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 (
(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.