Joe Cuseo -Findings reviewed in the previous section point to the conclusion that enhancing the quality of academic advising should improve the rate of student retention. However, any potentially effective attempt to increase student retention through improvement in academic advisement must be guided by a clear vision of what “good” or “quality” advising actually is—because if we cannot define it, we cannot recognize it when we see it, nor can we can assess it or improve it. Among the factors that contribute to poor advising, lack of consensus about the role or function of the advisor (Wyckoff, 1999). The following statements, selectively culled from the scholarly literature on academic advising, have the potential to serve as starting points for defining what “quality” academic advisement is, and may serve as focal points for guiding the development of effective advising practices and procedures. 

(a) “Developmental academic advising is a systematic process based on a close student-advisor relationship intended to aid students in achieving educational, career, and personal goals through the utilization of the full range of institutional and community resources. It both stimulates and supports students in their quest for an enriched quality of life” (Winston, Miller, Ender, & Grites, & Associates, 1984, p. 538).  

(b) “The formation of relationships that assure that at least one educator has close enough contact with each student to assess and influence the quality of that student’s educational experience is realistic only through a systematic process, such as an academic advising program. It is unrealistic to expect each instructor, even with small classes, to form personal relationships of sufficient duration and depth with each student in his or her class to accomplish this” (Winston, Miller, Ender, & Grites, & Associates, 1984, p. 538).

(c) “Developmental academic advising is not primarily an administrative function, not obtaining a signature to schedule classes, not a conference held once a term, not a paper relationship, not supplementary to the educational process, [and] not synonymous with faculty member” (Ender, 1983, p. 10).

(d) “Academic advising can be understood best and more easily reconceptualized if the process of academic advising and the scheduling of classes and registration are separated. Class scheduling should no be confused with educational planning. Developmental academic advising becomes a more realistic goal when separated from class scheduling because advising can then go on all during the academic year, not just during the few weeks prior to registration each new term. Advising programs, however, that emphasize registration and record keeping, while neglecting attention to students’ educational and personal experiences in the institution, are missing an excellent opportunity to influence directly and immediately the quality of students’ education and are also highly inefficient, since they are most likely employing highly educated (expensive) personnel who are performing essentially clerical tasks” (Winston, Miller, Ender, & Grites, & Associates, 1984, p. 542).  

(e) “Students may enter the advising process with a set of perceptions and expectations quite unrelated to those of the advisor. The importance of the interpersonal relationship for students should not be underestimated (Wyckoff, 1999, p. 3).” 

From the students’ perspective, previously cited research points to the conclusion that undergraduates value most highly academic advisors who function as mentors or counselors, and who are: (a) available/accessible, (b) knowledgeable/helpful, and (c) personable/approachable. Integrating the perspectives of both student advisees and advising scholars, high-quality academic advisement may be distilled into, and defined in terms of, three key (“core”) advisor roles or functions.