The objectives of the Student Academic Advising Survey were to determine: (1) what the nature and process of advising is on campus; (2) what are students' experiences and expectations of advising on campus; (3) how do students evaluate the effectiveness of advising; (4) what specific advising issues are important for students; and (6) what suggestions do students have for improving current advising practices on campus.
Students in nine Western Traditions courses and seventeen capstone courses, at least one from each college, were asked to complete the Student Academic Advising Survey. These courses were selected because class enrollment reflects a cross-section of the students on campus and because fewer freshman, who have had little experience with academic advising at the university, are enrolled in these courses. In total, 1015 student surveys were completed. As the purpose of this survey was to evaluate the experiences of undergraduates with advising, those persons who identified themselves as graduate students or nondegree students were removed from the sample, leaving a total of 994 completed surveys.
In general, the survey sample reflects the demographics of the campus undergraduate student population. The mean age of students responding was 23.5 years. Four hundred and seventy-six respondents (48%) were male, and 508 student respondents (52%) were female. The racial/ethnic breakdown of the student sample was: 778 (80%) White; 67 (7%) Asian American; 46 (5%) Hispanic American; 16 (2%) African American; and 11 (1%) Native American; and 60 (6%) other. Just over half (578 or 59%) of the students entered UNR as freshmen, while 409 (41%) entered as transfer students. At the time of the survey, the respondents were enrolled in a mean of 13.9 credits and a mean of 4.7 classes. The class levels of the respondents were: 417 (46%) seniors, 295 (32%) juniors, 180 (20%) sophomores, and 24 (3%) freshmen. Two hundred and fifty-two students (27%) reported that they were not employed, 180 (20%) reported that they worked 19 hours or less per week, and 491 students (53%) reported that they worked 20 hours or more per week.
The Source and Process of Advising
Students were asked to supply the name of their current adviser or the last person they had seen for advisement. Ninety-three students (9%) reported that they had never seen an adviser at UNR. The majority of students (639 or 64%) indicated that their current adviser was a department faculty member. Other advisers identified by students included: College of Business advisers (93 or 9%); Academic Advising Center staff (37 or 4%); Health Career Advisement Center staff (27 or 3%); "other" university personnel (26 or 3%); friends (11 or 1%); and department or college advisers who were not faculty members (5 or less 1%).
Students were asked a number of questions about the advising process and those who had never seen anyone at UNR for advisement were asked to skip this section of the questionnaire. The average number of semesters that students had seen their adviser for was about three (mean 3.2). The majority (653 or 79.0%) of students had not selected their adviser, but had in some way been assigned one.
Advising Experiences & Expectations
Students were asked to reflect upon their experiences with advising during the 1992-93 academic year. Students who were not at UNR, who had never seen an adviser at UNR, or who had consulted friends for advising were asked to skip this section.
Number of Times Adviser Seen: The majority of students (66%) reported that they saw an adviser 1 or 2 times in the 1992-93 academic year. A very small number of students (1%) reported that they met with their adviser more than six times during this period, and 10% reported that they did not meet with their adviser at all during the 1992-93 academic year. Of students responding to a question regarding whether or not this was a sufficient amount of time in which to address their needs, the majority (74%) of students reported that it was sufficient.
Average Length of Advising Meetings: 56% reported that they usually met with their adviser for 5-15 minutes, 32% met for 16-30 minutes, 8% met for less than 5 minutes, and 4% met for more than thirty minutes.
Accuracy of Information Provided: Most students (76%) said they were satisfied with the accuracy of information provided by their adviser. 10% were dissatisfied. 14% expressed no opinion.
Ease of Access to Adviser: 21% of students were dissatisfied with the their adviser's accessibility. 65% of those responding indicated satisfaction. 14% were "neutral."
Helpfulness in Course Selection: 15.0% reported dissatisfaction were their adviser's helpfulness in selecting courses, 66.9% reported that they were satisfied, and 18% were "neutral".
Student-Adviser Communication: 75% of students described their adviser as easy to talk with; only 11% reported difficulty in communication, and the remainder (13%) were neutral in their assessment of the ease with which they could talk to their adviser.
Student Expectations of Advising Content
To ascertain what students expect and want from advising, each student was asked to indicate whether or not certain issues were important to them when meeting with their adviser. The types of responses ranged from "very important" to "not important," with a "not appropriate" category also included. Table 1 contains the questions and percentage of responses, with the content appropriate for advising sessions rank ordered according to the percent of students responding 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 | 97 | 2 | Less than 1 |
| Accurate Information on University/College requirements | 97 | 2 | Less than 1 |
| Guidance in choosing the best courses to meet the student's needs | 93 | 6 | Less than 1 |
| Information on internships | 82 | 17 | 2 |
| Guidance on graduate school opportunities | 82 | 16 | 2 |
| Conversations about student's career goals | 81 | 17 | 2 |
| Help with academic problems | 76 | 22 | 2 |
| Help in getting graduates a job | 74 | 22 | 4 |
| Advisers will know advisees | 73 | 26 | 1 |
| Conversations will be confidential | 73 | 26 | 1 |
| Accurate Information on transfer credit equivalencies | 70 | 20 | 10 |
| Guidance on scholarships and financial assistance | 64 | 31 | 5 |
| Advisers will spend time getting to know advisees | 60 | 39 | 1 |
| Discussions about financial problems | 26 | 59 | 16 |
| Discussions about personal problems | 15 | 63 | 22 |
The most important areas in advisement for students were specific information about requirements and courses to take. Next was information related to career aspirations and future educational goals: information on internships, guidance on graduate school opportunities, conversations about their career goals, and assistance in obtaining employment after graduation. Additionally, students considered receiving help with academic problems to be an important advisement issue. Less important for students were issues related to the student-adviser relationship (e.g. that advisers will get to know the student and that conversations will be confidential). Discussions about financial and personal problems were considered to be least important, with 22% of the students reporting that conversations about personal problems were inappropriate for advising sessions.
The Effectiveness of Advising
Students were asked to respond to a number of statements regarding the effectiveness of advising on campus. They indicated that they feel more positively about their department's advising effectiveness than they do about the effectiveness of the university's advising system, but both levels of satisfaction were not as positive as one might expect. Generally, they would recommend their adviser to other students and would go see their adviser if they were thinking of quitting school. Opinions about freshman advising generally reflected some negative experiences, and SOAR session advising showed a large number of neutral attitudes, perhaps and indication that most had not participated in SOAR. Table 2 contains the percentages responding in each category.
| Survey Statement | % Agree or Strongly Agree | % Neutral | % Disagree or Strongly Disagree |
| Department has excellent system of advising | 43 | 33 | 21 |
| University has excellent system of advising | 21 | 51 | 28 |
| Would recommend adviser to other students | 58 | 29 | 14 |
| Would see adviser if considering quitting school | 51 | 24 | 25 |
| Advisement is excellent for freshmen | 42 | 30 | 27 |
| Advising given in SOAR sessions was very helpful | 25 | 48 | 17 |
Specific Problems With Advising
22% of respondents reported that they did not know who their current adviser was, 16% reported that "it was more trouble than it was worth" to get to see an adviser, and 12% reported that their adviser had given them information which had later proven to be incorrect. 30% of the students reported that they did not see an adviser every semester. When asked to elaborate on why, 71 students reported that they felt that they didn't need to see their adviser each semester, that for the most part they could take care of their own schedules.
When given an opportunity to further explain negative experiences, students commented that advisers are often busy or unavailable and they have to wait too long to get to see an adviser. Some students indicated that a negative experience with advising had actually delayed their graduation or caused them to take additional courses.
Suggestions For Improving Advising
Students were asked how the advising system at the university could be improved. Most students (839 or 83%) suggested that the university require advising for students. Other comments were that advisers should be more knowledgeable; more advisers are needed; the waiting time to see an adviser should be reduced; advisers should improve their attitude towards advising; and the process of finding out who your adviser is needs to be improved.
Overall Student Satisfaction With Advising
Overall student satisfaction with advising was examined by means of a composite scale. This satisfaction scale was constructed using the following survey items: adviser gives accurate information; adviser is reasonably easy to see; adviser is helpful in course selection; adviser is easy to talk to; department has an excellent system for advising; the university has an excellent system for advising; and student would recommend adviser to other students. The constructed Satisfaction with Advising Scale possessed high reliability (Cronbach alpha =.90). Student responses on these items were analyzed and an overall score on advising satisfaction for each student was obtained. The possible range of scores on the scale was from very satisfied (5) to very dissatisfied (1). Only students who responded to each of the items on the satisfaction scale were included in this analysis (N=748).
Students reported an overall mean of satisfaction with advising of 3.67. An analysis of variance revealed no significant differences between overall satisfaction with advising and the following variables: age, gender, ethnic group, class level, when the student first entered UNR (as a freshman or as a transfer student), and full- or part-time status. A significant difference was found, however, between the college associated with a student's major and their overall satisfaction with advising. (F=5.6830, p<0.00). Table 3 provides the mean satisfaction score for each college.
| College | Mean Satisfaction Score |
| Agriculture | 4.2245 |
| Journalism | 4.0875 |
| Medicine | 4.0286 |
| Human & Com Sci | 3.8000 |
| Arts & Sciences | 3.7388 |
| Mines | 3.5909 |
| Business | 3.4510 |
| Engineering | 3.4475 |
| Education | 3.3817 |
Satisfaction With Advising and Department
For those students who received advisement from a faculty member, significant difference was also found for satisfaction with advising and department (F=4.3610, p<0.00). The mean overall satisfaction with advising score, when advising was conducted by a department faculty member, was 3.6852, with the range of ratings being from a low of 3.000 to a high of 4.2328. Rankings by student satisfaction of the 17 departments with sufficient numbers of students in the survey to be ranked are given directly to the departments for their use.
Satisfaction With Advising and Sources of Advising
Student satisfaction with other sources of advising (COBA Advising, Health Career Advisement Center, Academic Advising Center, and the Academic Adviser for Athletes) was also examined. A slightly different satisfaction scale was constructed using the following survey items: adviser gives accurate information; adviser is reasonably easy to see; adviser is helpful in course selection; adviser is easy to talk to; and the university has an excellent system for advising; and student would recommend adviser to other students. This constructed Satisfaction with Advising Scale also possessed high reliability (Cronbach alpha =.86). The mean satisfaction rating for each of the other sources of advising is in Table 4.
| Advising Center | Mean Satisfaction Score |
| Academic Adviser for Athletes | 4.189 |
| Health Career Advisement Center | 3.510 |
| COBA Advising Center | 3.413 |
| Academic Advising Center Staf | 3.326 |
Comparisons of High and Low Satisfaction Responses
In an effort to identify patterns of responses which would help explain student satisfaction with academic advising, responses of those students who were in the top third on the on the student satisfaction scale were compared to those students in the bottom third. A greater percentage of students in the high satisfaction group chose their adviser (32%) and felt that the number of meetings that they had with their adviser in the past year had been sufficient to meet their needs (95%). In addition, the average length of time spent with their adviser was greater. In contrast, more of the students in the low satisfaction group had a complaint about their advising experiences. A greater percentage of this group stated that they did not know who their adviser was (21%), that it was too much trouble to see an adviser on campus (39%), that they did not see their adviser each semester because of the problems associated with seeing their adviser (25%), that their adviser had given them inaccurate information (27%), or that they had to take additional classes or had taken the wrong classes because of problems with advising (12%). Table 5 shows the comparisons of the high satisfaction group to the low satisfaction group as well as the responses of the entire sample.
| % of High Satisfaction Students | % of Low Satisfaction Students | % of All Students | |
| Student chose adviser (Adviser not assigned) | 32 | 7 | 21 |
| Number of meetings with adviser sufficient to meet student needs | 95 | 40 | 74 |
| Student does not know curent adviser | 6 | 21 | 23 |
| Too much trouble to see adviser | 1 | 39 | 16 |
| Adviser has given incorrect information | 5 | 27 | 12 |
| Student does not see an adviser each semester | 4 | 25 | 10 |
| Specific advising problems have hurt student | 5 | 12 | 7 |
Comparisons of high satisfaction departments/centers vs low departments/centers: As in the previous analysis, more of the students who had been advised by a source of advising with a high ranking had chosen their adviser (26%) and a greater percentage of these students felt that the number of times they had met with their adviser was sufficient to meet their needs (84%). Similarly, the students who had been advised by a source of advising which ranked in the bottom third also had more complaints about their advising experiences. Table 6 shows the results of these comparisons.
| % of Students with Positive Responses in High Satisfaction Depts | % of Students with Positive Responses in Low Satisfaction Depts | % of All Students with Positive Responses | |
| Student chose adviser (Adviser not assigned) | 26 | 13 | 21 |
| Number of meetings with adviser sufficient to meet student needs | 84 | 68 | 74 |
| Student does not know curent adviser | 6 | 14 | 23 |
| Too much trouble to see adviser | 6 | 21 | 16 |
| Adviser has given incorrect information | 10 | 16 | 12 |
| Student does not see an adviser each semester | 6 | 14 | 10 |
| Specific advising problems have hurt student | 8 | 8 | 7 |
LINKS TO 1993 ADVISING SURVEY SECTIONS
Student Responses | Department Responses
| Summary and Conclusion
| Assessment Home |  |