|
|
|
 ver the years, academic advisers have been assessing their programs and
services and sharing the results in articles, presentations, and
commission/interest groups. However, the focus has usually been on the
assessment of programs or student populations rather than the science (and art) of
assessment. Because academic advising is a multi-dimensional
field in higher education, the assessment of advising has some unique
challenges. Advising is multi-level (from individual appointments to
campus-wide programs), multi-disciplinary (from student development theories to
specific curricular fields), and multi-functional (from conducting degree
audits to teaching credit classes). The method of delivery of advising services
can vary from institution to institution (from centralized to decentralized)
and advising may be provided by a variety of sources (from peer mentors to
faculty advisors). This unique multi-dimensionality offers both excitement and
frustration to those wanting to develop or refine their assessment activities.
 herefore, assessment of advising can be seen as a field in itself, one that
requires careful and in-depth discussion and study. In his keynote speech
at the 2000 NACADA National Conference, Wes Habley urged the advising profession
to make assessment a high priority, something he and others in NACADA leadership
have been advocating for years through monographs, pre-conference workshops, and
speeches. The need for assessment of advising, in particular
academic advising outcomes, has also been recently addressed by Banta et.al.
in the Spring 2002 NACADA Journal.
he Assessment of Advising Interest Group was convened at the 2001 NACADA National
Conference in Ottawa. At this first meeting, the following concerns and
goals of the group were identified:
·
Who do we assess -- students, special populations, advisors, faculty, mixed model, centers,
campus-level, etc. ?
·
What do we assess -- student outcomes, satisfaction, retention, etc.?
·
How do we assess -- results oriented instruments, methods,
etc.?
·
When do we assess -- longitudinal, transition from advising offices to faculty advisors,
etc.?
·
What are the advantages, consequences and results of assessment
-- funding, change in
program, demonstrating the impact of advising, etc.?
·
What has been done before -- studies and best practices.
·
Foster
the development
of a network of individuals interested in the assessment of academic advising
through activities at NACADA conferences and active discussions on the ASAC
listserve.
·
Further develop the ASAC website, which includes links to established assessment
sites, sample instruments and tools,
bibliography, and examples of previous studies and best practices.
·
Begin the process of identifying and developing projects or reports
related to the assessment of academic advising.
·
Sponsor
and/or solicit the presentation
of assessment-designated sessions by interest group members at regional or
national conferences.
|
|
