advisers approach veteran students in a sympathetic manner, they will establish a foundation and rapport that could be critical in helping veterans become comfortable in their new role as students. Once this rapport is established, veterans will be more receptive to seeing academic advisers, which in turn, will help ease some of the transitional challenges this student population faces in a new environment.

When thinking about Self, it is important to understand that all students have a perception of how things should function. Advisers can discuss with veterans their views toward higher education and help them understand what is expected of them and how to succeed as students. Advisers need to acknowledge that veterans’ expectations and approaches to tasks have been shaped by their military service and these are not always the same expectations and approaches that traditional college students bring to their higher-education journey. “These [veteran] students have been shaped by life-altering experiences that affect their thoughts and behaviors at home, at work, and in the classroom” (Coll, Oh, Joyce, & Coll 2009). Once advisers appreciate this fact, they can more successfully address the way they deliver the advising process to veterans. They can frame the educational process in ways that foster growth, development, and understanding for veterans. If advisers approach veterans in this manner, they will establish a relaxed atmosphere that can help ease the transition from battlefield to classroom.

The Support aspect of Schlossberg’s theory is perhaps the most significant for advising veterans. Advisers should work to establish an advising process that recognizes the holistic needs of veterans and helps to establish relationships with these students. “With a strong foundation of self-awareness and a familiarity with veteran issues, advisers may engage in meaningful relationships with students, providing a positive and safe environment for them to develop personal goals, seek assistance with school, and make future professional plans” (Coll, Oh, Joyce, & Coll, 2009). Veterans need to feel they have a solid support network to help with the transitional challenges they are facing. Veterans need support from advisers in the form of referrals to other appropriate resources and in the form of a friendly face that veterans can go to in time of need and advice. If advisers work to ensure they are offering support to veterans, they will show veterans there is a network of people in place who care about their success as students, which in turn will help to make the college experience more meaningful for them.

Lastly, the Strategies aspect of Schlossberg’s theory is about developing a means of helping veteran students cope. Once all of the other S’s are accomplished and understood, advisers can empower veterans to implement various strategies that will aid in their success as college students. Advisers should make veterans aware of the various support services available to them that will help them with their transition to the higher education environment. Veterans need to know how to locate tutoring, counseling, health, and veterans affairs services. Veterans need to be aware of the various services they can utilize to become a successful college student.  Advisers can play an invaluable role in embracing the holistic nature of their work and assisting veterans so they have the means to be successful and gain something from their growth as college students.

Conclusion

Significant increases in the number of veterans attending institutions of higher education suggest academic advisers need to learn more about veterans. Academic advisers often represent the first face that incoming students see, and, because of that, they often become a confidant for students.  To succeed and grow, veterans attending colleges and universities for the first time need a meaningful relationship with their academic advisers. If academic advisers respect veterans for who they are and appreciate the experiences they have sometimes endures, they will be better suited to serve them. By using Schlossberg’s transition theory and addressing Situation, Self, Support, and Strategies, academic advisers can develop plans of action that will allow them to better serve veterans and meet the many needs they bring with them as students. Advisers must remember, “Having encouraging advisers who can help veteran students navigate through the school experience has proven to enhance the growth and success of veterans students and has promoted institutional retention as well” (Coll, Oh, Joyce, & Coll, 2009).

References

Ackerman, R., DiRamio, D., & Mitchell, R.L. (2009). Transitions: Combat veterans as college students. Wiley InterScience, 5–14. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ss.311/pdf

Bound, J., & Turner, S. (2002). Going to war and going to college: Did World War II and the G.I. Bill increase educational attainment for returning veterans? Journal of Labor   Economics, 20(4), 784–815.

Clark, E. C., & Kailonzes, J. (2008). Advising students of color and international students. In V. N. Gordon, W. R. Habley, T. J. Grites, & Associates (Eds), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (2nd ed.) (pp. 204–225). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Coll, J. E., Oh, H., Joyce, C., & Coll, L. C. (2009, April 29). Veterans in higher education: What every adviser may want to know. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved from http://www.psu.edu/dus/mentor

DiRamio, D., Ackerman, R., & Mitchell, R. L. (2008). From combat to campus: Voices of student-veterans. NASPA Journal, 45(1), 73–102.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1998). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Morreale, C. (2011). Academic motivation and academic self-concept: Military veteran students in higher education. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from UMI Dissertation Publishing. (UMI 3460783)

Schlossberg, N. K., Waters, E. B., & Goodman, J. (1995). Counseling adults in transition: Linking practice with theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Spring.

Strickley, V. L. (2009). Veterans on campus. Retrieved from http://www.paper-clip.com/Media/GenComProductCatalog/VetsWP_FInal.pdf

Abstract

In this conceptual article, the authors explore how advisers’ and advisees’ use of questioning can enhance the mentoring process. The authors frame this discussion within one developmental mentoring model, Adaptive Mentorship ^© (AM), which they have designed, researched, and refined. They contend that AM has relevance for mentoring in its broadest sense across all disciplines, including academic advising. The authors illustrate how participants using the AM model would typically pose questions to enhance the professional development of protégés and mentors, alike; and they emphasize that appropriate questioning within the mentorship process will promote professional learning.

Introduction

Whether one sees academic advising as a unique professional discipline in its own right, or as an embedded portion of the assigned duties of all instructional personnel (Lowenstein, 2011), there is widespread agreement that mentorship is integral with advising (Noll, 2011). Educators typically conceptualize mentorship as a developmental process, whereby individuals who possess more knowledge, skills, and experience in a particular field (i.e., mentors) assist individuals possessing less of those elements (i.e., protégés) to acquire and/or refine them, in terms of the latter’s psychosocial and technical functions within particular professional disciplines (Ragins & Kram, 2007).

A plethora of definitions and approaches to mentorship exist across the educational and professional landscape (Allen & Eby, 2007), and protégés within every field reflect a wide range of task-specific developmental stages. Despite these contextual complexities, mentors endeavor to meet protégés’ diverse professional-development needs (Desselles & Livingston, 2011). If this individualization process is to be successful, participants must ensure that mentorship is rooted in effective communication practice (Alvarez, 2010), which often includes the use of questioning to stimulate protégé thinking (Parks Daloz, 2005). Considerable research has emerged regarding the use of questioning within the teaching/learning process (Wilen, 1987; McKeachie, 1986), and Mezirow and Taylor’s (2009) work on transformative learning has also contributed to shaping how questioning might be utilized to enhance mentorship in adult education.

Our purpose in this article is to illustrate questioning within one developmental model, Adaptive Mentorship^© (Ralph & Walker, 2011a, 2011b), previously Contextual Supervision (Ralph, 1998, 2004), within which one could utilize questioning.

Adaptive Mentorship

We developed AM to serve as an interdisciplinary mentoring approach to enhance advising/mentoring practice in any field (Ralph & Walker, 2010, 2011a, 2011b). We derived it from contingency-leadership approaches (Ralph, 1998) and have witnessed its transferability to various professional disciplines and cultures (Johansson-Fua, Sanga, Walker, & Ralph, 2011). We represent the model in Figure 1.

In Figure 1, we illustrate AM operating within the confines of a specific context consisting of the situational elements unique to each setting. These contextual variables cannot be easily changed by mentors or protégés (e.g., participants’ cultural backgrounds, individuals’ personalities, organizational procedures, or workplace conditions). In fact, within such contexts the only factor that mentorship dyads would have power to control is their own behavior: protégés could change their performance, and mentors could adjust their leadership actions. In Figure 1, we depict this activity by two face-to-face windows, using the glass metaphor to emphasize transparency, upon which all successful relationships are based (Armstrong, 2012; Parsloe & Leedham, 2009).

The D-grid in Figure 1 represents the protégé and his/her task-specific, time-specific developmental level, while the A-grid represents the mentor’s adaptive response matched to the protégé’s then-existing developmental stage for the skill set in question. The key principle underlying the AM model is that the mentor must adjust his/her mentoring response to align with the protégé’s performance level. An A-response that mismatches the D-level will typically spawn confusion, frustration, anger, and/or resentment between partners (Ralph, 1998, 2005). Ideally, as the protégé develops his/her skills/knowledge, the mentor will make corresponding adaptations in his/her leadership style. The application of AM consists of four phases:

1. Decide on the knowledge/skills being developed
Each profession/discipline has specific bodies of knowledge, competencies, and values that characterize proficient practitioners. In the case of student advising, a major goal is for students to make optimal decisions regarding their academic courses/programs, and to extend this ability to make sound career decisions in their future (Parks Daloz, 2005).

Within the AM model, protégés are typically at different developmental stages for their various tasks and will encounter difficulty in trying to master everything at once. Logically, the mentoring pair will divide the learning requirements into manageable portions and have the protégé focus on “bite-size chunks” of material.

2. Determine the protégé’s task-specific development level
As illustrated in the D-grid of Figure 1, a protégé’s skill-specific developmental level consists of both his/her competence and his/her confidence in performing a task at a given point in time. We defined competence as the degree of the learner’s procedural, technical, or mechanical ability to perform the skill set; and we defined confidence as the degree of inner psycho/emotional composure, self-assurance, self-efficacy, ease, or comfort that a protégé senses regarding his/her performance of that task.

A protégé could be at one of numerous positions for each skill set within the D matrix, but for analytical purposes, we identified four general positions in each grid. For instance, the D1 quadrant typifies a protégé who has “low competence” and “high confidence” in performing the task being practiced (i.e., he/she does not know exactly how to perform it with technical prowess but feels self-assured, willing, and eager to do so). A protégé at D2 is low on both competence and confidence, a protégé at D3 shows high competence in the skill but has low confidence, while a protégé at D4 ranks high on both dimensions.

A protégé’s developmental level for each skill set may be ascertained in three ways: (a) by the mentor’s formal and informal observations of the protégé’s actual performance of it, (b) by the pairs’ informal conversations about the protégé’s specific progress, and (c) by the protégé’s answers to direct questions regarding his/her competence and confidence in the task. We re-emphasize that these D-levels are skill-specific, they are changeable over time, and they are not permanent labels of protégés’ progress.

3. Synchronize mentor response
The mentor must subsequently adapt his/her mentorship response to correspond to the protégé’s existing D-level. This matching process represents the essence of AM and is depicted in Figure 1 by the large arrows connecting similarly numbered quadrants: A1 with D1, A2 with D2, and so on.

As we illustrate in the A-grid (representing mentors’ adaptive style), their response has two dimensions: the amount of support the mentor provides the protégé (i.e., the encouragement, positive reinforcement, praise, and psychological/emotional inversely related to the protégé’s confidence level). It consists of positive words, facial expressions, gestures, and body language that the mentor provides.

The other response-component on the A-grid is the task continuum (i.e., the amount of mentor “directedness” regarding the protégé’s existing technical or mechanical performance of the specific skill set). The mentor’s task response varies along a continuum from lesser to greater amounts of directive guidance, or specific technical advice regarding the protégé’s “technique” or performance. This task-dimension involves mentor behaviors ranging (at the high end) from telling, directing, prescribing, recommending, and suggesting; to less directive action (at the medium range), such as advising, guiding, showing, demonstrating, or asking questions; to the least task-oriented response (at the lower range), typified by mutual discussion, sharing, or delegating by the mentor.

The key principle in correctly matching the A and D quadrants is that the mentor’s task response must be inversely proportional to the extent of the protégé’s competence level. That is, low protégé competence requires mentors’ high task-orientation or attention to direction, because the protégé does not know how to execute the strategy and needs to know. On the other hand, high protégé competence calls for low task-direction from the mentor, because the former already knows how to perform it. Similarly, the extent of the mentor’s support is inversely proportional to the novice’s level of confidence. Low protégé confidence requires high mentor support, while high confidence solicits low support, because the protégé’s already elevated confidence does not need bolstering.

4. Observe and continually adapt mentor response
The mentorship dyad must monitor the protégé’s changing level of development for each element, and the mentor will accordingly adapt his/her response to synchronize, in opposite degrees, with the protégé’s development level(s). Our research (Ralph, 1998, 2004, 2005; Ralph & Walker, 2010, 2011a, 2011b) has consistently shown that (a) protégés do not always progress numerically from D1 to D4; (b) they can begin at, and change to, different levels on the D-grid, but typically conclude at D4; and (c) effective mentors appropriately synchronize the A with D quadrants.

Posing Questions within the AM Model

We illustrate how mentors employ questioning strategies within AM to promote pairs’ reflection, strengthen their decision making, enhance the mentorship process, and advance their mutual learning.

The program leader first describes AM to all participants, and then advises the pairs how to implement it. During this initial AM orientation, the leader gives two grid-sheets to each partner: a blank D-grid and a blank A-grid. He/she asks protégés to independently mark an “x” on their D-grids at which location they think they are functioning for the agreed-upon skill set. The leader also asks mentors to independently mark a point on his/her D-grid copy to indicate the position at which he/she felt the protégé was performing in the skill. After each partner privately completes his/her D-plottings, the leader asks the pair to compare/question/discuss their choices and underlying rationales.

Next, the leader asks mentors and protégés to privately mark an “x” on their respective A-grid sheets to reflect the location from which they each thought the mentor was mentoring the protégé at that time for the task. The leader then asks the pair to question/discuss their two “A” plottings. After this discussion, the leader asks pairs to debrief the similarities and differences between their respective A and D rankings.

We provide key questions that the pairs typically pose, not only during this initial orientation to the AM framework, but also periodically throughout the entire mentorship period. We consider these questions, which Wiggins (2007) would classify as essential questions, to be critical to the success of the entire Adaptive Mentorship enterprise. Our research showed that as mutual trust developed between participants, and as they became more comfortable with each other and the communication process, then the quality of the mentoring grew, their timidity diminished, and their mutual satisfaction and learning increased (Ralph 2004; Ralph & Walker, 2011a).  The questions are:

• How did we compare on our D-placements?
• How did we compare on our A-placements?
• Why did we match (or mismatch) our plottings?
• What needs to be done to correct the mismatch?
• Why did you think I was functioning at “X”?
• What would AM suggest that I need to do to help us match the quadrants?
• What would AM suggest that you need to do to help us match the quadrants?
• According to AM, what am I doing that I should stop doing to help you (protégé) reach D4?
• According to AM, what am I not doing that I should be doing to help you (protégé) reach D4?
• How could I provide you (protégé) with more support (or task/direction)?
• What do I (protégé) need to do to enhance my competence?

Our research (Ralph 1998, 2011a) has further identified the following benefits that accrue when mentor/protégé dyads collaboratively pose and systematically answer the above questions: (a) AM served as a useful framework by which pairs could conceptualize the whole mentoring process; (b) it provided mentors with specific guidance for adapting to and promoting protégé development; (c) it helped sidestep and re-interpret so-called “relationship difficulties” or “personality clashes,” by identifying mentors’ mismatching of their responses; (d) it indicated if protégés were not demonstrating anticipated growth; (e) it served as a “third-party,” helping pairs replace blaming, fault-finding, and rationalizing behaviors with more constructive resolutions; and (f) it required a sound rationale, clear explanations, sufficient training, and sufficient practice for success.

References

Allen, T., & Eby, L. (Eds). (2007). The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspective approach. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Alvarez, R. M. (2010, September 21). Five steps for effective mentoring: Part 1, Communication of the master plan. Psychology Today. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-psychology-behind-political-debate/201009/five-steps-effective-mentoring-part-1-communicati

Armstrong, H. (2012). Coaching as dialogue: Creating spaces for (mis)understandings. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 10(1), 33–47. Retrieved from http://www.business.brookes.ac.uk/research/areas/coachingandmentoring/

Desselles, M., & Livingston, M. (2011, October 28). Motivational richness: How reversal theory can help advisers and benefit advisees. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor

Johansson-Fua, S., Sanga, K., Walker, K., & Ralph, E. (2011). Mentorship in the professions: A perspective from Tonga. The International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching, 9(2), 19–37.

Lowenstein, M. (2011, September 28). Academic advising at the University of Utopia. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor

McKeachie, W. (1986). Teaching tips: A guidebook for the beginning college teacher (8th ed.). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.

Mezirow, J., & Taylor, E. (2009). Learning as transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Noll, T. (2011, May 5). Learning and changing: My college experience (Part 9). The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor

Parks Daloz, L. (2005). Mentorship. In L. M. English (Ed.), International encyclopedia of adult education (pp. 398–400). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Parsloe, E., & Leedham, M. (2009). Coaching and mentoring: Practical conversations to improve learning (2nd ed.). London, UK: Kogan Page.

Ragins, B., & Kram, K. (Eds). (2007). The handbook of mentoring at work: Theory, research, and practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Ralph, E. (1998). Developing practitioners: A handbook of contextual supervision. Stillwater, Oklahoma: New Forums Press.

Ralph, E. (2004). Developing managers’ effectiveness: A model with potential. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2), 151–163.

Ralph, E. (2005). Enhancing managers’ supervisory effectiveness: A promising model. Journal of Management Development, 24(3), 267–284.

Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (2010). Rising with the tide: Applying Adaptive Mentorship in the professional practicum. In A. Wright, M. Wilson, & D. MacIsaac (Eds.), Collection of essays on learning and teaching, Vol. III (CELT, pp. 1–8). Hamilton, ON: Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education.

Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (2011a). Adapting mentorship across the professions: Fresh insights & perspectives. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: Temeron/Detselig Publishers.

Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (2011b). Enhancing mentoring in management via the Adaptive Mentorship^© model. The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 10(8), 35–43.

Wiggins, G. (November 15, 2007). What is an essential question? Big Ideas: An Authentic Education e-Journal. Retrieved from http://www.authenticeducation.org/ae_bigideas/article.lasso?artid=53

Wilen, W. (Ed.). (1987). Questions, questioning techniques, and effective teaching. West Haven, CT: National Education Association Professional Library.

As an undergraduate student, I rarely sought out my academic adviser. For a number of reasons, I really only interacted with an academic adviser when I was required or needed his or her signature. While enrolled in a recent seminar on academic advising, I began to reflect on these experiences. It is my belief that there is a particular group of unreachable students—those who do not seek out their advisers, rarely make appointments, and seldom utilize the expertise offered by academic advisers. In fact, one in ten college students do not interact with an adviser in a given academic year (Kuh, 2008). This is an important statistic to investigate, because it tells us that 10 percent of students are not utilizing advising resources and raises the question why are students not seeing their advisers? To answer this question, it is necessary to understand reasons why students should see their advisers and follow up with strategies that advisers and advising offices can implement to publicize what they offer to students.

Understanding “Unreachables”

It is important to understand why students choose not to visit their academic advisers. Although this article will identify three likely reasons for this phenomenon, student rationale will vary based on factors such as institutional type, mission, culture, and advising model. The goal of this section is to provide professionals a lens through which to view the student experience and hopefully provide meaning and context.

All-Knowing Students

Perhaps one of the more common reasons students would elect not to meet with their advisers is because they are “all-knowing” and perceive they are already familiar with everything an academic adviser would tell them. This same excuse is sometimes used to rationalize not visiting a physician. When ill, it seems many individuals will say they aren’t going to visit the doctor, because they already know the diagnosis. Likewise, there are students who believe a course catalog, degree audit report, or the institution’s website can act in place of an academic adviser. High-achieving students described by Harding (2008), as well as Gordon’s (2007) “expert” major changers, are good examples of students who typically do not seek help; however, they enter college with the same developmental challenges as any other student. Regardless, just like those who irregularly visit their doctor, all-knowing students have the perception that their adviser is not going to tell them anything he or she doesn’t already know.

Inconvenience of Sessions

Whether it is timing or location, there may be a notion going around our campuses that getting an appointment with an adviser and finding time to do so is another inconvenient hoop to jump through. In fact, for some students it may seem to be such a hurdle that they would rather simply avoid seeking the assistance of their adviser. Nontraditional and commuter students will often cite that getting to an academic advising appointment is difficult because of limited office hours held by advisers and inconvenience of location and parking.

Poor Previous Experiences

Lastly, students might avoid or choose not to interact with their advisers because of negative past experiences. Even the stories of poor experiences from others can have an impact on whether a student chooses to pursue a relationship with his or her academic adviser. Whether students perceive an adviser provided misinformation on degree requirements or insisted an advisee enroll in a particular set of classes, these perceptions lead students to believe an adviser was instrumental in extending their degree program and cost them more money in the long run.

The Adviser is In

Notwithstanding the possible student justifications for not interacting wit­­h academic advisers, we must investigate further before looking at solutions. Whether it is at the campus or departmental level, it is critical to investigate the reasons advisers and student affairs professionals believe students should see their advisers on a regular basis. In addition to academic planning, there are three main reasons students should visit their advisers.

Campus Connections

Academic advisers are keepers of a vast array of knowledge in regard to the university structure and opportunities on campus. Advisers can play an important role in assisting students and especially helping them to navigate the institution’s academic requirements as well as its many policies and expectations. As De Sousa (2005) described, advisers should seek to connect students with complementary learning opportunities outside the classroom—some of which students might not be familiar with unless speaking one-on-one with a university official. Advisers can truly connect students with campus resources they perhaps didn’t know existed.

Transition Assistance

As the transition into college begins, students need someone to answer questions, provide guidance, or lend a listening ear. Academic advisers are among the few university officials who can theoretically touch every student who enrolls at the institution. This is a privilege! Advisers assist new students with transitions into college and help create opportunities for those students to be engaged members of the institution’s community. By the same token, advisers ease additional transitions such as changes in majors and career paths, as well as aiding students in their transition out of the university as they inch toward graduation.

Mentor and Role Model

Some students receive campus resource information and transition assistance through other channels— perhaps through their on-campus jobs or their involvement with campus organizations. What can an adviser offer the engaged student tapped into administrative, staff, and faculty networks? Academic advisers can serve as mentors and role models to advisees. It is critical for advisers to recognize the differing relationships among their advisees. Some students will need more prescriptive information, whereas others, such as the engaged student, benefit more from an adviser-advisee relationship that is more of a collaborative friendship. The point is that an academic adviser can offer something to everyone if willing to be creative and try new things.

How to Reach the Unreachable

The million-dollar question remains to be explored: How can we promote and extend advising services to unreachable students? The good news is that by understanding what advisers offer and why students don’t visit their advisers, we can determine what advising offices can do to better assist their students. An institution, department, or individual adviser can implement an array of techniques and strategies to create more successful interactions with unreachable students. The use of short-term strategies, such as environmental and visibility tweaks, as well as long-term strategies, including an integrated marketing communications (IMC) model and the inclusion of tech-savvy tools, are small changes that can have a big impact and help increase the reach of academic advisers.

Short-term Strategies

Join the Student Environment

Rightfully or not, many students believe that academic advisers sit in their offices, wait for appointments, and wonder why students don’t come and visit. To change student perceptions, advisers should seek to create a more inclusive, rewarding advising atmosphere that students will want to frequent. Aiken-Wisniewski and Allen (2005) discussed trends from institutions across the nation in which advisers actively meet advisees in their student environment. For example, the “Adviser on Board” program allows academic advisers to engage students in the advising process while riding the campus shuttle. Other creative ideas include walking around campus during peak registration times, hosting small-group sessions in residence hall suites, offering to meet over lunch or dinner, or even having designated office hours at the campus coffee shop or dining center (Aiken-Wisniewski & Allen, 2005; De Sousa, 2005).

Change the Office Atmosphere

If we go out to meet students in their environment, it is only fitting that when they come to visit us in ours, it be welcoming and presentable. Simple changes can be made to an office or advising center to enhance its appearance and  welcoming nature. The furniture and layout plays a big part. A study conducted by Eckerty (2011) found that placement of an adviser’s desk in relation to student seating had an impact on first impressions related to ease of communication. Although no particular office arrangement was preferred by surveyed students, it became clear that advisees need a place to physically see documents related to the session, have a clear path to their seat in the adviser’s office, and are less distracted in a clutter-free space (Eckerty, 2011). These are quick changes that can assist students in the learning and advising process.

In addition, simply the location of the office or center plays a big part as well. Is the building on the outskirts of campus or near the quad? On what floor is the office or center located? Within the office, who is present to answer questions? It is also helpful to have someone besides the administrative assistant field students’ quick questions. For example, student mentors or even professional advisers on a rotating duty could provide this function. In so doing, students might be more inclined to stop by the advising office if they have quick questions and develop an ongoing relationship with their adviser.

Lastly, an innovative idea suggested by Aiken-Wisniewski and Allen (2005) is called the tip jar, which is a small, fun bowl of “advice” from advisers. It is intended to be something for students to investigate as they wait for their appointments. Career information, school news, and fidget toys would also be appropriate items to have in the waiting area of an advising office.

Long-term Strategies

Develop an IMC Model

Effective marketing to any audience requires careful planning and execution. On the modern college campus with information continually bombarding students, this is even more appropriate. Creveling and Edelman (2009) introduced a business-marketing concept to the realm of academic advising. Known as integrated marketing communications (IMC), this model seeks to increase the reach of, in this case, advising services. IMC includes identifying a target audience, selecting a unified theme, placing material in high-traffic areas, and creating a media schedule (Creveling & Edelman, 2009). Developing IMC for an advising office would require a more long-term vision and commitment to outreach than the short-term strategies mentioned above. In particular, intentional strategies such as selecting a theme and creating and following a media schedule require more dedication than some of the short-term changes that an adviser or advising center could implement. Technology likely would likely play a large role in messaging and marketing on campus. Videos, Facebook, Twitter, and other marketing outlets are great methods to attract the attention of students across campus, including those who might otherwise not engage with an adviser.

Using an IMC model can be a great way to incorporate and promote the many reasons students should see an adviser. As detailed earlier, advisers play a vital role in linking students with various campus resources, serving as mentors and role models, and assisting with transition and course selection. An advising-focused IMC might include serial Facebook updates with “Top Reasons to Visit Your Adviser” or perhaps videos with tips and tricks for students as they begin the registration process for the following semester’s courses. The point is to find creative methods to reach out and market to students, while acknowledging that true engagement with an advisee must ultimately be the decision of the student.

Utilize Technology

To reach out to today’s millennial students, it is imperative that advisers utilize the same technology as their advisees. Many institutions are utilizing online synchronous chat features, as well as texting for immediate student assistance. On many campuses, security, information technology, and the library already use these strategies, and students will continue to expect texting and online chatting as communications options until something newer and better is released. Until then, advisers should strive to incorporate these technology pieces into their daily routine in order to increase availability to students. Similarly, social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter have truly become a way of life for students today. If advisers and advising offices tap into this market, new communication dimensions and connections with students open up and should be handled both strategically and professionally.

Conclusion

Dedicated advising practitioners should continually investigate new and innovative methods to engage with their student advisees. At times, it can be difficult to contact and relate to students who are not currently seeking academic advising—the so-called unreachable students. However, advisers can draw students into the advising process through the use of creative short-term and long-term marketing strategies, including meeting students in their environment, creating a welcoming office climate, developing an integrated marketing communications model, and utilizing technology. It is imperative for academic advisers to reach out to all students, for it is likely that these unreachable students are in need of a helping hand or a listening ear.

References

Aiken-Wisniewski, S., & Allen, C. D. (2005). Did Einstein know the date to withdraw? Techniques and activities to educate your campus community about academic advising. NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources. Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Marketing-Advising-Services-a604.aspx

Creveling, K., & Edleman, J. (2009, August 19). Utilizing integrated marketing communications with the Academic Centers for Excellence. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved from http://dus.psu.edu/mentor

De Sousa, D. J. (2005). Promoting student success: What advisers can do (Occasional Paper No. 11). Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.

Eckerty, J. (2011). “Approachable” “Intimidating” “Unprofessional” “Credible”: What do our offices say about us? NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources. Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/AdvisingIssues/office-study.htm

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

Harding, B. (2008). Students with specific advising needs. In V. N. Gordon, W. R. Habley, T. J. Grites (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (2nd ed.; pp. 189–203). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kuh, G. (2008). Advising for student success. In V. N. Gordon,   W. R. Habley, T. J. Grites (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (2nd ed.; pp. 68–84). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

As advisers, we strive to help our students excel in their studies, develop as the individuals they are, and move toward graduation to pursue their ventures. Our goal is to foster and facilitate student development. In order to be effective, we need to establish trust with our students so we can provide them with the appropriate guidance along the way. But what if advising in the office is putting a barrier between the adviser and the student, thus affecting our chances of getting the “full story?” As advisers, we need to think beyond the office. The purpose of this article is to explain why moving into student spaces and utilizing conversations outside the office can enhance advising sessions. I will first outline the importance of relationship between an adviser and advisee, and through the example of Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis’ (IUPUI) first-year-seminar model, discuss why moving into student spaces creates a unique opportunity for advisers to effectively foster and facilitate student development. By moving into student spaces, advisers are able to make every conversation count.

Building the Foundation: Relationship

Relationship is the most critical component of an effective advising session, because it encourages the formation of openness and trust. It provides the framework for an effective advising session. For this reason, Crookston’s (1994) developmental advising approach is seen as a popular and respected way to advise; in his approach he says that above all, advisers should focus on the relationship. He stated, “Most critical of all is the nature and quality of the relationship existing between the adviser and the student” (Crookston, 1994, p. 8).

Once an adviser has the trust of a student, it allows for the breaking down of barriers. In addition, relationship allows for individualization and trust, because the student and adviser have the opportunity to learn from each other. This relationship contributes to many factors for a college student; and according to Schnell (1998) and to Winston and Sandor (1984) (as cited in Arms, Cabrera, & Brower, 2008), “The importance placed on the value of personal relationships is well-grounded in research, which shows a link between developing a personal relationship with an academic adviser and students’ satisfaction, success, and persistence” (p. 8).

Extending Advising beyond the Office: First-Year Seminars

Because relationship serves as the framework for effective advising, it is important for advisers to effectively utilize the time they have with students. Extending advising beyond the office and moving into student spaces, such as classrooms, is a great tactic to consider, because it helps to seamlessly break down barriers and build the relationship that is so important for effective advising. While it should not be assumed effective advising cannot happen in the office, institutions with programs that integrate advisers into student spaces provide advisers this unique opportunity to continue fostering their relationships, which then helps them reach that ultimate goal of fostering and facilitating student development. IUPUI’s first-year seminar model effectively demonstrates this idea.

IUPUI and Its First-Year Seminar Model

IUPUI’s first-year seminar model, more widely known on campus as the learning community model, is a seminar designed to help students (mostly first-year students) successfully transition from high school to college, as well as navigate the university so they are better prepared for related academic rigors (Williams, 2001). According to Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot (as cited in Pike, Hansen, & Lin, 2011), IUPUI is part of the nearly 75 percent of colleges and universities that offer programs tailored to first-year students. Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, Whitt, and Associates as well as Upcraft et al. (as cited in Pike et al., 2011) further explained that colleges use first-year seminars, because they are “associated with a variety of positive educational outcomes, including a successful transition to college, higher grade-point averages, and improved retention rates” (pp. 194–195).

The initiative to establish first-year seminars at IUPUI started in 1994 to primarily address unmet student needs and low retention figures and to help students make successful transitions to college (Williams, 2001; Orme & Voorhis, 2001). At first only faculty taught the seminars, but it was not long before advisers were recognized as an integral part of this new model (Orme & Voorhis, 2001). Eventually, a four-person instructional team was developed to help students achieve their academic pursuits and included a faculty member, adviser, student mentor, and librarian, and this group provided consistency and support in different ways through the semester class (Orme & Voorhis, 2001).

The Adviser’s Role within a First-Year Seminar

Advisers serve a variety of roles within the model of a first-year seminar at IUPUI. Advisers are deliverers of information, reminding students of the important deadlines affiliated with registration (Vermette, Ruch, & Seabrook, 2001). They also present on special topics related to academic success, such as time management, study skills, and the various support centers offered on campus. Most importantly, they serve as the primary adviser for each student in the class. This gives students consistent interaction with the adviser and assurance that at least once a week they receive the guidance they need (Vermette et al., 2001).

Benefits of This First-Year Seminar Approach

Moving into student spaces, as depicted in this first-year seminar approach, leads to many benefits, including:

Observation: In this model, advisers have weekly contact with students throughout the semester. They learn each student’s name and personality-type, as well as how each interacts with peers and the instructors (Vermette et al., 2001). By observing student behaviors, advisers are more equipped to recognize challenges and opportunities affecting the student’s academic performance.

Consistency and increased adviser/student satisfaction: While first-year seminars oftentimes created more work for advisers, advisers reported contentment in this role. One said, “Seeing students in the classroom shows how they think, unlike the office setting. It has built my interest in the bigger picture and finding ways to help the students improve” (Orme & Voorhis, 2001, p. 60). Interestingly, in a fall 2010 survey completed by IUPUI students taking a first-year seminar, almost 80 percent of the 426 students who responded reported they were either satisfied or very satisfied with their advisers (Hansen, 2010).

Forced interaction: Without even realizing it, students are “forced” to see their adviser on a weekly basis in a setting that has the potential to be more comfortable for them than in an office setting.  Students often ask advisers questions they might not have otherwise considered. The only reason they ask is because it is convenient for them (Vermette et al., 2001). One adviser mentioned, “Instead of waiting and hoping that students will come to us, we go to them” (Vermette et al., 2001, p. 98).

Understanding the adviser’s role: Students can better understand the role of the adviser as a centralized resource for the variety of programs across campus. Vermette et al. supported this by stating, “A goal of the learning communities is that students will come to value advisers as one of their greatest resources at the university” (2001, p. 97).

Seek Opportunities to Make Every Conversation Count

Realizing that not all institutions adopt the first-year seminar model in their curriculum, advisers can and should continually seek opportunities and utilize other student spaces to deepen relationships and maximize effectiveness during advising sessions—they just might have to get a little creative. The overall goal is to make every conversation count. Here are a few ways to do this:

• After the first advising meeting, ask the student to pick the location for the next meeting. He might choose your office or another space, but leaving the decision to the student allows him to take more responsibility and ownership for the advising session. In addition, the student may see his or her adviser as more of a “real” person and someone to connect with (Clark & Kalionzes, 2008).
• Work with the residence life office to incorporate advising in the residence halls. Miami University provides a great model by integrating the two services (Kuh, 2008). In this context, the traditional residence hall director additionally serves as a live-in academic adviser (Kuh, 2008). By providing advising services where students live, advisers have the opportunity to observe interactions and be readily available to students in their living areas. Along the same lines, both Indiana University-Bloomington and IUPUI have offices for advisers to do their work directly in the residence halls (C. Buyarski, personal communication, November 12, 2011). Placing offices in strategic, high-traffic areas throughout campus, such as in residence halls, increases the opportunities for advisers to see students in the hallways, which can then lead to quick “check-in” conversations (C. Buyarski, personal communication, November 12, 2011).
• Establish group advising appointments with students within the same major to discuss academic and career plans. A group setting lends a more relaxed, social setting in which students can comfortably exchange ideas. Advisers can observe and note things to address individually with each student.
• Keep abreast of issues and trends related to students and their majors and send them emails with pertinent news. This shows students that advisers are interested in keeping the conversation going. In an ongoing conversation, students are more likely to use advisers as resources. For example, when I hear of new computer technology companies moving to Indianapolis, I will send the news along to my students who are computer technology majors in case they are interested in applying for positions.
• During strategic times of the year, in particular during registration periods, position advisers at tables in high-traffic areas, such as the student union or near food vendors, to make them accessible. For example, IUPUI markets “Café Conversations” near Starbucks to catch students in between classes. According to Aiken-Wisniewski and Allen, “activities that reach out to the campus community build rapport, increase understanding of academic advising, and deliver students to your center” (2005, p. 1).

Benefits of Moving into Student Spaces

As demonstrated in the first-year seminar model, extending advising beyond the office and moving into student spaces creates a unique opportunity for advisers to effectively foster and facilitate students’ personal and academic development. In addition, moving into student spaces brings about three unique benefits: enhanced relationships, the opportunity to address discoveries, and the opportunity to advise the whole student.

Enhanced relationships: Advisers who move into student spaces, such as the classroom, can interact with and learn more about their students. This helps to strengthen their relationship, which then leads to opportunities beyond the surface level of advising. Advisers can help students get to the root of their academic or developmental problems and better walk alongside these students to ensure they reach their goals.

Opportunity to address discoveries: “Some of the advisers’ most important work is done in conversations with individual students before and after class” (Vermette et al., 2001, p. 98). Showing up ten minutes early and staying ten minutes late in the first-year seminar can help advisers “discover” actions they might not have otherwise have the opportunity to see. These “discoveries” can be unnoticeable during an advising session but may be easily observed when meeting with a student in a casual setting or by observing and interacting with him or her in the classroom. For example, as I was leaving class one day, I happened to walk out with one of my students, Megan. I asked how her classes were going and she said she felt behind each week because she did not do her homework on the weekends. For the rest of the semester I asked her if she was utilizing her time on the weekends, and she remarked that my prompting helped, because it meant someone was holding her accountable. By listening and observing in this way, advisers can easily and effectively address these “discoveries” with their students.

Opportunity to advise the whole student: Advisers who strengthen relationships by moving into student spaces can “bring together two facets of college life—social and academic—together” (Hunter, Henscheid, & Mouton, 2001, p. 104). Advisers can make conclusions based on their observations and provide support in a more holistic sense. For example, advisers can provide resources for those they see are in need of counseling, math support, or a lesson on time management. Because the adviser knows more about each student, the recommendations can be tailored for each student to aid in their development.

Bringing it Back to the Office

After trying some of these strategies, it is important to note that advisers should assess and reflect upon what worked well and what did not during the time spent in student spaces to see if they truly are getting more of the “full story.”  This reflection will help advisers plan more effectively for the next in-office advising appointment and can help advisers alter their strategies to align with the issues/observations they noticed. As part of the reflection, advisers may find that some student spaces are more effective than others and plan accordingly for the coming year. For example, advisers may find that students respond better to an advising session when they have the opportunity to get a snack (at the student union) as opposed to meeting in the library where food might not be allowed.

Conclusion

Moving into student spaces and utilizing conversations outside the office can enhance advising sessions, because the adviser is able to enhance the relationship, address “discoveries,” and advise the whole student. Being creative and utilizing conversations outside the office, such as in classrooms via the first-year seminar model, helps advisers more effectively break down barriers and get the “full story.” While one should not assume that effective advising cannot happen in the office, colleges with programs that integrate advisers into student spaces provide advisers this unique opportunity to continue fostering relationships, which then helps them reach the ultimate goal of fostering and facilitating student development. Advisers, then, should continue seeking ways to foster and facilitate students’ personal and academic development and make every conversation count.

References

Aiken-Wisniewski, S., & Allen, C. D. (2005). Did Einstein know the date to withdraw? Techniques and activities to educate your campus community about academic advising. NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources. Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Marketing-Advising-Services-a604.aspx

Arms, J. H., Cabrera, A. F., & Brower, A. M. (2008). Moving into students’ spaces: The impact of location of academic advising on student engagement among undecided students. NACADA Journal, 28(1), 8–18.

Clark, E. C., & Kalionzes, J. (2008). Advising students with color and international students. In V. N. Gordon, W. R. Habley, & T. J. Grites, and Associates (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 205–225). Manhattan, KS: Jossey-Bass.

Crookston, B. B. (1994). A developmental view of academic advising as teaching. NACADA Journal, 14(2), 5–9.

Hansen, M. J. (2010). [Citations from first-year seminar evaluation form: Fall 2010 semester aggregate report]. Unpublished raw data.

Hunter, M. S., Henscheid, J., & Mouton, M. (2001). Collaborations beyond the advising office. In M. S. Hunter, B. McCalla-Wriggins, & E. R. White (Eds.), Academic advising: New insights for teaching and learning in the first year (Monograph No. 46 [National Resource Center]; Monograph No. 14 [National Academic Advising Association]; pp. 99–113). Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition.

Jackson, B. D. (2001). Faculty development and learning communities. In B. D. Jackson (Ed.), Creating community—Supporting learning (pp. 75–91). Indianapolis, IN: University College.

Kuh, G. D. (2008). Advising for student success. In V. N. Gordon, W. R. Habley, & T. J. Grites, and Associates (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 68–84). Manhattan, KS: Jossey-Bass.

Orme, W., & Van Voorhis, R. (2001). Use of instructional teams in first-year seminars. In B. D. Jackson (Ed.), Creating community—Supporting learning (pp. 47–73). Indianapolis, IN: University College.

Pike, G. R., Hansen, M. J., Lin, C. (2011). Using instrumental variables to account for selection effects in research on first-year programs. Research in Higher Education, 52(2), 194–214.

Vermette, R., Ruch, L., & Seabrook, P. (2001). Changing roles, assuming new responsibilities: The academic advisor in the urban university. In B. D. Jackson (Ed.), Creating Community—Supporting Learning (pp. 93–106). Indianapolis, IN: University College.

Williams, G. (2001). Learning communities at IUPUI. In B. D. Jackson (Ed.), Creating Community—Supporting Learning (pp. 1–17). Indianapolis, IN: University College.

Introduction

Choosing a major is a daunting task for college students and many are making a choice about an academic major before they are developmentally ready. Gordon (2007) indicates that “many college students are in the midst of maturational and identity struggles; choosing an academic major from a myriad of choices is a developmental task for which they are not prepared” (p. 87).  Nevertheless, choosing an academic major is extremely important not only in terms of students’ time and finances, but also in terms of student satisfaction, success, and retention (Dellman-Jenkins, 1997).

Terry O’Banion’s (1972) model of academic advising supports Gordon’s notion of students not being developmentally ready to choose a major. O’Banion’s model of academic advising is a process that includes exploring life and vocational goals, choosing a program, choosing courses, and lastly scheduling courses (O’Banion, 1972). However, many academic advising offices tend to skip directly to the choice of program and courses during the first contact with students at orientation. O’Banion argues that these offices are not effective, because they assume students have already made life and career goals (O’Banion, 1972). According to O’Banion, the first question should be “How do I want to live my life?” Unfortunately, many students have not been able nor had the chance to explore the answer to this question before entering college (O’Banion, 1972). Therefore, academic advising programs need to allow room for the exploration of life and career goals before the first semester of enrollment, such as before or during summer orientation.  O’Banion (1972) suggests that advisers should help students explore their goals through summer workshops.

In light of O’Banion’s model, academic advising professionals need to rethink their strategies for working with students during orientation and set aside time for students to consider life and career goals before they declare a major and begin a career path. This article will first examine the reasons why students change their majors to help readers understand why delaying a declaration of an academic major to first focus on life and vocational exploration would be an effective academic advising practice. Second, this article will offer suggestions about how to implement this exploration of career and life goals in an academic advising program.

Reasons for Major Changes

Lack of Exploration

Research on major changers shows that the majority of college students lack the knowledge and experience necessary to make an informed decision about their academic major and career choice (Orndorff & Herr, 1996). Many students have a limited knowledge base of available occupations as “the potential pool of choices is enormous and it is commonly thought that the United States has more than 20,000 occupations” (Lewallen, 1993, p. 110).  Most likely, students have not examined all of those choices and therefore, only choose majors that they know about or have heard about through family, friends, or community members (Lewallen, 1993). Also intimidating is the number of majors offered at colleges and universities. The number of majors at any given institution can be overwhelming—some institutions have hundreds—and the majority of incoming students know very little about their options (Lewallen, 1993). The sheer number of career and major options can be confusing, and it is unlikely that students have explored all of these options before coming to college.

Also contributing to this lack of exploration is the information presented in high school about career choices. The level of career education students receive in high school varies greatly (Lewallen, 1993). Some students get an extensive amount of career education while others receive little to none. Interestingly, Orndorff & Herr (1996) found that both declared and undeclared students professed to getting little career guidance in high school. Also impacting career guidance in high schools is the ratio of high school students to guidance counselor. The average ratio of student to guidance counselor in high schools is four hundred and fifty students to one counselor (Ronan, 2005). Therefore, counselors have neither the time nor resources to individually help students prepare to choose a major and career during their high school experience. Incoming students should not be forced to make decisions about their educational and career goals as they have not been adequately prepared in high school to do so. For this reason, academic advising programs should consider including career exploration opportunities before students come to campus.

Parental and Societal Pressure

College students can also face parental and societal pressure to choose a major upon entering college. Pearson and Dellman-Jenkins (1997) pointed out that parents have the most influence on a student’s decision to choose a major; therefore, students are more likely to change majors when their initial choice is not their own. Koeppel (2004) argued that “students feel tremendous pressure over the choice of a major, which could be an important career decision, when many are just beginning to understand themselves” (¶ 2). Students are troubled about entering college without a declared major. Most likely, these students have been asked for years what they plan to major in and thereby feel pressured to choose a major before they are actually ready (College Parents, 2011).

Adding to this pressure is the rise in tuition costs and the instability of the economy. Koeppel (2004) maintained that students and parents are now viewing higher education as an investment and desire “the best return on that investment, which is often financed with a student loan” (¶ 3).  However, making a decision based on money alone can result in dismal consequences. One student argued that “with education so expensive, many in my generation are mired in debt. Some people choose to sacrifice personal happiness to make money” (Koeppel, 2004, ¶ 14). Students are feeling pressure now more than ever to make the “right” decisions about majors. As a result, academic advisers need to guide students in discovering their life and career goals before they declare majors to alleviate the pressure and demands placed on the students by their parents and society.

Summer Career and Advising Workshops and Mandatory Exploration

Because of parental and societal pressures and the lack of exploration in high school, it is vitally necessary that colleges and universities provide students with opportunities to explore majors and careers without the stigma associated with being undecided. The implementation of summer career and advising workshops or the requirement of a period of exploration would lessen these pressures and allow students to investigate majors and careers without fearing negative consequences. Two methods of career exploration that have been tried in the past are pre-orientation workshops and summer career programs.

Pre-orientation workshops occur before advising students into programs and courses during summer orientation. In these workshops, career and academic information is provided as well as an opportunity for self-assessment (Gordon, 2007). Gordon pointed out that while this method might offer “a very superficial exposure to majors and requirements, it helps to take the mystery out of what appears to be a complicated and confusing body of information (2007, p. 135). As a result, pre-orientation workshops can provide students with a brief overview of available majors and may lead them on the road to discovering their interests, personalities, values, and skills.

Another method of exploring careers is through a summer workshop program. One such successful summer program is the Brooklyn Opportunities in Science and Careers (BOSC). BOSC was created for undecided first-year students who had high scores in math in high school and was designed to increase participation in science majors (Miele et al., 2011). Activities during this summer program included informal lectures, interviews of current professionals, field trips, and workshops (Miele et al., 2011). This program was extremely successful as indicated by significant increases in science majors—most notably in science teaching with a 733 percent increase and physics with a 314 percent increase (Miele et al., 2011). Students not only gained information about these careers, they also acclimated to the collegiate environment. Ninety percent of students who participated in BOSC stated it helped them adjust to the college environment (Miele et al., 2011). Therefore, summer workshops can not only aid in major selection but also in student adjustment.

Conclusion and Suggestions for Implementation

Based on this literature, suggestions for implementing career and major exploration in academic advising include summer workshops, extended orientation, a one- or two-week bridge program, and/or a semester-long first-year seminar. Recommendations for the summer workshops include having students explore major interests, values, and goals in multiple career workshops throughout the summer. These could be made mandatory and offered online before orientation. Another suggestion is to extend summer orientation. Students can be required to take career assessments before they arrive for summer orientation and then can have a meaningful discussion with their advisers during orientation.

Two other suggestions include creating a summer bridge program or a semester-long first-year seminar focused on major exploration. Instead of participating in summer orientation, first-year students could be required to attend a one- or two-week summer bridge program in which they arrive one to two weeks early to campus. During this time, students can evaluate their interests, values, and goals with the help of an academic adviser or career counselor. At the end of the program, they could then choose a program and plan for classes as O’Banion’s model suggests. Another recommendation is the use of a semester-long first-year seminar. In this method, students would not declare a major when they apply to the college or university. Instead, students spend the first semester learning about their values, personalities, goals, and interests in a semester-long first-year seminar course and take general education courses that will apply to a multitude of majors. After the first semester is complete, students are permitted to select a major.

Whatever method is chosen, academic advising professionals must begin to consider the possibility of a workshop/program in which students can freely explore majors and careers before making firm decisions. Seventy-five percent of students change their majors during their college careers due to societal and parental pressures and the lack of knowledge about themselves and the career options available to them (Lewallen, 1993; Gordon, 2007; Orndorff & Herr, 1996). Academic advising for first-year students typically begins in the third step of O’Banion’s model (program selection); but as this article discussed, that is not developmentally appropriate for incoming first-year students (O’Banion, 1972). For that reason, it is necessary for academic advising programs to rethink their strategies of major selection and orientation practices so that students may select a major that is fully based on their unique life and career goals.

References

College Parents of America (2011). When should my college student choose a major? Retrieved from http://www.collegeparents.org/members/resources/articles/when-should-my-college-student-choose-major

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

Koeppel, D. (2004, December 5). Choosing a college major: For love or for the money? The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/05/jobs/05jmar.html

Lewallen, W. C. (1993). The impact of being “undecided” on college-student persistence. Journal of College Student Development, 34(2), 103–112.

Miele, E. A., Hainline, L., Lesser, P., Powell, W. G., Tisch, S., & Tomkiewicz, M. (2011). Early exploration of opportunities in science and careers encourages students to pursue science majors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(5), 59–64.

O’Banion, T. (1972). An academic advising model. Junior College Journal, 12(6). Retrieved from http://www.uni.edu/advisorhandbook/sites/default/files/An_Academic_Advising_Model.pdf

Orndorff, R. M., & Herr, E. L. (1996). A comparative study of declared and undeclared college students on career uncertainty and involvement in career development activities. Journal of Counseling & Development, 74(6), 632–639.

Pearson, C., & Dellman-Jenkins, M. (1997). Parental influence on a student’s selection of a college major. College Student Journal, 31(3), 301–314.

Ronan, G. B. (2005). College freshmen face major dilemma: Indecision about courses of study can prove expensive. NBCNews.com. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10154383/ns/business-personal_finance/t/college-freshmen-face-major-dilemma