Applying Technology to Academic Advising

Surveys can reflect a general consensus about student satisfaction in the higher education environment. Alexander Astin (1993) described the results of a national survey, which found that only 40 percent of students reported that they were or satisfied with the quality of academic advising at their institution. Besides the things you might expect-provide accurate information, get to know students as individuals, provide both major and career information, be available and approachable-students expect advisors to know about majors outside of their own program, provide frequent feedback, and assist with personal as well as academic issues. Advising affects student success, as measured by retention and graduation rates. In a 2003 paper, Academic Advisement and Student Retention: Empirical Connections &, Systematic Interventions, Joe Cuseo reported on a number of national studies that indicated a significant correlation between satisfaction with advising and student persistence. One survey of 944 institutions found that inadequate advising was seen as the number one characteristic linked to student attrition. What's wrong with academic advising, anyway? And why should we care? By recognizing that poor academic advising can have an adverse impact on students, it's important to look at advising from a number of perspectives. Let's start with how advisors are often assigned to students. In a large political science department for example, when a student declares the major, the department secretary is notified. The secretary looks to see who has fewer advisees than other faculty and assigns that person as the student's advisor. The problem is that a student interested in foreign relations, with a specific interest in South Asia, might be assigned to a specialist in constitutional law, rather than to the expert in South Asian nuclear policy. The chance of the student making a good connection with her advisor would be much less than if they shared an academic interest. However, matched with the right student, an advisor can have a profound effect on the student's life. Pinky McNamara was a football player at the University of Minnesota in the 19505. He struggled to decide on the right major before being helped by two academic advisors. After graduation he went on to have a very successful business career. In 1998, he gave the University $10 million. He said at the time: If I lived five lifetimes, I couldn't repay the University of Minnesota for what it has meant in my life and my career. I had academic advisors who guided me and saved my academic life with their dedication. I hope that what I am doing will encourage other alumni to consider giving back to the University, which has made such a difference not only in our individual lives but in the collective life of the state.1 Where We Are and Where We Ought to be Going In the 1980s, computerized degree audit programs, either homegrown or commercially available productions like Miami University's DARS or Georgia State University's PACE systems, started to appear. In the 1990s, as these programs became much more widely used and as more alternatives were developed, Student Information System vendors began to include degree audit software as an integral part of their systems. This software allowed prospective transfer students to see how their work would meet requirements at another institution. The early days of the Web also allowed great advances in providing information to students, such as lists of open classes and degree requirements. Later, the Web permitted students to process transactions, register themselves for classes, update their own addresses, and apply to graduate. I believe the next step is to support student decision-making, either on their own or in informed conversations with their academic advisors. We are beginning to see some promising steps in this direction. I'll highlight a few of them. …