The objectives of the Department Academic Advising Survey were to determine: (1) what the nature and process of advising is in each department; (2) what do advisers see as their responsibility in advising; (3) what specific advising issues do advisers consider important; (4) how do advisers evaluate the effectiveness of advising; and (5) what suggestions do advisers have for improving current advising practices in their department.
All department chairs were sent the Department Academic Advising Survey, with a request that the person responsible for academic advising in the department complete the form and return it to the Office of University Assessment. Departments were asked to respond in terms of the current advising practices for undergraduates in their program. After a period of two weeks, a telephone call was made to those departments who had not yet responded. In total, 35 departments responded to the survey -- 85% of all departments on campus. (Please see Appendix B for a list of all participating departments).
Departments were asked to describe their current advising practices. Questions regarding who is conducting advising sessions, the average amount of time spent with advisees, the system of assignment of advisers to students and the scheduling of advising sessions were also asked of departments.
The Nature and Process of Advising
A variety of responses were given by departments when describing the process by which advising is conducted. Twelve (35%) departments reported that advising is conducted routinely on a once per semester basis and 16 (47%) departments reported that it is the student's responsibility to seek advisement, conducted on an as needed basis. Seven (21%) departments reported that advising was mandatory or required, while another seven (21%) departments strongly encouraged or recommended that their students seek advising. Five (15%) departments reported using forms for advising, four (12%) reported that office staff conduct advising, three (9%) reported that they notify their students in writing about advising, and one department reported that they track students throughout their college career.
Who is conducting the advising sessions: Fourteen (41%) departments reported that all faculty members participate in advising, ten (29%) reported that a designated Department Adviser conducts advising, four (12%) reported both faculty and staff conduct advising, and five (15%) reported a combination of the above.
The average amount of time spent with advisees at each meeting: Five (15%) departments reported 5 to 15 minutes, 24 (71%) reported 16 to 30 minutes, and 5 (15%) reported more than 30 minutes.
The process of assigning advisers: Nine (27%) departments reported that advisers are assigned, four (12%) reported that students choose their own adviser, and twenty (59%) reported that advisers are assigned, but students may change from their assigned adviser if they wish.
Scheduling of advising sessions: Fourteen (41%) departments reported that appointments are scheduled, nine (27%) reported that faculty/staff post advising hours, and nineteen (56%) reported that each adviser decides how to see students - no overall department system is used.
Faculty Expectations of Advising Content
Each department was asked to rate the importance of certain content when meeting with advisees. The choice of responses ranged from "very important" to "not important" with a "not appropriate" category. Table 7 indicates the rank ordering of content appropriate for advising sessions according to percent response in the "very important to important" category.
| Survey Statement | % Responding Very Important to Important | % Responding Neutral to Not Important | % Responding Not Appropriate |
| Accurate Information on major requirements | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Accurate Information on University/College requirements | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Guidance in choosing the best courses to meet the student's needs | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Conversations about student's career goals | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Help with academic problems | 89 | 11 | 0 |
| Guidance on graduate school opportunities | 89 | 11 | 0 |
| Information on Interships | 77 | 17 | 6 |
| Advisers will spend time getting to know advisees | 74 | 26 | 0 |
| Advisers will know advisees | 71 | 29 | 0 |
| Guidance on scholarships and financial assistance | 71 | 14 | 14 |
| Help in getting graduates a job | 69 | 29 | 3 |
| Discussions about financial problems | 34 | 54 | 11 |
| Discussions about personal problems | 31 | 57 | 11 |
The issues which departments reported as most important for advising involved those related to specific information about requirements, course selection, and career goals. Issues seen as less important were those which involved career oriented matters such as guidance on graduate school, information on internships, and post graduate employment. Spending time getting to know the students was seen as less important. The issues which the departments reported as least important for advising were those which involved financial or personal problems.
Department Response to Students Who Withdraw
When asked if they conduct any follow-up when students withdraw from the university, twenty-five (74%) departments said no -- that they have no information on which students withdraw, three (9%) stated that they do provide follow-up by phone or letter contact, five (15%) stated that they sometimes provide follow-up, but it is not routine. One (3%) department did not respond.
The Effectiveness of Advising
Each department was asked to report on the effectiveness of their current system of advising: Only 20 (59%) departments responded. Fourteen (41%) reported that their current system was effective, with three (9%) of these saying it was "unused". Six (18%) departments reported that their system could be improved.
The Evaluation of Advising
Each department was asked if an evaluation or reward system was in place for faculty who serve as advisers. Sixteen (47%) reported that evaluation of advising was included in the faculty evaluation process under teaching and other responsibilities and fifteen (44%) reported that no evaluation system was in place. Three (9%) departments did not respond.
Suggestions for Improving Advising
Finally, departments were asked to provide suggestions for improvement of the advisement system at the university. The two most frequent suggestions (29% in each case) were to select advisers who have a commitment to quality advising and to reward those faculty who are serving as advisers. Types of rewards suggested were reduction in teaching load or additional pay. Other suggestions to improve advising included: provide accurate information on students to advisers, annual workshops to train advisers, regular updates on changes in requirements, better organization of advising, more advisement positions/staff, mandatory advisement, and mailing students information on the need for advising, who to see, and when.
LINKS TO 1993 ADVISING SURVEY SECTIONS
Student Responses | Department Responses
| Summary and Conclusion
| Assessment Home |  |