During the last few weeks, as students plan their schedules for the next semester, some make use of RPI’s advising system. Most, however, don’t give the advising process a second look.
While some advisors take a genuine interest in their students’ futures, others are apathetic when approached for advice or don’t have the appropriate information.
Problems in the advising system have caught the attention of President Shirley Ann Jackson. In a meeting with the Senate earlier in the semester, she called for a “first-rate academic advising system for undergraduates with more faculty involvement.”
This also corresponds to objectives set forth in The Rensselaer Plan, which states, “The Institute is under an obligation to support students in managing the logistics of their education. These services include outstanding academic advising; career, health, and counseling services; and consolidated, timely, and accurate information on courses and educational opportunities, progress to degree, financial aid, and account status.”
The advising system has remained a top complaint of students for many years, but Jackson’s support has been key in creating an atmosphere where system-wide change is possible.
“We have never before had support for an initiative like this at the presidential level,” said Grand Marshal Chris Mather.
On the administrative side the revamping of the advising system is being spearheaded by Dean of Undergraduate Education Gary Gabriele and the Academic Advising taskforce, which includes the Advising and Learning Assistance Center, students, and faculty.
The entire Student Senate is also working to gather student feedback during dorm-storming sessions and channelling this information to the taskforce through its Academic Affairs Committee.
The Senate Action Response Committee lists several comments found during dorm-storming in its Recommendations for Action report.
“Some students feel that advisor visibility is poor. Common complaints were things like advisors lack the proper training, aren’t knowledgeable enough, and they are hard to contact,” the report states.
The Senate’s Action Response Committee recommended the creation of an office of advising separate from the Advising and Learning Assistance Center. The new office would work to ensure that members of every department are present during scheduled times throughout the week.
According to feedback the committee has received, one of the most pressing problems of the current advising systems is the varying quality of advising. Many factors play into the type of experience students and advisors have.
The taskforce is working to define the attributes of a good advising system from the perspectives of students, faculty, and the Institute. Exactly where does the burden of responsibility lie? What effects do department size and student-to-faculty ratio play in the problem? And how has the creation of online tools like Banner and the CAPP reports affected the need for students to meet advisors?
Faculty Senate President Peter Persans commented on what he would like to see from faculty advisors. “I would like to see professors continue to be more associated with general career advice rather than the details of academic advising.”
Persans also expressed some of the time constraints faculty face as they average a work week of 50 hours or more. “When asked to do something new the question really becomes what do you want us not to do because there isn’t anymore time,” he said.
The data collection phase—first of a three-phase revamping process—is expected to wrap-up in two weeks. The taskforce then plans to analyze the data from the perspectives of students, faculty, and the Institute, and finally make recommendations to President Jackson.
