academic advising task force report july 15, 2017 advising task...relationship respectful of the...

University of North Carolina Wilmington

Academic Advising Task Force Report

July 15, 2017 Dr. Melinda J. Anderson, Co-Chair Dr. Paul Townend, Co-Chair

Ms. Jenny Adams, University College Ms. Maggie Bannon, University College/College of Arts and Sciences Dr. Kathy Browder, College of Health and Human Services Dr. Katherine Bruce, Honors College Dr. David Glew, Cameron School of Business Ms. Kristine Hopkins, Cameron School of Business Dr. Jennifer Horan, Honors College Ms. Amy Knebel, Cameron School of Business Ms. Catherine Lyles, University College Ms. Christina Logan, Transition Programs Dr. Andy Mauk, Institutional Research and Planning Dr. Beverley McGuire, College of Arts and Sciences Mr. Marcio Moreno, Admissions Dr. Carol McNulty, Watson College of Education Dr. Kemille Moore, College of Arts and Sciences Mr. Thom Rakes, Career Services Dr. Nivine Richie, Cameron School of Business Ms. Sheri Shaw, College of Health and Human Services Ms. LeAnne Smith, Watson College of Education Dr. Zack Underwood, University College Ms. Michelle Vliem, University College Mr. Mark Werbeach, College of Health and Human Services

2

Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3

Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 3

Current Academic Advising Practices at UNCW ........................................................................... 5

Special Populations ....................................................................................................................... 19

Faculty Advising ........................................................................................................................... 25

Student Experience ....................................................................................................................... 30

Appendix A ................................................................................................................................... 50

Appendix B ................................................................................................................................... 52

3

Executive Summary

The Academic Advising Task Force was charged by Provost Marilyn Sheerer in Fall 2016 to document current academic advising practices on campus, identify gaps in advising support services for students, and to better understand students’ perspectives about their academic advising experiences. Gaining a better sense of our current academic advising culture is critical to determine the types of resources needed to build upon and strengthen our structures to support our University’s crucial fourth strategic plan goal - Attract and Retain: Increase retention and graduation rates ensuring student success.

The committee’s work was performed by three subcommittees focused on 1) current practices; 2) faculty advising; and 3) student experiences. The current practices committee documented academic advising operations in each college, organizational structure, technology, strengths, needs and assessment initiatives. The faculty advising committee conducted focus groups with faculty advisors across all colleges to learn more about the needs and opportunities to strengthen faculty advising structures. The student experiences committee launched a survey at the end of the spring registration period to better understand students' opinions about their academic advising experiences.

Our commitment to student success is underscored by our resolve to examine our current academic advising landscape to identify areas that are critical to provide a consistent, comprehensive and quality academic advising experience for all students regardless of their major. The Academic Advising Task Force offers the following recommendations to strengthen a consistent and equitable advising experience for students; to enhance communication and information sharing across campus, and to advance changes in policies and practices to strengthen UNCW’s academic advising experience.

Recommendations Advocacy

In collaboration with the faculty senate, create an academic liaison position on the Academic Advising Council to provide critical ex-officio perspectives to Academic Standards, University Studies Advisory Council and University Curriculum Committee.

Strengthen and support the Academic Advising Council by funding professional development initiatives, speakers, and partnerships with other units on campus.

Encourage Deans and department chairs to champion academic advising efforts by dedicating time in retreats and in department meetings to advising best practices and important student success efforts.

Encourage an institutional culture that supports student success and recognizes academic advising as an essential practice for both faculty and professional advisors.

Policy and Practice

Work with schools and departments to review, develop and document revised advising policies and practices that support student success. Encourage a top to bottom review of advising practices across academic units, and encourage departments to develop/revise policies related to advising.

Strengthen practices and structures between schools and departments that support students when they transition into other majors, especially across schools and colleges.

Develop advising practices that support students who participate in multiple programs (i.e. double major, minor).

4

Develop and implement an institutional assessment plan that helps to continually improve academic advising practices.

Resources

Continue to monitor and adjust needs of each academic unit to achieve optimal staffing levels.

Replace antiquated academic advising technology to provide better case management tools to include documentation, appointment scheduling, and provide the opportunity to share student information across campus.

Provide more support (policies, practices, structure) for course enrollment management to meet the needs of all students who require particular courses in order to move towards degree completion in a timely fashion. These needs are especially important to successful recruitment and transition of transfer students.

Research and examine the need for a transfer center. Consider multiple staffing models and structures to support transfer students before the end of the 2017-18 AY.

Investigate opportunities for graduate assistants or fellowship opportunities to rotate throughout all advising offices to help support new initiatives and assessment activities.

Create a system to recognize and reward academic advisors.

Shared Experience

Develop an infrastructure to share student information across campus to enhance student support as they move between colleges and programs.

Explore non-traditional learner needs to include class time options, pre-advising experiences, and other matters related to their success.

Enhance common online academic advising resources and information for schools and departments including communication protocols, four-year degree program plans, degree plans, and flow charts.

Develop resources for advisors at all levels designed to encourage and direct students towards curricular and non-curricular high-impact practices

Create shared academic advising outcomes across all academic units responsive to particular student’s needs (academic goals, personal situations, career intentions).

Encourage student centered advising practices that enhance accessibility and responsiveness by developing centralized training and support.

Design and deliver training to support a common knowledge base for academic advising practices, policies and resources, particularly to support faculty advising efforts.

5

Brief History of Academic Advising

As university curriculums became more complex the need to create different levels of support for students became greater. Academic programs during the colonial era of American higher education, late 1600s, had no variation and all students took the same courses. Presidents and faculty served in loco parentis and assumed responsibility for their students’ academic, social, and personal lives. As curricular complexity evolved, and with the introduction of electives into standard curriculums, it became necessary to create administrative processes to support students in completing their degree requirements. The primary role of academic advising moved from a faculty centered practice into more of an administrative function. Currently, the level of accountability has increased for higher education institutions as legislatures, governing boards, and parents and students are increasingly likely to demand that students complete their educational programs in a timely and efficient fashion. Furthermore, curricular offerings have become more complex, and institutions and their faculties are offering more high-impact learning experiences such as internships, study abroad, and applied learning, increasing the opportunities for thoughtful academic advising to enhance student success. UNCW strives to improve student success efforts by strengthening academic advising practices on campus, both to improve degree efficiency and to help students get maximum benefit from our rich curriculum.

Current Academic Advising Practices at UNCW

Academic Advising has been identified as a vital strategy for supporting retention, persistence and other student success initiatives. Good academic advising is critical to providing students with information, direction and the support they need to achieve their academic and career goals. The Academic Advising Task Force has been charged by Dr. Marilyn Sheerer, Provost, to document current academic advising practices across the university to determine what academic advising resources are still needed in order to support all UNCW students at the appropriate levels to achieve the student success goals in our new strategic plan. The fourth strategic plan goal calls for Increase Retention and Graduation Rates, Ensuring Student Success. The following metrics have been identified to support the aforementioned goal:

• Increase first-year to sophomore retention from 85% to at least 90%, by 2020-21 • Increase four-year graduation rate from 52.5% to 55% • Increase six-year graduation rate from 71.5% to at least 75%, by 2020-21 • Increase graduation rate for community college transfers (with associates degrees) from 77% to

80% • Continue to reduce disparities in retention and graduation rates among underrepresented

populations

To achieve the performance measures as outlined in the strategic plan, the Academic Advising Task Force will work collaboratively to understand the current gaps in resources, structure and policy that need to be in place in order to achieve institutional goals. This report will begin with a review of the current advising practices on campus.

Academic advising can be defined as a process in which an advisor and advisee enter a dynamic relationship respectful of the student's concerns. Ideally, "the advisor serves as teacher and guide in an interactive partnership aimed at enhancing the student's self-awareness and fulfillment." (O'Banion, 1972). Academic advising involves “situations in which an institutional representative gives insight or direction to a college student about an academic, social, or personal matter. The nature of this direction might be to inform, suggest, counsel, discipline, coach, mentor, or even teach" (p. 3). Kuhn, T. (2008).

UNCW Academic Advising Models

6

The advising models found in UNCW units vary from a total intake model currently used in the University College and Watson College of Education where staff members are responsible for advising students for a specific time period or until requirements are met for graduation. Advising service offices in Cameron School of Business and College of Health and Human Services have a split model approach where they share the responsibility of advising and supporting their majors with faculty departments in the College. College of Arts and Sciences have adopted a supplementary model where the Dean’s office supports some students who are on probation or at-risk while departments have a faculty advising model to support their students. Many offices use other advising enhancements like group advising, online advising, and peer advising to support the needs of their students. Each model has its own strengths and challenges. Below is the summary of each unit’s practices.

Dr. Melinda J. Anderson Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies and Director for the University College

University College's (UC) primary focus is to ensure that students make a successful transition to UNCW, retain good academic standing, and identify and declare an appropriate major. As part of the University's commitment to excellence in undergraduate education, University College provides academic advising to all first-year students, sophomores who have yet to declare their major, and undecided transfer students. The UC supports distinct populations of students to include military, early college, first-year spring admits, and pre-professional students at UNCW. Depending on the time of year, UC serves between 3,500-4,000 students making it the second largest academic unit on the campus behind CAS.

Vision Statement

The University College will be a nationally recognized leader in creating and delivering best practices that cultivate student success.

Mission Statement

The University College supports students as they explore undergraduate curriculum and career paths, prepare to declare an appropriate major, and succeed in their transition to UNCW. The University College (UC) serves several student populations to include freshmen, select transfer, early college, military student, first-year spring admit and pre-professional students at UNCW.

The goals of the University College are to:

• Provide advising services that empower students to make informed academic choices related to both major and course selections as well as academic and administrative policies,

• Deliver academic courses designed to foster student development, academic inquiry, and successful transitions into our university,

• Administer programs that incorporate high-impact practices to support retention, persistence, student success and,

• Collaborate with students, faculty and staff across campus to build a campus community focused on student success.

7

Organizational Structure

The University College staff includes a Leadership Team of the Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies and Director, Business Manager, four Coordinators (Assessment, Advising and Intervention Practices, First Year Studies, and Special Programs – Transfer & Pre-Professional), 18 full-time academic advisors and 2 administrative support staff. Some professional advisors are specifically assigned to work with Early College, military, pre-professional, and transfer students. In addition, 12 faculty serve as part-time advisors for UC. Honors and Athletic advisors also work within the UC structure to ensure all first-year students receive a similar advising experience and common messages regarding general education requirements, student support services and academic policies. The University College operates as a centralized total intake model as part of a university split model. The split model is the most popular model at 4-year institutions (Pardee, 2004). University College meets with first-year students until they are able to declare their major, which is typically after their first year at UNCW. The University College has pre-professional advisors who work with all students over four years to help prepare pre-health and pre-law undergraduates for admission to graduate preparation programs for health and legal careers. The University College advisors also work with students in transition who finds themselves between majors or uninvited to majors based on academic requirements needed to enter the major. Students in Transition work with UC advisors until they complete prerequisites for their new degree program.

Duties and Responsibilities

The University College is involved with coordinating the following advising processes: Pre-Enrollment outreach to new UC Transfer students and First Year Spring Admits (in-conjunction with Admissions), Early Registration for freshmen, Advising and Registration during Orientation (freshmen and transfer), Early Intervention (via the Beginning Student Survey and First Year Student Survey in conjunction with Student Affairs), Mid-term grade reports, UC Appeals for academic dismissals and reinstatement, updating curriculum and program sheets and academic advisor training. The University College informs students of important academic policies and deadlines by email, the First-Year Seminar Course (common advising module), website, personal letters, presentations at Admissions events, and workshops (i.e., Majors Fair, Major Confusion, Should You Minor?).

Academic advisors are assigned caseloads based on a Meta major model design. Meta major areas include Arts and Sciences (Natural Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities), Cameron School of Business, College of Health and Human Services, Watson College of Education and undecided. This structure helps to support any academic transitions students may have in their first year prior to declaring their major. UC advisors are generalists and have a solid understanding of all program requirements but their student caseload is focused on particular Meta major area to build strong relationships with the College and departments. The UC has added a dedicated Arts advisor to support music, theatre, art and art history majors to include the newly designed digital arts major. The UC supports 12 faculty advisors representing all of the Meta majors and includes Engineering. Dr. Amy Reamer, NC State program advisor is considered one of our UC faculty advisors. Full-time advisor caseloads range from 175-200 and faculty advisors are 35.

Traditional Programs and Events Sponsored

• Majors Fair in conjunction with the Career Center

8

• Major Confusion • Pre-professional advising awareness week

Advising Structure Description/Advising Philosophy

UC advisors use a developmental approach when working with students as they strive to assist students with numerous aspects of their college experience (transition issues, academic support strategies, setting goals and priorities, etc.). Advising is viewed as teaching versus a prescriptive approach where students are merely told which courses to take.

Through the professional advisors and academic support programs, students are challenged and supported during the formative semesters in the development of personal interests, skills, and talents to the fullest extent. Students are required to meet with their advisor twice in the fall semester and once in the spring but are highly encouraged to meet with their academic advisor frequently to ensure academic success, to discuss transition to college life, and to plan their university experience. The advisor staff routinely collaborates with professional staff throughout the university to proactively mitigate issues that are impeding student success.

Assessment and Evaluation

Currently no evaluation of advisor and student interactions are being performed.

Challenges and Opportunities

Challenges

Office space needs for additional staff members as we continue to increase student enrollments. The ideal caseload size is 150.

Managing curricular changes and updating information and materials used to train and support advising community

Maintaining close relationships with other enrollment and business units (admissions, financial aid, registrar, and student accounts) now that the unit reports to Undergraduate Studies

Opportunities

UC has an opportunity to work closely with Undergraduate Studies to improve the first year seminar course to aid in retention efforts.

Three new academic advisors will be hired in 2017 to help decrease caseloads from 200 to 175.

Student success analytics and other technologies are currently being explored to support scheduling, case management and documentation needs to enhance student support.

Ms. Kristine Hopkins Director of Cameron Student Service Center

9

Advising in the Cameron School of Business is a blended model of professional advisors housed in the Cameron Student Services Center and faculty advisors spread among each of the disciplinary departments. Faculty advising models vary by department; some elect to meet individually with students during registration periods, while others prefer group advising or peer advising modalities. Advising Unit Name: Cameron Student Services Center Vision Statement Advising is a collaboration and shared responsibility of both the professional and the student. Our commitment is to engage you in a conversation about your future and listen to your goals with an open-mind. We will provide consultation on academic paths, major options, and career possibilities; help you interpret and navigate academic programs, services, requirements, and policies; and give feedback on your academic progress. In return, we encourage you to be proactively engaged in your own academic success. We challenge you to set high standards for your own accountability and to participate in an inclusive and respectful partnership with your advising professional. Mission Statement The mission of the Cameron School of Business Student Services Center is to promote student success through the advising experience by:

• Empowering students to think critically about their future and reach sound decisions • Providing informed guidance to help students achieve academic success • Equipping students with advising tools and resources that support their academic goals

Organizational Structure Prior to May 2017, the Student Services Center was comprised of a Director, Associate Director, Director of Undergraduate Extension Programs, an Administrative Specialist, and both undergraduate and graduate student workers. We are pleased to report that a conversion of the Administrative Specialist to Academic Advisor along with the hiring of an additional Academic Advisor has recently altered the structure as of July 2017. As a result of the hiring changes, the Student Services Center will advise all Pre-Business students starting Fall 2017 with faculty advisors managing students who are admitted to the upper-division major. All Directors/Associate Directors carry an academic advising caseload. While the Student Services Center incurred a loss of the Administrative Specialist, we hope funding may become available to replace this critical position. Duties and Responsibilities of Advising Office Professional advisors and staff in the Student Services Center work with students in transition including (1) Students seeking admission to the Cameron School of Business; (2) Pre-Business students; (3) Extension students enrolled at the Onslow Site; (4) Academically at-risk students; (5) Graduating seniors; and (6) Prospective students. All other undergraduate business students are assigned to Faculty Advisors in the Cameron School. The Student Services Center also provides administrative support to Faculty Advisors through graduation clearance, submission of petitions, waivers, appeals, and other university business that is administrative in nature, but relates to academic advising. Student Services Center Advisors:

• Counsel current undergraduate business students on academic paths, major options, and career possibilities that support decisions about their future life goals.

• Engage undergraduate students in proactive curriculum planning that supports degree progression and academic persistence toward timely graduation.

• Assist students in interpreting and navigating academic programs, services, requirements,

10

and policies. • Evaluate academic progress and advise academically at-risk students. • Counsel prospective students through recruitment and outreach efforts.

Decentralized Advising Across the College

Advising in the Cameron School of Business is a blended model of professional advisors housed in the Cameron Student Services Center and faculty advisors spread among each of the disciplinary departments. Faculty advising models vary by department; some elect to meet individually with students during registration periods, while others prefer group advising or peer advising modalities. Most faculty advisors are only available for students during peak times, such as pre-registration.

Assessment and Evaluation In the past, the Student Services Center conducted volume tallies and the occasional services satisfaction survey to benchmark the Center’s activities. This is an area that needs to be improved and has been identified by the newly appointed Director as an important initiative. As such, a benchmarking survey was release in early February 2017 to gather a baseline for future improvements. Faculty in all sections of BUS 205 and BUS 305 administered the survey in an effort to reach a variety of enrolled students in the Cameron School at different points in their advising experience. In addition, we have started a study of the Cameron School’s peer and aspirant institutions to further benchmark service offerings. The Center is undergoing significant operational restructuring and has plans to regularly administer satisfaction surveys of advising appointments in the near future, once the restructuring is complete. Challenges and Opportunities

Challenges

Currently, technology is used in a limited capacity. The College is still heavily reliant on paper files and began to transition to an electronic format this summer using ImageNow. Students are cataloged and managed through Who’s Next in addition to paper files. Digitizing student records is a high priority along with identifying storage solutions for electronic documents. Use of technology among faculty advising is varied and inconsistent. The current advising model for the Cameron School includes a combination of professional advisors along with faculty advisors. It is the desire of the Cameron School to advance toward centralized advising in order to better promote student success and retention efforts. Presently, resource constraints prohibit progress toward this outcome. With the existing model, advising information and practices vary within the College resulting in inconsistent experiences for students. The technical knowledge gap among advisors is also a challenge, with some faculty far behind the curve of understanding policy changes, curriculum requirements, degree audit changes etc., which can impact a student’s progression through the degree to graduation. It then creates a resource burden on professional advisors, who often find themselves standing in the gap to promote student interests. Other challenges include advisor attitude about advising responsibilities, availability of advisors to meet with students, and unevenly applied policies and exceptions across the college.

11

In addition, adopting the right technology tools to enhance the advising experience for students and advisors is a core concern. There appears to be an antiquated system in place for accessing and storing records and notes, rather than a streamlined system that promotes sharing of information across departments and disciplines. Finally, there is marked concern for identifying and eliminating barriers for transfer students, particularly those that are in the first semester at UNCW. Of upmost concern is the evaluation of transfer credits, the speed at which those credits are articulated, and the fulfillment of university studies requirements as equivalents. The Cameron School as a unit spends substantial time reviewing unofficial transcripts for credit, writing course substitutions and waivers, and negotiating equivalencies on behalf of transfer students. This time could be more effectively spent working directly with students in ways that promote success and academic progression at the university. Opportunities The Student Success Center hired a new Director in early January 2017. There are plans to reorganize and restructure some of the processes to better streamline advising activities with the goal of maximizing advisor availability to meet with students. The population of students that the center serves will also be examined for potential improvements, along with exploring technology tools that may support effective work practices. Even with these goals in mind, there are existing challenges that need to be addressed.

Dr. Kemille Moore Associate Dean for Student Policy

Advising Unit Name: Office of the Associate Dean for Student Policy

The office of the Associate Dean for Student Policy handles advising coordination.

Mission Statement: The College of Arts and Sciences is committed to the life of the mind and the enrichment of the human spirit. In our practice as a college, we

• educate students for lives of personal, civic, and professional fulfillment in a world increasingly defined by change,

• advance knowledge and creativity in the arts and sciences, and • serve the betterment of the region, state, nation, and world.

As the academic core of the University of North Carolina Wilmington, the college provides the vital foundation for the university's pursuit of excellence in teaching; research, scholarship and artistic achievement; and service.


The Associate Dean for Student Policy Office is comprised of the Dean, the Executive Assistant, and a part-time Academic Services Coordinator. There are 25 departments and programs within the College of Arts and Sciences that serve both undergraduate and graduate students.

Duties and Responsibilities of advising office

The office of the Associate Dean for Student Policy serves important functions related to advising for students in CAS. In addition to serving as a general resource for students, faculty, and chairs for information on all facets of degree requirements, University Studies, degree audits, academic policies,

12

transfer equivalencies, course substitutions and waivers. The office also provides individual advising and consultation for re-enrolling students (both good academic standing and previously academically dismissed), for transfer students with questions about University Studies equivalencies, and for students on academic probation or with Academic Dismissal standing. Many of these consultations are scheduled by request or by referral, while others take place as part of designed process.

Another responsibility is the end of term processing that occurs at the end of fall, spring, and summer. The Associate Dean's office reviews academic standing reports for all CAS students, and notifies students accordingly of probation and dismissal status. Any full-time student who earns a term GPA below 1.0 and/or passes fewer than 9 hours in the fall or spring semester is given the option to submit an appeal explaining the basis for the poor academic performance and outlining specific plans for improvement if allowed to continue. The Associate Dean and Academic Services Coordinator review each appeal and if approved, arrange an individual academic contract with the student for the subsequent semester. Each contract specifies expectations for academic involvement and performance, and each student is reviewed at the completion of the semester for which the contract was in effect, to establish whether terms of the contract were met successfully. The outcome of the review is discussed with each student, and serves as one basis for determination of academic eligibility.

This office also coordinates transfer orientation for all CAS departments for the six summer and one January sessions. This involves communicating important information to the departments as well as Transition Programs to make sure advising rooms are set, faculty are scheduled to work advising rooms, share names and numbers of department students coming for each session, and sharing important information to help advising rooms run smoothly. Students are often referred to our office to resolve complicated registration issues.

The Dean's office also provides workshops, forums, and written communication to provide updates for the faculty as needed on changes to undergraduate curricula and academic policy as well as providing opportunities to discuss best practices in advising across our departments.

Traditional Programs and Events Sponsored by the office:

CAS Open House

Advising Philosophy

Undergraduate advising is a key priority in the College of Arts and Sciences. The bulk of undergraduate advising in CAS takes place at the departmental level, and specific advising practices vary necessarily by department, as a function of size of the department, number of majors, and number of faculty. Common to all departments in CAS is a commitment to the position that academic advising is one of a faculty member’s most important responsibilities. Given the role of quality advising in ensuring undergraduate student success, and in keeping with the UNCW Faculty Handbook’s definition of faculty duties (page 137), CAS practices reflect the expectation that academic advising is a regular part of a faculty member teaching responsibilities. Faculty advisors are in a unique position to offer individualized guidance on programs of study, to best capture a student’s developing interests, individual needs, and career aspirations. Student responsibility for planning a route to meet graduation requirements is emphasized, with faculty advisors expected to: be available for conferences at appropriate times and places; provide accurate information about academic regulations, procedures and deadlines, course prerequisites, and graduation requirements; assist students in planning academic programs suited to their interests, abilities, and career objectives; and make appropriate referrals as needed.

Advising practices within each department are designed to provide a balance between providing for individualized faculty attention to each student, according to her or his needs, and for efficient and effective dissemination of the information that holds for all majors. Students are assigned to a particular advisor once the major is declared. In most CAS departments, a faculty advisor is the original advisor assigned. In some CAS departments, students meet first with the department Chair, Undergraduate Coordinator, or professional advisor, and then are assigned later to a faculty advisor. In most departments, to the extent possible, faculty advisors are assigned according to the student’s academic

13

interests. This practice is optimal for providing relevant expertise in academic and professional areas of interest. However, faculty assignments must also provide for an equitable distribution of advisees across faculty members, and each department has an explicit strategy for accomplishing this goal. Once assigned, the faculty advisor works with a student throughout her or his time at UNCW, providing for continuity and allowing the advisor to get to know each student and her or his interests and needs.

Advising Structure Description

Each student is required to meet with her or his assigned advisor at least once per semester for a registration advising meeting. These meetings typically focus on graduation requirements, special opportunities (e.g., DIS, internships, study abroad, and topical seminars), information on other university resources, and career planning. Other advising appointments are scheduled as needed. Most departments make use of advising checklists and forms developed to track progress within the major, in addition to the student’s degree audit. Again, emphasis is placed on helping each student understand degree requirements, so that the student is equipped to make informed plans and decisions, and to ask knowledgeable questions during advising sessions.

Complicated advising cases (e.g., students reinstated following academic dismissal, transfer students with complex academic histories) are typically assigned to the department’s Undergraduate Coordinator or Associate Chair, or in smaller departments, the department Chair. These individuals are responsible for overseeing the advising practices within each department, and are best equipped to handle unusual advising issues, often in consultation with the CAS Associate Dean for Student Policy. These same individuals are responsible for coordinating, at the departmental level, the six transfer orientation sessions held each summer for incoming transfer students, as well as the one orientation session in January.

A number of the larger departments in CAS have adopted advising models to supplement the faculty advisor assignment described above. Central to these alternative models is the need to steward limited resources and still provide for all necessary components of quality advising (i.e., basic information on common degree requirements, and individualized guidance based on interests, abilities, and needs).

One popular supplement involves Group Advising Sessions held early in the registration advising period. Depending on the size of the department, between 4 and 12 group sessions are scheduled. Students receive multiple notifications about the sessions and the importance of attending. The content of the group sessions includes: requirements for University Studies and the major, classes being offered for a given semester (specialty classes, in particular), and department announcements. Students are asked to develop a course plan for the semester, and the plan is then checked against the student’s degree audit by one of the faculty or professional advisors supporting the group session. This model works well for providing consistent and well-informed discussion of degree requirements. Students schedule follow-up meetings with their assigned faculty advisor to pursue more individual schedule questions, career and graduate school advice, or questions related to personal challenges.

A second popular advising strategy, used in conjunction with assigned faculty advisors, involves a Professional Advisor model. This model itself takes various forms across CAS departments, but always entails a key individual (the Advising Coordinator or Undergraduate Coordinator) responsible for reviewing student records and discussing with each student a strategy for academic progress in keeping with her or his academic interests. Most typically, this academic review would be scheduled in the student’s first semester as a declared major, allowing for complete and consistent explanation of degree requirements by an informed and motivated advisor, and providing for appropriate matching with a faculty advisor. Students with more complicated advising scenarios often continue to meet with the Advising Coordinator for follow-up on particular issues of concern.

Assessment and Evaluation: Advising is included in every full time faculty member's annual review documents. Several departments ask students to complete surveys regarding their advising experience during registration.

Challenges and Opportunities:

More resources, including professional advisors, to support the advising activities of faculty.

14

More electronic resources and assessment tools.

Creating stronger partnerships across campus, in relation to advising practices and philosophies.

Creating a culture if the value of faculty academic advising more in parallel with NACADA guidelines for faculty advising.

Ms. Sheri Shaw Assistant Dean for Student Success The College of Health and Human Services (CHHS) was established in 2010 as a doorway for the University of North Carolina Wilmington (UNCW) to make a positive impact on the health and quality of life of individuals, families, and communities in Southeastern North Carolina and beyond. The overarching purpose of the CHHS is to help those in our local and global communities live healthier, more prosperous, and empowered lives. This purpose is rooted in the core belief that every person should have equal opportunity to enjoy a long and healthy life. The College of Health and Human Services (CHHS) is an integrative structure that includes the School of Health and Applied Human Sciences, School of Nursing, School of Social Work, Center for Healthy Communities, Center for Clinical Research Workforce Development, and Student Success Center. Advising Unit Name: CHHS Student Success Center (SSC)

The CHHS SSC works in parallel with the college’s mission to create transformative learning experiences, advance knowledge through research and scholarly activity, and engage in local and global communities. In this context, the CHHS SSC is guided by the following values: Integrity, Responsibility, Advocacy, Accessibility, Accountability, Student-Centered Learning, Diversity, Collegiality and Excellence. Advising traditional, on-campus and extension students in the College of Health and Human Services (CHHS) is a shared collaborative advising model consisting of professional advisors housed in the CHHS Student Success Center and faculty advisors housed amongst the three CHHS professional schools: School of Nursing, School of Social Work and School of Health and Applied Human Sciences. In addition to the traditional on-campus advising, the CHHS Student Success Center advises and supports all students in the OAP, or Online Accelerated Programs (currently, B.S. Exercise Science, RN-BSN, MS Nurse Educator) from matriculation to graduation.

The CHHS SSC is designed to develop and deliver services and programs to students that will increase their potential for success in the fields of Health and Human Services (HHS). To this end, its focus is on the entire “lifespan” of the student, recruiting a diverse and qualified student best matched for HHS, providing opportunities that maximize the student’s success during his or her tenure at UNCW, and maintaining a relationship with HHS alumni that mutually benefits the alumnus and the current HHS students in their respective professional and personal development.

The goals of the CHHS Student Success Center are to:

• Employ strategies to guide students successfully and holistically through the UNCW and CHHS student experience

• Implement and execute strategic programs for student recruitment, retention and reward • Provide professional training opportunities and collaborate with campus partners to expand

interprofessional learning experiences to support exchange of knowledge and expertise for student success

Vision Statement: We enrich the student experience.

Mission Statement: We provide support for students and alumni resulting in professional leaders and global

15

citizens.

Organizational Structure The CHHS SSC resides in the CHHS Office of the Dean and reports to the Assistant Dean for Student Success. The office consists of two divisions, the Student Success Center and the Student Learning Commons. The Student Success Center includes the Assistant Dean for Student Success, Student Success Advisors and an Administrative Assistant. The Assistant Dean as well as all Student Success Advisors carry an advising caseload. The second division is the Student Learning Commons. The Student Learning Commons is a dedicated space to support students in their learning activities outside of the classroom. This space, located on the first floor of McNeill Hall, is a full-service learning, research, and project space, which provides areas for group meetings as well as tools to support students’ creative efforts, collaboration and learning.

Duties and Responsibilities of Advising Office:

In addition to providing academic advising, student support, education and programming, the CHHS SSC office provides support in several overarching administrative areas, including but not limited to: recruitment, outreach, admissions, retention and persistence, academic coaching, recognition/awards and scholarship as well as career, graduation preparation and alumni tracking. To support these areas, there are several CHHS SSC internal committees and the advisors are cross-trained to support all students.


• Transformation Tuesday with campus units • Nursing Career & Networking Fair in conjunction with the Career Center • Veteran-Focused Career Fair in conjunction with the Career Center • Seahawk Success Program • Interprofessional Case Competition • Major Information sessions


Collaboration across the College and University is paramount to the Center’s ability to ensure the consistent delivery of high quality service and programs that meet the needs of our evolving student population. The Assistant Dean for Student Success, in collaboration with the Student Success Advisors provide front line student service, through advising, programs, and initiatives. The CHSS SSC serves as a catalyst for the engagement of a diverse group of students, faculty, staff and administrators in efforts that continue to enhance the learning experience for all students. The CHHS SSC team use appreciative, developmental and intrusive advising approaches to foster excellence in the student experience at UNCW and CHHS to position students for success in their chosen career paths. Walk-ins, Drop Ins, and individual appointments (phone and in person) are available, as requested. Assessment and Evaluation Beginning in the Spring 2017, there is an exit evaluation of advisor and student interaction performed for meetings that take place in the CHHS SSC. There is currently an internal CHHS SSC assessment committee developing an end-of-semester student satisfaction survey and an evaluation that can be sent out to distance education and OAP students to assess advisor and student interaction. Challenges and Opportunities

Challenges

16

• Lack of technology (i.e. database to share across advising departments prompting communication barriers and duplication of services)

• Managing training to support advisor knowledge of OAP programs and processes

Opportunities

• Assistant Dean of Student Success was hired in November 2016. This position has taken full responsibility for managing Student Success Center and Student Learning Commons while working across the college to raise the profile for student success efforts and further enhance the SSC’s infrastructure

• An additional Student Success Advisor will be hired to support the new OAP program offerings

Ms. LeAnne Smith Lead Academic Advisor

Advising Unit Name: Office of Student Advising and Integrated Leadership (SAIL). This is a centralized advising unit, with each education student assigned to a professional advisor.

Mission Statement The Watson College of Education (WCE) empowers students to become reflective leaders who positively impact schools and society. The office of Student Advising and Integrated Leadership (SAIL) supports this mission through a constructivist, strengths-based approach to academic advising and through purposeful engagement and leadership experiences in the Watson Student Leader and Education Learning Community programs.


SAIL has four professional advisors and an administrative assistant who serve approximately 550 students. Students are assigned to three full-time advisors on main campus in addition to one three- quarter time advisor at the extension office in Jacksonville, North Carolina.

Each main campus advisor has additional responsibilities in one or more of the following areas: recruitment, orientation, communications, and student engagement programs (see chart below). A recruiter (position currently vacant) plans and organizes outreach efforts on both the undergraduate and graduate levels, and also oversees all Watson Student Leader functions associated with recruitment. One administrative associate supports both SAIL and the WCE Technology Team. She also helps organize and supervise a graduate student assistant.

17

Duties and Responsibilities of advising office

• Recruitment for the WCE and the Education Learning Community • Outreach to high schools & NC community colleges • Orientation for students- course selection, policies, procedures and registration • Advocacy and oversight for course articulation/transfer & audit issues • Intervention for academic and/or personal difficulties, graduation clearance • Communication and creation of relevant information and tools for academic planning • Guidance in making academic and life choices consistent with goals and interests • Meaningful relationships and mentorship experiences to students • Engagement opportunities within the WCE and greater Wilmington community • Support to multiple campus units e.g. UC, Registrar, Admissions, Dean of Students,

Traditional Programs and Events Sponsored by SAIL: (student outreach varies by year)

SAIL-Recruitment and Outreach Event Month Watson Information Session Sept., Oct., Nov., Dec., Jan., Feb. & Apr. UNCW Graduate School Open House October Future Teacher Conferences October & March Alumni Reception November Watson Graduation Reception December & May College Application Week High School Visit November Card Writing Event February & April Watson Student Leaders T-shirt Sales Table October, November & February Child Development Center Community Project October Food Bank October Bradley Creek Elementary School Fall Festival October Fort Fisher Outreach October Trick or Treat for Canned Goods October Beach Clean Up October Good Shepherd Center Event at The Blockade

October

Ogden Elementary Fall Carnival November Miracle League Baseball November Volunteering at Battleship Race November Smart Start Baby Fast November Watson Student Leaders Retreat January Read Aloud - Rachel Freeman Elementary School February St. Louis Education Innovation Trip March Sponsored by UNCW- We Participate Involvement Carnival August Academic Majors & Minors Fair September Seahawk Saturday October Career Fest October UNCW Graduation December & May Homecoming February Just Juniors February & April Seahawk Preview Day April

Advising Philosophy

The Watson College of Education places a high value on advocacy, inquiry, and innovation. Our role as advisors mirrors and supports these values and is guided by the individual needs of each student. Using inquiry, we facilitate self-awareness, clarification of values and goals, ownership of action, and a

18

strengths-based approach to future planning.

Relationship building is central to this process. We provide a safe, inviting atmosphere and operate from an “appreciative mindset” as described by Jennifer Bloom. Our goal is for students to feel respected, encouraged, and appreciated. We strive to be culturally competent and to convey a true interest in their achievements and potential. Students are important, and we are grateful for the opportunity to learn from them.

Just as teachers are trained that learning is a constructive, interactive process, we believe that advising is as well. Advisors are active listeners, facilitators, and a source of knowledge for UNCW processes and requirements. Our role is to help students determine what resources and actions are needed to reach their goals, what options are present, and what level of motivation is required to follow through. Owning and building on strengths and successes is also an important part of fostering resilience and self- efficacy. Using all available tools, we strive to help students recognize, articulate, develop, and draw upon their talents and personal assets.


Education students are assigned to a professional advisor based on their area of study and last name. We make every effort for students to remain with the same advisor from declaration through graduation, but sometimes have to re-assign them to maintain balanced student loads.

Students have mandatory, one-on-one academic sessions at least twice a year. Students are also encouraged to make additional appointments or to drop in frequently to stay in touch.

Approximately six weeks before registration opens, we send an invitation to our advisees to sign up for an advising appointment. We provide links, useful information, and expectations they can use to prepare for their advising session.


We distribute a survey after each session of transfer orientation in order to measure the level of satisfaction with the on-boarding process. In addition, we survey existing students once a semester for the purpose of capturing their level of satisfaction with the advising process and services. Two of the questions on the survey also reflect student self-efficacy.

We are in the process of developing a formal assessment for our Student Learning Outcomes.


Challenges

Need campus-wide software that streamlines access to student records

Need data specific to Watson College on student retention and persistence

Ease of transfer articulation and completion of University Studies requirements- specifically for students seeking to graduate within four to five years

Developing and implementing assessment of cognitive, affective and behavioral SLOs-specifically, we need time (and possibly more resources) to develop and maintain multiple measures

Lack of resources to expand programs and services

Opportunities

Recruitment position (existing line, currently vacant) – refining target population of prospective students and reaching out before during and after admissions process

Increased student engagement and retention through our professional advising model practices and connection to WCE programs as freshman.

19

Increased student opportunities/programs if given more resources

Special Populations

Student-Athlete Support Services (SASS)

Mr. Drew Scales Director of Student-Athlete Support Services

Vision Statement

Student-Athlete Support Services aims to provide comprehensive academic support services designed to foster academic and personal growth for UNCW student-athletes enabling them to be self-sufficient after graduation.

Mission Statement

The Office of Student-Athlete Support Services within the Department of Athletics at the University of North Carolina Wilmington utilizes a holistic approach to developing our student-athletes. We will support the academic pursuits of all student-athletes while providing opportunities that assist in developing active citizenship, personal growth and professional goals throughout their entire collegiate experience. We are dedicated to upholding the University’s academic integrity standards and we embrace a diverse environment while creating future leaders.


The Student-Athlete Support Services (SASS) staff consists of three full-time Academic Coordinators and one Director who are each assigned a caseload of student-athletes for advising during student-athletes first year of college and until they declare a major. Additionally, SASS employs a 10-month Internship position to assist with providing academic support for UNCW student-athletes. Each of the Academic Coordinators and Director assume several other administrative duties for the department.


Director

Reporting directly to the Associate Vice Chancellor and Dean of Academic Affairs/Office of Undergraduate Studies with a dotted reporting line to the Deputy Athletics Director/Senior Women’s Administrator, the Assistant Athletic Director for Student-Athlete Support Services (SASS), will be responsible for the supervision, coordination and oversight of all aspects of the academic support program relating to the overall student-athlete experience, academic success and graduation, while adhering to the NCAA, CAA Conference, and UNCW bylaws, rules, policies and regulations. Serve as Sport Administrator for Women’s Soccer (revenue) and Women’s Tennis programs. Supervise and coordinate programs, services, and staff relating to the Athletics’ Student-Athlete Academic Services Office which includes budgetary development, goal planning, facility operation, and management of all services provided within the Athletics Learning Center. Academic Coordinators

Academic Coordinators provide general oversight, support and direction of the academic preparation and performance of assigned student-athletes by monitoring of classes, grades, use of tutors/mentors, student

20

needs. After serving as the initial academic advisor in the first year, coordinators continue to support their athletes throughout their entire time until graduation. Coordinators serve as liaison between campus departments, professors, coaches and student-athletes. They identify student-athletes with academic deficiencies, or those at risk of failure in courses, and provide them with assistance or referrals to academic/tutoring resources. Coordinators assist coaches in the recruitment process of prospective student-athletes by performing the following duties: transfer evaluations, course evaluations, meeting progress of degree, meeting with prospects and parents on both official and unofficial visits.

Intern

Assist the Director, Assistant Director, and Academic Coordinators with scheduling individual study hall hours and meet weekly with assigned student-athletes, supervise group study hall, create daily and weekly academic reports, assists with the monitoring of progress towards degree and eligibility requirements, helps student-athletes with registration issues, refers students to on campus resources as necessary, serves as a mentor for academically at-risk student-athletes.


• Academic Recognition Night • Graduation Sashing Ceremony (Fall & Spring) • SAAC Welcome Back Picnic • Student-Athlete Career Fair • CAA Blood Drive • 2 Mandatory speaker events for all student-athletes • 1 mandatory life skill workshop for each class of student-athletes per semester • Mentor Program • Tutorial Services • Study hall • Weekly Focus meetings with Academic Coordinators


All student-athletes entering the university meet with their assigned SASS Academic Coordinator during their orientation to campus. During this meeting, the student-athlete makes course selections for the first semester. Student-athletes continue to consult with their assigned Academic Coordinator in subsequent semesters for class advising until they declare a major. Mandatory academic advising ensures that student-athletes have a class schedule that fulfills the requirements of their chosen degree program. Student-athletes must declare a major by their fifth semester. Academic advising is then provided within the department of the chosen major with continued monitoring by the SASS staff.

All student-athletes receive priority registration, as do honor students and students with disabilities. The SASS staff will facilitate course changes for student-athletes during the drop/add period and withdrawal period to ensure full-time enrollment, progress towards a degree and continued NCAA compliance. All student-athletes must be in contact with their assigned SASS Academic Coordinator for any changes to their class schedules.


In February 2017, a program review was conducted on the SASS office by an external entity to assess the functionality, efficiency and effectiveness of all operations of academic support for student-athletes. The program review will not likely be a regular source of evaluation for the SASS unit, but there are other forms of assessment that take place periodically. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has academic metrics which are relatable measures of effectiveness for athletic academic support units. Academic Progress Rate (APR), a measure which holds institutions accountable for the academic progress of student-athletes through a team-based metric that accounts for the eligibility and retention of each student-athlete for each academic term. Graduation Success Rate (GSR), the proportion

21

of first-year, full-time student-athletes who entered a school on athletics aid and graduated from that institution within six years. GSR accounts for student-athletes who may transfer from UNCW, and subsequently graduate from another institution. Student-athletes grade point averages are also another measure of assessment for the SASS unit. Finally, senior exit interviews of graduating student-athletes address their satisfaction with the support they received from the SASS unit during their years as a UNCW student-athlete.


Challenges

Concerning academic advising for student-athletes one challenge the SASS office faces is once students declare their majors and receive department advising, there can be a lack of regard for athletic continuing eligibility. Furthermore, there appears to be a notion among some departments that since SASS facilitates academic advising for student-athletes prior to major declaration, that SASS is staff should continue advising declared students instead of department advisors. Finally, some student-athletes are faced with a difficult decision of choosing an alternative major path because their ideal major is not an option as several essential classes, or practical classes in the curriculum are offered during sport practice time.

Opportunities

An opportunity to expand the SASS’s spectrum of support assistance can be delivered in the form of an additional full-time personnel. Discussions have taken place with the Dean of Undergraduate Studies to potentially employ a Learning Specialist to better address the specific learning needs of a population of student-athletes who have diagnosed learning disabilities, or those who have deficiencies in certain subject areas.

Dr. Kate Bruce Director of the Honors College

Vision

UNCW's Honors College encourages and supports life-long learning, including a global perspective. The Honors College provides opportunities for undergraduates to engage in independent and creative scholarly activity. As part of this effort the Honors College directs the four-year Honors curriculum and Departmental Honors, offers opportunities to develop a global perspective, supports undergraduate research for all UNCW undergraduates, and mentors UNCW students through the application process for national scholarships and fellowships.

Mission

The Honors College attracts and retains academically talented students, offering a powerful learning experience by encouraging curiosity, critical thinking, and independent work skills, that together contribute to creating a community of honors scholars on campus. The College is committed to offering opportunities to students as they pursue their academic passions in college.


Academic advising in Honors is led by the Director and the Associate Director, both of whom are University College (UC) trained advisors. In addition to their UC advisor duties, Honors advisors meet separately to review honors requirements and opportunities to be able to articulate to the student both university studies and honors requirements and help them as they develop an initial academic path. Advising is also incorporated into our HON 110, Honors First Year Seminar and, as possible, faculty

22

advisors teach HON 110. The connection between the faculty of record and advising allows the development of personal relationships that facilitate in-depth academic advising to help students develop a flexible “4-year-plan” that includes research and creative scholarship, and may include internship and/or study abroad opportunities.


Honors academic advisors carry a caseload similar to other University College faculty advisors. They are expected to meet with students on a regular basis for academic advising and to complete all reports and duties assigned by the UC. Meeting with students includes preregistration advising, but also includes discussion of many other experiences related to possible career goals. Highlights include:

• opportunities for early engagement in undergraduate research and study abroad, and • navigating both US and Honors requirements in a “4-year-plan” that also incorporates

consideration of o minors and double majors, o intentional service and leadership opportunities on campus, and o application for extramural opportunities such as study abroad, national scholarships and

internships.

Once honors students declare their majors, they are assigned to primary advisors in the academic departments or schools. However, the Honors Director, Associate Director, and Assistant Director of CSURF continue to act as advisors to Honors students on an as needed basis but especially as related to pursuit of undergraduate research and creative scholarship opportunities and requirements, and graduate school.


In addition to one-one-one one academic advising, honors advising includes

• A dedicated advising day in HON 110 to go over honors and university studies requirements, and the philosophy behind the requirements.

• Expected participation and reflection related to the UNCW Majors Fair, and other programs offered by UC and Career Center.

• Required “4-year-plan” and “Dream Job/Career” assignments in HON 110 that encourage students to meet and interview upper level honors students and research faculty in their possible majors.

• Programs sponsored by the Student Honors Advisory Board and the Honors College to promote informal meetings between honors students and UNCW faculty (Pizza and Professors).

• Workshops on “What is Departmental

Honors?”.


Structure and Philosophy

Honors experiences and requirements (above and beyond major and US requirements) are based on the guidelines established by the National Collegiate Honors Council. Honors academic advisors receive development opportunities in the form of training and planning meetings as well as end of semester workshops to review and reflect on this philosophy as they prepare to teach HON 110 and to advise students. “Honors education is characterized by in-class and extracurricular activities that are measurably broader, deeper, or more complex than comparable learning experiences typically found at institutions of higher education. Honors experiences include a distinctive learner-directed environment and philosophy, provide opportunities that are appropriately tailored to fit the institution's culture and mission, and frequently occur within a close community of students and faculty.”

http://www.nchchonors.org/

23

Further, specific UNCW Honors requirements are outlined in the UNCW Catalogue and are included in the students' degree audits as an optional "degree" category,

To graduate with University Honors, a student must:

1. Complete at least 12 credit hours of university studies courses as honors sections* 2. Complete six credits of “Interdisciplinary Honors Seminars” (HON 110 and one of

the following: HON 210 or HON 211 or HON 212 )* 3. Complete two credits of “Honors Enrichment Seminar” (HON 120 or HON 121 )* 4. Complete three additional honors credits (additional honors seminars or university

studies courses as honors sections, or honors contract course, or semester study abroad)

5. Maintain academic eligibility: at the completion of 27 credit-hours at UNCW, an overall grade point average of 3.30 or better in all coursework is required. An overall grade point average of 3.50 or better must be established by the completion of 58 credit hours and maintained thereafter.

6. Earn a minimum of a “C” (2.00) in all honors work (“B” (3.00) in 499 and honors contract courses) and have a 3.00 overall GPA in all honors curriculum coursework. If a student earns a grade below a “C” in an honors university studies course, the grade may count toward that student’s university studies requirements but not toward his or her honors requirements. If that student wishes to complete the honors requirements for University Honors, he or she must take an additional honors university studies course and earn no lower than a “C.” Students earning below a “C” in HON 210 (or HON 211 or HON 212 ) or HON 120 (or HON 121 ) must take additional seminars, respectively, and earn no lower than a “C.”

7. Complete requirements for Departmental Honors – 6 hours of XXX 499.

*Note: students entering after the fall of the freshman year must complete HON 210 (or HON 211 or HON 212 ), two credit hours of HON 120 (or HON 121 ), at least nine hours of honors university studies courses, and three additional honors credits (additional honors seminars or university studies courses as honors sections, or honors contract course, or semester study abroad.

Honors Good Standing

Honors students are expected to remain in Honors Good Standing- making progress on the above requirements and attaining the GPAs required. At the end of each semester, the Director and Associate Director review students’ GPAs. Students earning Dean’s List or “All As” receive commendations from the Honors College (Dean’s List congratulatory email and USPS letter to the home address for 4.0 GPA). Students earning below the required GPA receive a warning email from the Director, noting that they are placed on honors probation for one semester, with an expectation that they will reach the required 3.3 or 3.5 by the end of the next semester. During this time, the students are still assigned to their honors academic advisors (if they are undeclared) and may enroll in honors classes. If students attain the required GPA by the end of the next semester, they receive a congratulatory email from Honors. If their GPA does not reach the required GPA, then they are put on “honors inactive” status, sent an email explaining that they are not eligible for honors courses, but that once they attain the GPA, they should notify the Honors College and can be added back to the Honors cohort. They are also advised that departmental honors opportunities may be available even with a lower GPA.

In addition, each summer, the Director and Associate Director review the degree audits of all Honors College students to advise them of missing honors requirements, or to congratulate them on attainment of the requirements. This is a thorough process that takes many hours; however, the benefits of maintaining communication with all Honors students who have declared majors and the opportunities to continue informal advising are many.

http://catalogue.uncw.edu/content.php?catoid=35&navoid=4603&tt438




24

Students who complete the requirements for honors courses and seminars are recognized each spring at a “pinning ceremony”. Students who complete departmental honors requirements are recognized at a formal medallion ceremony before the graduation ceremonies.

Assessment and Evaluation:

The Honors College participates in all University College advising assessment and evaluation procedures.

Challenges and

Opportunities

Challenges

• Troubleshoot Degree Works for special cases (honors contracts, transfer students, etc.). • Staffing hours for annual reviews of all students. • Maintaining informal (secondary) advising for all honors students once they declare majors.

Opportunities

• Consider an Honors academic advisor staff position, possibly housed in UC. This would change the role of the HON 110 instructors to include more career-path advising and discussion of enrichment opportunities. Or could be housed in Honors and include student programming duties.

• Feature advising on the Students page of the Honors website. • Add an advising assessment question(s) to the honors exit survey (for students). • Add formal “secondary advisor” as honors advisor to honors students once they declare

their majors. Faculty Advising

While the professional schools employ professional advisors for a significant portion of academic advising, all of the colleges and schools have faculty serve as primary academic advisors for a percentage of their students, particularly in the students’ final year at UNCW. Advising loads for faculty vary widely across UNCW. Advising practices and approaches used by faculty advisors also vary widely. The professional schools (CSB, CHHS, WCE) have professional advising offices which serve a variety of advising roles and supplement faculty advising. Faculty members still advise, particularly upper-level students. The College of Arts and Sciences uses primarily a faculty only advisor model, with a few exceptions. In all departments and programs faculty still advise students, but often only juniors and senior majors.

Current Strengths:

• While there is a great deal of unevenness in faculty advising, both in terms of quality and commitment, the sense is that most faculty are engaged in advising and value this connection with students. There are stellar faculty advisors in all disciplines at UNCW.

• In numerous departments the importance of faculty advising has become a topic for more frequent discussion about how to better serve students.

• Many departments, particularly in CAS, have shown a willingness to explore new models. • CAS has added a ½ Academic Services Coordinator to act as a faculty resources in several ways.

This has been very well received by department chairs as well as faculty. • Departments are showing increased interest in doing follow-up with students who do not sign up

for advising appointments or do not register for the next semester.

Current Challenges:

• There are clearly many faculty are not committed to academic advising. They are not accepting of best practices, nor do they appear to wish to embrace them. While this is very difficult to quantify, the sense is that there is not a consistent culture of the value of the importance of faculty academic

25

advising across the faculty. • The need to either create incentives for faculty advising, or a concrete effort to change the culture

mentioned in the last item. • The lack of assessment of faculty advising • The complexity of academic advising, especially in curriculum areas outside of their expertise

(University Studies, minors outside the department, double majors, students wishing to change majors) challenges many faculty advisors. This frequently leads to students being poorly advised.

• It is not clear that new models of academic advising, such as variations on group advising, are serving students well. This is another area where assessment is critical.

• Advisors often do not keep records of advising appointments. • Advising offices, especially in CAS, lack adequate resources to support faculty advising. Faculty

need to be provided resources and training to perform better, as well as a place to refer students who have particularly complex advising situations.

Possible Next Steps: • With the support of the Deans and Department Chairs, dedicate time in retreats and department

meetings to talk meaningfully about the best practices for faculty academic advising. Extend this conversation beyond reading a degree audit and assigning PIN numbers.

• Work with schools and departments to develop written advising policies. • Create a process where students with double majors can be assigned an advisors and be required

to be advised in both departments. • Research advising assessment models for faculty advising. • Explore and implement process for faculty advisors to be able to keep records of

meetings/recommendations. • Provide additional resources to support faculty advising, especially in the College of Arts and

Sciences. At least 1.5 additional positions are needed to meet this need.

Student Experience The student experience subcommittee was charged to identify and describe student experiences with academic advising across UNCW’s academic units. Like the range in advising practices and models across campus, we found that students have a range of experiences based on their specific needs as individuals, their chosen academic paths, as well as their point of progress along that path. Through the survey, students were able to share their satisfaction and perceptions on advisor effectiveness. Students were also asked some direct questions to measure whether critical advising information has been communicated effectively. Students were also asked to provide comments and recommendations.

Survey Respondents We surveyed a representative sample of 4,994 undergraduate students based on college (chosen academic paths) and class standing (although not precise, a general measure of progress towards degree completion). 580 students responded to our survey for an overall response rate of 11.6%.

Demographics The sections below detail the demographics of these respondents and response rates for each.

The response rate for females was 14.35% compared to 7.00% for males. The response rate for residents was 11.72% compared to 10.89% for non-residents.

26

The table below provides the response rate by race.

Response Rate by Race Race

Respondents

Non- Respondents

Response Rate

American Indian or Alaska Native 6 19 24.00% Black or African American 31 200 13.42% White 464 3444 11.87% Not Reported 20 164 10.87% Multi-race 16 148 9.76% Asian 11 105 9.48% Hispanic/Latino 32 329 8.86% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

0

5

0.00%

The table below provides the distribution of respondents by race.

Respondents by Race Reported Race Number Percent White 464 80.00% Hispanic/Latino 32 5.52% Black or African American 31 5.34% Not Reported 20 3.45% Multi-race 16 2.76% Asian 11 1.90% American Indian or Alaska Native 6 1.03%

Overall, the demographic distribution of respondents is similar to the larger population for UNCW’s undergraduate population.

Student Distributions The following tables provide a breakdown of respondents by student type, college or school, and class standing. Note that response rate by type of student is not available as this attribute was identified in the survey.

Respondents by Student Type

Student Type Number Percent Traditional 305 52.59% Transfer 235 40.52% Military - Active or Former 23 3.97%

Female

Male

Respondents by Gender

22%

78% Non-Resident

Resident

Respondents by Residency Status

12%

88%

27

Early College High School 20 3.45% Student-Athlete 9 1.55% *Some students selected more than one description so total student types reported exceed 580; however, percentages are calculated based on the total 580 student respondents.

The following table provides a response rate by college.

Response Rate by College

College

Respondents

Non- Respondents

Response Rate

Extension Campus (All Schools) 79 504 13.55% College of Arts & Sciences (AS) 237 1589 12.98% College of Education (ED) 21 146 12.57% University College (UC) 106 920 10.33% School of Business (BA) 76 685 9.99% College of Hlth & Hum Srv (HH) 60 541 9.98% None 1 20 4.76% Isaac Bear 0 9 0.00% Total 580 4414 11.61%

The following table provides the response rate by class standing.

Response Rate by Class Standing Class

Respondents

Non- Respondents

Response Rate

Freshman 83 255 24.56% Sophomore 86 808 9.62% Junior 209 1088 16.11% Senior 180 2134 7.78% Other 22 129 14.57%

The chart below provides the distribution of respondents by class standing.

Respondents by College or School

None

College of Education (ED)

College of Hlth & Hum Srv (HH)

Extension Campus

School of Business (BA)

University College (UC)

College of Arts & Sciences (AS)

1

21

60

79

76

106

237

0 50 100 150 200 250

28

Current Advising Experience for All Respondents The section below provides an overview of survey results for all respondents.

Primary Source of Academic Information Survey respondents reported that their primary sources for academic information were their academic advisors followed by UNCW’s website. The chart below provides the full distribution of their responses. The “Other” category typically included responses such as “myself," siblings, or upperclassmen.

Number of Times Met with Current Advisor The majority of respondents reported meeting with their current advisors on average once a semester. Approximately 13% reported that they did not meet with an advisor at all.

Freshma

n

Sophom

ore

Junior

Survey Respondents by Class Standing

4% 14

% 31%

15%

36%

Primary Source of Academic Information

21%

9% 6%

5%10% 5%

44%

Academic Advisor

Faculty

Friend

Other

Other UNCW staff (not academic advisor)

Parent

UNCW website

29

My Advisor....

Positive Not Applicable Negative Skipped

Satisfaction with Current Advising Experience Students were asked to rate their level of agreement with statements about their current advising experience in terms of their advisor’s accessibility and responsiveness as well as whether their advisor assisted them with educational planning and goal setting. Students were also asked whether they were comfortable discussing their personal goals and challenges with their current advisor.

Comfortable Discussing Personal Goals and Challenges

Assists with my Educational Planning/Goal-setting

Responsive

Accessible

0%

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Generally, the majority of respondents reported that they either strongly or somewhat agreed that their current advisor was accessible, responsive, assisted with educational planning, and that they felt comfortable discussing personal goals and challenges. However, assistance with educational planning and goal setting had the highest negative responses (26% strongly to somewhat disagreed) followed by comfort level discussing personal goals and challenges (19% strongly to somewhat disagreed).

Students were also asked to rate their level of agreement with statements about their current advisor’s knowledge of critical advising information.

None

Once

2-3 times

4 or more times

Blank

Number of Times Students Met with Current Advisor per Semester

2% 1%

13%

31%

53%

68% 19%

62% 26%

13% 76%

72% 16%

30

Generally, the majority of respondents reported that they either strongly or somewhat agreed that their current advisor was knowledgeable about critical advising information.

Direct Assessment of Advising Learning Outcomes Students were also asked direct questions to measure their understanding of general advising learning outcomes and processes, such as how to run a degree audit, how to locate their current advisor’s contact information, and how to identify UNCW’s major and minor requirements. The majority of students answered these questions correctly; however, a significant number did not know how to run a degree audit (18% incorrect; 3% did not know answer) and did not know how to locate advisor information (24% incorrect; 13% did not know).

Advising Models – Experience and Feedback

Students were also surveyed regarding the different types of advising models they experienced in their time at UNCW. For those students reporting experience with more than one model, we provided an open ended question to collect their feedback on which type of experience they preferred and why. The table below summarizes their responses.

I know how to ....

79% 70%

53%

18% 24%

3% 9% 13% 9% 12% 9%

0%

Run a Degree Audit Locate Advisor Contact Info Identify Major/Minor Requirements

Correct Incorrect Did Not Know Skipped

31

Students often provided comments justifying their opinions, showing a range of pros and cons for each method as evident in the summary of comments and specific comments below.

• One-on-One / Individual Advising Meetings – o Pros: Individual meetings provide a more personalized in-depth

experience; freedom to ask personal and/or “dumb” questions; and feeling recognized as an individual. Respondents spoke of the connection and the ability for advisors to focus on long-term planning. Student Comments: “I feel [the one-on-one meeting] gave me more freedom to ask questions and really connect with my advisor and have them give me the guidance I needed” and "[One-on-one meetings] allowed me to have my advisor's full attention to plan my semesters.”

o Cons: No specific comments provided on negative experiences with individual meetings; however, there was some reference to the differing knowledge and expertise of individual advisors in other survey responses.

• Professional Advisors - o Pros: Knowledge of advising, policies, and graduation requirements;

familiarity with multiple degree programs; dedicated time for student; more consistent information. Student Comment: “Advising with my professional Advisor delivered more consistent information. She really understands what is required and how to get me to graduation via the most efficient possible route.” and "Please hire professional advisers like the ones they have in Watson for all colleges. Faculty advisers are nice but are too busy and unknowledgeable to understand how to advise properly."

o Cons: May not be as knowledgeable about specific degree requirements or courses. Student Comment: “My advisor did not know much about my major since I have not yet declared, but she knew a lot about what classes met my general education requirements."

• Faculty Advisors - o Pros: Knowledgeable about degree requirements, career fields, specific

courses, and workloads. Student Comment: “I prefer my advisor that is also an instructor in Chemistry because he knows the courses well and what would be possible for me to take at the same time. He did not want to make my workload impossible.” Cons: Un-responsive and difficult to find time for student; not as knowledgeable about other degree programs, University Studies, or campus services; perceived "disinterest in student success." Student Comment: “I think that most students are frustrated with the lack of knowledge by most advisors that serve as professors. It's not the professor's fault as their primary job is to teach students. Because they haven't been trained to work with scheduling or degree requirements, they don't offer a lot of helpful information. An academic advisor should be someone that can give me concrete answers on my degree path. Currently, the system doesn't provide that for me.” and

Survey Respondents' Most Effective Advising Models

152

58 38 26 19 18 11 6

32

"Faculty advisor is good; he just doesn't email back." and "Having professors be advisors is a massive failure for all students who do not want to continue directly on the life path that their major sets up." and "Students need advisors that aren't professors. The professors don't have the time nor do they have knowledge to help students plan their path to a degree."

There were also comments that acknowledged the benefits and challenges of faculty advising, "I believe that faculty advisors are much more effective because they understand their program better and the opportunities it holds. Unfortunately, many of the faculty advisors do not keep updated with changing curriculums that do not directly concern them. Outside of potential knowledge gaps, advisors are faculty members foremost with classes they must focus on. This leaves them less time to meet with students for advising and nearly guarantees that they are not fully prepared to answer all questions that may be asked during an advising appointment. For this reason, I believe that there should be someone else in the department that primarily serves as an advisor for that department."

• Departmental / Major Advisors (could be faculty or professional) - o Pros: Knowledgeable about degree requirements, career fields, and specific courses.

Student Comment: “My current advisor in my academic department has been most helpful. She knows the ins and outs of the department, and she is very willing to devote time to helping each of her advisees with whatever they need.”

o Cons: Not as knowledgeable about other degree programs or University Studies. Student Comment: "My advisor was helpful with questions about classes in my major but was less than helpful when it came to questions about classes for my minor and university studies. I had to email my old university college to get the answers I needed."

"I think there should be less advisors in each department, and have 8-10 advisors that are extremely knowledgeable about everything related to academics and anything a student would need."

• Group Advising - o Pros: Benefit from other students’ questions; networking with other students in

major; consistency of information and delivery. Student Comment: “Group advising in my major [was preferred] because students asked questions that I had never thought of before.”

o Cons: Feeling lost in the group; sitting through personally irrelevant information. Student Comments: “Group advising was very impersonal. I wasn't allowed to ask the questions I needed to ask, so I had to look them up myself and still have questions for my advisor” and "Information is very basic and not personal and helpful for specific questions" and "Group advising is a sorry excuse for lack of funding and resources." And "Even though I have an assigned advisor, I do not meet with her because students are instead required to attend a two hour long information session about registration every single semester to receive our pins." Some students referenced not being able to attend group session until after registration had opened due to limited offerings."

• None – Some students indicated they preferred simply looking information up online and contacting different UNCW offices to address their needs. In some cases, this was based on a negative personal experience with an advisor giving them conflicting information or simply not finding any value in meeting with an advisor.

• Peer (Students and Friends) - Some students spoke of their preference to receive informal advising information from their peers and the ability to gain insight from upperclassmen, “Seniors are typically more helpful than advisors in terms of finding classes and meeting academic requirements." Although no students who preferred this method spoke of cons, it is of concern that students relying on peers (not in a formal peer-advising method) may not be getting accurate, consistent, "official" information, especially because degree requirements and catalogue information may change each year. One student in CSB referenced the Peer Advising model, "the peer advising seems more helpful than the group [advising], but the peers don't understand the students' needs."

33

• Remotely – Some students indicated that they preferred to email or speak on the phone to address their questions rather than trying to schedule face-to-face meetings.

The table below provides the distribution of these comments by college or school.

Distribution of Comments Related to Most Effective Advising Model

One- on-One

Professional

Faculty

Department

/Major

Group

None

Peer

Remotely

College of Arts & Sciences (AS)

64

22

26

16

12

7

4

1

College of Education (ED)

12

3

1

3

2

College of Hlth & Hum Srv (HH)

17

9

2

3

1

School of Business (BA)

24

10

6

2

6

6

3

University College (UC)

26

10

2

1

1

3

2

Extension Campus 9 4 1 1 0 1 0 5

Total 152 58 38 26 19 18 11 6

Comments on Current and Overall Advising Experiences from All Respondents Students also were allowed opportunities in the survey to provide open ended comments and recommendations about their current and overall advising experiences at UNCW. Many comments related to the survey questions above (responsiveness, knowledge, comfort-level, etc.), but students also provided insight into a variety of advising issues as summarized in the list of themes below. Although many students shared positive experiences, most comments focused on feedback related to recommendations for improving the advising experience. Additional comments are also provided within the analysis by College.

• Course Availability as Issue – Students indicated frustration with the fact that recommended

courses in advising were not offered each semester or seats were already filled by the time they got to registration:

"Advisors knew what classes to take but the [problem] was the classes themselves. It's pretty much impossible to get into the class you want at UNCW if you are just an average student with no incoming credits or special registration status. By the time you register either all the classes are filled up or the only choice left is completely unrelated to your interests."

"[In my program] some classes are offered once a year." (this student shared that they were not aware of this)

• Communication and Responsiveness – Students noted gaps in communication and responsiveness from advisors, particularly related to faculty advising. Many noted that because faculty’s primary role is in teaching, advising questions and responsibilities do not seem to be prioritized. This lack of communication creates frustration in some students, "I have had no good advising experience at UNCW my advisor constantly ignores my emails and I am so frustrated at the lack guidance that the university has provided me."

• Pros and Cons of Types of Advising (Faculty Advisors versus Professional Advisors) – Students cited a number of examples where professional advisors were not as knowledgeable regarding major requirements and course descriptions within specific majors and faculty advisors were not as knowledgeable about University Studies, programs outside of their departments, and university administrative policies. Students also discussed frustration with group meeting requirements. See analysis and comments on methods of advising.

34

• Quality and Accuracy of Information – Students often cited receiving conflicting information from professional and faculty advisors as well as academic departments and administrative units based on their areas of expertise. Many comments related to transfer credit and graduation issues; students cited instances where they were given conflicting information about how courses transfer and instances where an advisor recommended courses the student had already completed. A few students also shared feeling that misinformation from advisors put them off-track for their graduation timeline. Students also shared concerns about accuracy of information for double majors and major changes, indicating gaps in cross-departmental knowledge and understanding of other programs. This relates not just to the program information itself but also to which department has responsibility for ensuring that these students’ needs are appropriately addressed. Some students spoke of their advisor's help in finding information if they did not know something, "If she does not know the answer to one of my questions, she is willing to find it herself or point me in the right direction so I can find it."

• Personal Connections, Interpersonal Skills, and Focus on Student Success - Many students shared feedback regarding their interpersonal experience with their advisor, their advisor's overall approach to the advising relationship, and their perceptions of the advisor's interest in their overall success and goals. Some students commented that the personal connections and long-term planning they sought with an advisor did not exist and that time restraints and workload prevented them from developing the kind of strategic, long-term partnership they wanted. Students who were able to develop this kind of relationship with their advisor reported its positive impact. Overall, this was the strongest theme in the comments – a desire for advising to be more than just getting a PIN:

o "I would like to choose an advisor whom we are closer to and feel connection with." o “I'd just prefer an advisor that would make me feel welcome, not rushed for time, and like

they actually want to take their time to help me as opposed to following a job script.” o "[Advising] feels very rushed and impersonal. Slow down, help us understand what we are

doing." o “I wish there was more guidance towards my personal academic/career goals rather than

just 'what courses I need to graduate.' My advisor is super helpful in telling me what classes to take and how to stay on track, but I wish there was someone to help me figure out what to do after graduation (internships, graduate school, etc.).

"[Advisors should] at least pretend they care about how that student is doing in their classes and offer solutions on how a student might improve their grades and inquire as to what direction/area of focus the student is trying go with their degree."

o “My advisor was very open to my comments on my education and actually contacted a few of my professors to ask about me, which I thought was amazing. He had never met with me before this semester and looked for a little more understanding of my goals outside of just myself.”

o “[My advisor] was extremely helpful when planning each semester. I felt I could reach out to him for any reason and he was always quick to respond in a timely manner.”

o “I've had the best experience with [my advisor]. She has helped me academically and has gotten to know me as a person too. I am thankful that I got such a caring and dedicated advisor.”

• Better Academic Planning and Resources (4 year program sheets, degree flow charts) – Some students commented on the need for better planning guides and tools for students and advisors to use. Some noted other department’s program sheets and path to degree flowcharts as examples of what they would like to see in their own majors.

• Better Advising Tech and Systems (Degree Audits) - Some students indicated frustration with the lack of an integrated information system related to advising and planning out their academic paths.

Significant Differences in Experience by Population Types We analyzed and compared survey results by specific population characteristics such as gender, race, residency status, student type, and class standing to identify any relevant themes for population sub- groups.

By Gender Female respondents consistently reported more positive perceptions of their advising experience and advisor’s knowledge.

35

Positive Perceptions of Advisor's Knowledge by Gender

78% 75% 68% 71%

59% 64% 60% 63%

Degree Requirements University Studies Campus Resources Administrative Policies

Female Male

47% of female respondents indicated their academic advisor as their primary source of academic information compared to 32% of males. 13% of females reported that they did not meet with their advisor compared to 15% of males.

By Residency No clear patterns emerged when reviewing results by residency status. Although there is some degree of variety in responses, the percentages of positive responses for residents and non-residents was usually within 1-3%.

By Race No significant differences were noted based on race.

By Student Type We compared responses from transfer students to other students and found that typically, transfer students had slightly more positive perceptions than other students. Responses ranged from 2-5% higher for positive responses from transfer students. Also, transfer students (53%) were more likely to consider their academic advisor as their primary source of information than other students (38%). However, 17% of transfer students who responded reported that they did not meet with their advisor compared to 11% of other students that did not meet with their advisor.

A few students shared their feelings that advisors were not prepared to advise on incoming credit transferability or degree requirements based on their transfer or Early College standing.

By Class Overall, freshmen consistently reported the most positive perceptions usually followed by seniors. Sophomores and juniors were typically the lowest.

36

Positive Perceptions of Advisor Knowledge by Class 90%

78% 74% 75% 75% 84% 84%

Degree Requirements University Studies Campus Resources Administrative Policies

Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior

71% 66% 68% 60% 57% 61% 71% 64% 66%

Freshmen (4%) and sophomores (7%) were less likely to report that they had not met with their advisor compared to juniors (16%) and seniors (14%).

These results may indicate that existing advising models in place for freshmen and seniors may be more appropriately matched to the general needs of these student populations than for sophomores and juniors. However, this shift in perceptions could also partially reflect confusion and uncertainty around additional, often complicated program requirements to consider as well as the uncertainty around self-exploration. Regardless of delivery method, the focus of advising typically begins to shift in the sophomore year from University Studies to more specific academic program information and career planning and development. This mirrors a shift in student development and corresponding needs as well, with the student ideally moving along the spectrum from dependence on guided, prescriptive advising regarding concrete requirements to self-exploration and determination. Additional study of this sophomore shift to identify relevant factors over a longer timeframe is recommended.

Experiences by College or School Because different colleges/schools employ a variety of advising models, we also reviewed results for individual college and departmental trends. The sections that follow present common trends by college and any significant variances. College of Arts and Sciences - Response Rate 12.98%

Positive Perceptions of Advising by Class

78% 84%

66% 68% 74% 73% 72% 77% 76% 78%

56% 58% 61% 66% 62%

69%

Accessible Responsive Educational Comfort Discussing Planning/Goal-Setting Personal Goals and

Challenges Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior

37

Primary Source of Academic Information for CAS Respondents

26%

38% 6%

8%

4% 7% 11%

Academic Advisor

Faculty

Friend

Other

Other UNCW staff (not academic advisor) Parent

UNCW website

Number of Times Met with an Advisor for CAS Respondents

0% 26%

57% 2%

15%

2-3 times

4 or more times

I do not meet with my advisor.

Once

54% 31

CAS Respondents My Advisor....


Assist in Educational Planning/Goal-Setting

Responsive

64% 21%

Accessible

70%

67%

%

18%

21%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Positive Not Applicable Negative Skipped

38

Primary Source of Academic Information for Watson College of

Education Respondents

Number of Times Met with an Advisor for Watson College of

Education Respondents

19% 5% 14%

5%

19%

57% 81%

Academic Advisor

Faculty

Other UNCW staff (not academic advisor) Parent

2-3 times

Once

Direct Assessment - CAS Respondents Percent Correct for Advising Learning Outcomes

76% 82%


59%

Students assigned to CAS shared comments that align with the responses above. The majority of CAS comments focused on a desire for a more meaningful advising experience (19 student comments re: connections and discussions of goals, challenges, etc.). Many of these comments also addressed the challenge of faculty advising and group advising in meeting their expectations and needs. Of the comments, 17 students discussed lack of responsiveness and accessibility and 19 addressed the accuracy and quality of information received.

"There has been minimal discussion of future plans, concerns about classes, anything beyond what classes I need to take."

"I have been there for three years and have never met my advisor. We set up meetings thru email and they always get cancelled by him...Just always sent my PIN via email."

"Overall, advisor is helpful but is hard to get in touch with."

Watson College of Education – Response Rate 12.57%

39

Watson College of Education Respondents My Advisor....



Responsive

Accessible

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Watson College of Education Respondents My Advisor is Knowledgable about...

Administrative Policies 1

Campus Resources

University Studies

Degree Requirements 1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


71% 29%

86% 14%

86% 14%

81% 19%

8 % 10%

71% 14%

76% 19% 8 % 14%

Students assigned to Watson did not share many comments. Comments from students assigned to Watson were generally favorable, with reference to feeling "genuine care" from the advisor and the helpfulness of advising handouts/resources. One student shared a recommendation of advisors being cross-trained in different education areas, as he was sent to several different advisors to have his question answered.

College of Health and Human Services – Response Rate 9.98%

71%

Direct Assessment - Watson College of Education Respondents Percent Correct for Advising Learning Outcomes

76% 76%


40

College of Health and Human Services Respondents My Advisor....



Responsive

Accessible

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


College of Health and Human Services Respondents My Advisor is Knowledgable about...

Administrative Policies

Campus Resources

University Studies

Degree Requirements

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Primary Source of Academic Information for College of Health and

Human Services Respondents Academic Advisor

Faculty

18% 37% Friend

18% 3% Other

9% 5% 10% Other UNCW staff (not academic advisor) Parent

Number of Times Met with an

Advisor for College of Health and Human Services Respondents

2-3 times

28% 4 or more times

3% 67% 2% I do not meet with

my advisor.

Once

60 % 25 %

58% 32%

75% 15% 70% 1 8%

68% 15%

65% 12%

73% 13%

77% 13%

41

Cameron School of Business Respondents My Advisor....



Responsive

Accessible

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Comments from students within the College of Health and Human Services focused primarily on the difference in experience between professional and faculty advisors with preference being for professional advisors, although praise was also given to faculty advisors. These were comments referencing the need for advisors to be able to assist with graduate programs or at least be able to refer to campus resources. The students within the RN to BSN online program shared overwhelmingly positive remarks on the helpfulness and attentiveness of advisors, who primarily advise via email and phone.

School of Business – Response Rate 9.99%

Primary Source of Academic Information for Cameron School of

Business Respondents Academic Advisor

34% 29% Faculty

4%

10% 3% Friend

7% 13% Other

Number of Times Met with an Advisor for Cameron School of

Business Respondents

2-3 times

4%12% I do not meet with

25% my advisor. 59%

Once

Skipped

50% 29%

43% 37%

63% 18%

55% 24%

Direct Assessment - College of Health and Human Services Respondents Percent Correct for Advising Learning Outcomes

85%

63% 48%


42

Cameron School of Business Respondents My Advisor is Knowledgable about...


Campus Resources

University Studies

Degree Requirements

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Direct Assessment - Cameron School of Business Respondents Percent Correct for Advising Learning Outcomes

78%

72%

51%


45% 17%

39% 20%

49% 24%

61% 18%

The comments from the Cameron School of Business respondents mainly discussed the formats of advising (professional, faculty, peer and group) and the different experiences based on the format. These comments were in line with summary of pros/cons of different models included in overall report. Student comments were most positive when speaking of professional advisors within the Student Services Office, and students had negative reactions to group and faculty advising ("rushed," "impersonal," "not productive"). Many students commented on not meeting with their advisor or just receiving a PIN number as a result of advising (mostly through group advising). In each model, students consistently remarked of the advisors' great knowledge of major requirements but lack of knowledge in University Studies and general questions. Some students remarked on the friendliness of staff and the helpfulness of advising resources.

University College – Response Rate 10.33%

43

University College Respondents My Advisor....



Responsive

Accessible

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


University College Respondents My Advisor is Knowledgable about...


Campus Resources

University Studies

Degree Requirements

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Primary Source of Academic Information for University College

Respondents Academic Advisor

13% Faculty

19% 42%

3% Friend 5%

5% 13% Other

Number of Times Met with an Advisor for University College

Respondents 2-3 times

1% 4 or more times

34% I do not meet with 58%

1% my advisor.

6% Once

Skipped

80 % 11 %

73% 20%

86% 6% 80 % 9 %

84% 2%

81% 5%

88% 6%

77% 10%

44

Direct Assessment - University College Respondents Percent Correct for Advising Learning Outcomes

81%


69% 58%

Comments for the University College advising experience focused mainly on the responsiveness, helpfulness and friendliness of advisors. Students remarked that advisor was "approachable," "genuinely interested," and "welcoming." There were positive and negative responses to responsiveness, with some students having difficulty with email responses. Some students also commented on frustrations with being reassigned to new advisors when their previous advisor left the university. Overall, students commented on the ability of UC advisors to focus on their overall experience inside and outside of the classroom and the knowledge of University Studies, but that UC advisors seemed less knowledgeable on major requirements, graduation timelines, and class specifics (difficulty, rotation of offerings, etc.).

Extension Campus – All Colleges and Schools Response Rate 13.55%

Primary Source of Academic Information for Extension Campus

Respondents 1%

3% 5%

5%

5%

81%

Academic Advisor

Friend

Other

Other UNCW staff (not academic advisor)

Number of Times Met with an Advisor for Extension Campus

Respondents

31% 44%

25%

2-3 times

I do not meet with my advisor.

Once

45

Extension Campus Respondents My Advisor....



Responsive

Accessible

75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%


Direct Assessment - Extension Campus Respondents Percent Correct for Advising Learning Outcomes

71%


90% 6%

86% 9%

91% 4% 92% 4%

47%

30%

Student comments from Extension students (CAS, Watson, CHHS) were in line with the survey results: many students shared positive comments on the attentiveness, responsiveness, and helpfulness of their advisors. Many commented about their non-traditional experience as adult learners, online students, and/or working and whether their advisor was accommodating with their more complex educational and personal situations. Although many of the advising for extension students occurs through email and

Extension Campus Respondents My Advisor is Knowledgable about...

Administrative Policies 87% 4%

Campus Resources 82% 5%

University Studies 85% 4%

Degree Requirements 89% 5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


46

phone, students overall commented on the high response rates of advisors and the personal attention received through routine check-ins.

Conclusion

Based on survey results and student comments, there is certainly a range of experiences with advising at UNCW, mainly due to the different methods used throughout the campus and even within colleges. Whether a student’s advising experience is positive or negative seems to be largely driven by the type of advising method and whether the advising model/practice in place within their academic department is appropriately matched to the needs of that individual. As a result, it is vital to understand what students are seeking from an advising experience, how their needs may shift based on their progression to degree, and whether the university is successful in meeting the students' needs.

Student needs and desires for advising became evident through the student comments, with many students repeating concerns or topics. The negative comments focused on what was missing or lacking in the student advising experience, and the positive comments focused on what the students valued. Many topics and themes emerged through what students chose to share in their comments. Interestingly, these themes were universal and did not vary for classification / standing or college. As a result of reviewing student comments, it appears that students want and value the following from their advisor and advising experience.

• Knowledge of all graduation requirements - University Studies, major requirements • Knowledge of course specifics (prerequisites, rotation of offerings, demands of coursework, etc.) • Assistance in addressing registration issues/obstacles • Accessibility and responsiveness • Attentiveness • Focus on individual concerns, goals, and personal situation/needs; personalization of services • Personal relationship with advisor – genuine interest in student's success inside and outside of the

classroom, short-term and long-term, encouragement • Friendly, welcoming environment

The following student comments summarize these themes quite well:

[My advisor] is so helpful and willing to sit and talk with me for however long is necessary! She knows so much and it's incredibly helpful! She gives suggestions of what might be the best option and what may not be the best but still allows me to make the final decision.

My advisor is quite helpful. I go to him not only during registration time, but all year around. He is very knowledgeable about my major seeing as how he's the head of that department, and I feel as though I can talk to him about anything.

[My advisor] is knowledgeable of requirements for graduation and is prepared for my personal goals whenever I meet her. I feel comfortable discussing personal situations that are causing added stress/concern with my education and genuinely feel like she has a personal investment with me. If she does not know the answer or feels that someone else may be able to offer more assistance, she points me in the right direction.

Some common themes were also evident in the recommendations that students made in their open comments:

47

• Offer professional advising instead of faculty or group advising - this could be within each college/department beyond University College

• Have consistent method of advising for all students • Create support for students who are between majors or double majors

These recommendations are directly tied to the list above; students want personalization and accessibility which they believe that group advising and often faculty advising is unable to offer. Students often commented on their transition between advisors and colleges and how it would also have been helpful for them to know what to expect in this change.

Overall, student experiences varied, but the topics they focused on, either positively or negatively, did not. Students clearly value advising and understand its importance in their overall experience and desire for it to be a more positive experience for all students:

I have always had positive experiences with advising; however, many of my friends and peers have not had the same experience I have had. They frequently say how disconnected they feel from their advisor and how there is a lack of help, especially when group advising is most frequently used. I hate they feel that way, especially since my advising experiences have been positive. Currently, there is not a common way to advise, and the different experiences students have, whether good or bad can have a positive or largely negative impact on their view of college, success, and academics.

48

References Kuhn, T. L. (2008). Historical foundations of academic advising. In G. N. Gordon, W. R. Habley, & T.

Grites (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass and Manhattan, KS: National Academic Advising Association.

O’Banion, T. (1972). An academic advising model. Junior College Journal, 42 (6), 62-69.

Pardee, C.F. (2004). Organizational structures for advising. NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources. Retrieved June 2017 from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Organizational-Models- for-Advising.aspx

http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Organizational-Models-

Appendix A - Academic Advising Practices Chart 52 Technology Matrix

Academic/Advising Units

Who's Next Note Taking

and Scheduling Software

Survey Software

Image Now

Banner Self- Service

Banner Production

Electronic Academic Records

Degree Works

Other

Arts and Sciences X X X X Scheduling software in some departments

Cameron X X X X X Health and Human Services

X (to begin using Fall '17)

X X X X X

University College X X X X X X X Watson X X X X X Honors College X X X X Athletics X X X EAB/Grades First

Athletic Support Services

UNCW Academic Advising Overview

Academic/Advising Units

Advising Unit Organizational Structure

Average Caseload Type of Advising Assessment

College of Arts and Sciences

Associate Dean of Student Policy and Curriculum Coordination

Work with students on contract each semester

See contract and reinstatement students - 2 - 3 x/semester - about 70 students average. About 12 are between majors so those students are advised in the Dean's office until their GPA is 2.0 or higher to declare

None

Departments Decentralized faculty advising

Average Caseload Range 12 – 100. Higher #'s are lecturers or coordinators where that is a major part of their job. Caseloads that are on smaller side tend to be in smaller departments. Only one CAS department (BIO/MBY) has 2 professional advisors and their caseloads are about 260.

Some departments have utilized student satisfaction surveys, informal assessment in most departments after advising season to discuss processes, concerns and propose updates or changes.

Cameron School of Business

Student Services Center

Professional advising 125 – 150 per advisor Very limited; student satisfaction surveys

Departments Faculty advising – Variety of models including one-to-one advising, group advising, and peer advising

Accountancy & Business Law – individual student meetings; caseload approx. 36 students per faculty member

Economics & Finance – Group and Peer Advising; caseload range 29 – 48 per faculty member

Management – Drop-in advising meetings; caseload range for HRM & MLD concentrations 48 – 70 per faculty member; EBD concentration = 48; INB = 18

Marketing – Group and Peer advising; caseload approx. 55 per faculty member

Operations Management & Information Systems – individual student advising;

None

53 approx.. caseload ranges from 15 – 34

students

College of Health and Human Services

Office of Student Success Center

Centralized professional advising

Approx. 150-170 per advisor (varies due to OAP programs)

Advisor appointment survey; graduation survey; student satisfaction survey

Departments Decentralized Faculty advising

Average Caseload Range 12 – 40. Higher #'s are lecturers or coordinators where that is a major part of their job- varied by school and major

University College University College Staff

Professional and faculty advising

180 caseload for professional advisors 40 caseload for faculty advisor

Student satisfaction/ Learning Outcomes based evaluations

Watson College of Education

Office of Student Advising and Integrated Leadership (SAIL)

Professional advising Approx. 125-170 average load -Student survey with questions on process, relationships, self- efficacy -In process of developing

Learning Outcomes based evaluations (We have SLOs)

Honors Centralized advising Faculty Advising: 2 Full-time, 6 faculty advisors

40 students per advisor

Athletics Centralized advising Professional advising Varies by Sport. Ranges14 -160 students per advisor

Appendix B - Faculty Caseload Numbers 52

REG Advisor Tally for term: Fall 2017 UCOL Advisor Total Advisees Abrams, Hannah Delacruz 5 Adams, Mike S 27 Albert, Arlene Midori 15 Alexander, William L 14 Alexanian, Moorad 5 Almeida, Antje Pokorny 14 Almeida, Paulo F 9 Amponsah, Nana-Akua 1 Andreescu, Florentina Carmen 30 Andrews, Martha C 213 Arbogast, Brian Scott 13 Arms, Tamatha Ebert 3 Ashton-Forrester, Candace Rae 39 Atkins, Anthony T 9 Avery, Gene Brooks 21 Bachmeyer, Melanie H 25 Bailey, Jeffrey Craig 12 Baker, Elizabeth W 20 Ballard, Timothy Alan 24 Barnes, Christian G 22 Barnes, Donald Clay 56 Barreto, Daisyane C 3 Barth, Thomas J 1 Barthe, Pascale 4 Bass, Harry T 150 Benedetti, Michael M 11 Bennett-Smith, Keisha 9 Berg, Herbert 80 Berkeley, Anne R 7 Berliner, Todd Mathew 40 Biddle, Jennifer C 23 Black, Timothy C 6 Blake, David Edward 11 Bliss, Greta K 5 Blum, James E 10 Blumenthal, Margaret Hodgson 4 Boeyink, Natalie L 3 Bolduc, William James 20 Bolton, Kristin Whitehill 13 Bongiorno, Frank Joseph 5 Boomershine, Amanda 4 Boren, Mark E 4 Borrett, Stuart R 10 Bose, Nandana 2 Boul, Stephen D 29 Boyce, Robert W 23 Bradley, Ralph L 35 Bramlett, Traci R 19 Brander, Susanne Marie 12

Bredbenner, Candice D 12 Brennan, John F 22 Brenner, Wendy 8 Brignole, Francisco 5 Britt, Michelle Lee 31 Brown, Jeffrey Lawrence 9 Brown, Kirk W 28 Brubaker, Jennifer 29 Bruce, Katherine Ely 25 Bryant, Lolita Bennett 23 Buffington, Daniel T 28 Bulger, Tammala A 150 Bullers, Susan 27 Burgh, Theodore W 6 Burt, Raymond 31 Burton, Grace Mae 1 Bushman, Donald E 9 Cahoon, Lawrence B 12 Cami-Vela, Maria 5 Canel, Cem T 32 Carr, Marsha L 30 Cassel, Rachael E 35 Castagno, Paul C 6 Catalano, Hannah Priest 46 Catapano, Susan Marie 69 Chai, May-lee 4 Chakrabarty, Subhra 55 Chandler, Brian T 16 Chang, Yaw O 9 Chen, Cuixian 10 Chen, Yixin 11 Chin, Jennifer A 28 Ciner, Cetin 49 Clark, Ulku Yaylacicegi 21 Clements, Caroline M 23 Cohen, Dale J 26 Combs, Clarice Sue 31 Condon, Robert H 14 Conser, Walter Hurley 5 Cook, Kimberly J 30 Coombs, Thomas C 12 Corpus, Heather Jean 13 Cottrell, Randall Russell 48 Covi, Joseph A 12 Cox, Mark Douglas 7 Coyne, Amanda Rebecca 9 Crawford, Elizabeth Outlaw 84 Crowe, Brandi M 7 Crowe, Nathan P 9 Cummings, Jeffrey W 21 Cummings, Lance E 7 Daniels, Karen A 25

Danner, Raymond M 8 Dark-Freudeman, Alissa R 25 Das, Amrita 1 Daspit, Lesley L 1 Davies, Maryann 1 Davis, Brian Frederic 9 Day, Jacob C 30 De Gramont, Marina Diane 4 DeGennaro, Donna 30 Dennis, Christopher C 2 DeVall, Kristen E 27 DeVita, James Michael 47 Dodd, Diane M B 30 Dowd, Deborah Ann 23 Downen, Thomas 37 Dugan, Loraine Pasquantonio 12 Durako, Michael J 11 Echevarria, David P 17 Edgerton, Clyde Carlyle 7 Elikai, Faramarz 41 Elliott, Steven Mark 19 Elovaara, Mika T 1 Emslie, Steven D 11 Enlow, Randall A 7 Errante, C Steven 4 Erwin, Patrick Michael 9 Eshleman, Matthew C 2 Espinosa-Hernandez, Maria Graciela 24 Eulie, Devon Olivola 51 Evers, Pamela S 1 Fain, William T 36 Faircloth, Susan C 7 Farinella, Joseph A 51 Felis, George M 18 Feng, Wei 24 Ferner, Clayton S 19 Figueroa, Jorge L 47 Fonvielle, Chris E 7 Fox, Jane A 11 Frampton, Arthur Ronald 33 Frank, Hannah M 28 Frankel, Arthur J 10 Franzidis, Alexia F 31 Freeze, Michael A 9 Fugate-Whitlock, Elizabeth I 1 Furia, Philip 4 Furner, Zhan Z 40 Furst, Donald Edward 12 Galbraith, Craig Scott 49 Gamble, Douglas W 6 Gan, Liping Q 11 Gao, Bei 42

Garrett Dikkers, Amy Elizabeth 34 Gebauer, Judith 49 Gerard, Philip 6 Gessner, David 5 Ghoneim, Eman M 9 Ghosh, Indranil 9 Gill, David Macinnis 1 Glass, Anne H 7 Goff, Anne-Marie 25 Gordon, Michael Ross 3 Graham, J Edward 54 Grant, Nancy M 25 Gray, Cara N 35 Grove, Nathaniel P 22 Guidice, Rebecca Monette 1 Guinn, Curry I 35 Guo, Daniel X 10 Gurganus, Kenneth Rufus 1 Habibi, Don A 4 Hackler, Frederick M 35 Hadsell, Lester C 32 Hakan, Robert L 25 Halkides, Christopher J 11 Hall, Jack Charles 51 Hall, Jon C 13 Hallenbeck, Sarah Overbaugh 9 Halls, Joanne N 12 Hansen, Victoria Jane 36 Hanson, Randall K 34 Hargrove, Tracy Y 1 Harper, Stephen Coale 43 Harris, Emmanuel D 3 Harris, Glen A 7 Hawkes, Andrea D 11 Heijnen, Michel Johannes Hubertus 22 Hemingway, Kimberly Faxon 7 Herman, Russell L 12 Hermanson, Susan Dianne 42 Herstine, James H 38 Hickman, Joe Eugene 6 Highsmith, Carol Newton 24 Hilburn, Jeremy Dale 1 Hill, Jeffery Martin 54 Hill, Stephen E 36 Hines, Mary Elizabeth 3 Hoffmann, Sharon S 11 Holmes, Michael Brandon 10 Horan, Jennifer E 25 Hou, Xiaojie 9 Housand, Angela Marie 30 Howe, Lee Vincent 62 Howells, Michaela E 5

Hudson, Ashley E 25 Hudson, Nicholas Frederick 12 Huelskamp, Amelia C 8 Hughes, Christine E 60 Hungerford, Anne E 26 Hunt, James Brunner 53 Hunt, Tammy Garrison 14 Imig, Scott R 1 Imperial, Mark T 13 Irvine, Edward C 14 Iselin, Anne-Marie R 20 Ivancevich, Daniel M 38 Jackson, Lee Anderson 55 Jakelic, Dijana 10 James, Scott M 5 Janicki, Thomas N 52 Jarvis, Jessie C 46 Johnson, Courtney E 15 Johnson, Daniel C 27 Johnson, Danny E 50 Johnson, Mariana C 8 Jones, Adam Talbot 38 Jones, Andrea L 13 Jones, Roderick W 22 Jones, S Bart 26 Juall, Scott Daniel 2 Juniku, Rajan 11 Kamel, Stephanie J 8 Kase, Juan Carlos 42 Kerler, William A 45 Kermani, Hengameh 1 Kerr, Jared G 34 Kieber, Cecilia B 11 Kieber, Robert J 2 Kim, HyunBum 32 Kinard, Brian R 54 King, Aaron S 35 King, Donna 17 King, Nancy Anne 6 Kinsey, Stephen T 1 Kinzer, Kirsten L 6 Kiser, Kevin B 12 Kleinberg, Raymonde B 86 Kline, Douglas M 22 Kohman, Rachel A 26 Kolomer, Stacey Robin 5 Koopman, Heather N 9 Kubasko, Dennis S 7 La Vere, David L 8 LaCognata, John Patrick 4 LaGrange, Randy Lavern 19 Laham, Kelly Grey 26

LaMaskin, Todd A 15 Lammers, Mark C 4 Lancaster, Richard D 11 Lane, Chad S 13 Lane, Julie D 3 Lang, Heather S 14 Lanier, Christina L 27 Lankford, Thomas E 11 Lapaire, Pierre J 3 Laudadio, Nicholas Christian 7 Laverty, Roger Montgomery 7 Lecci, Len B 26 Lee, Hee-Seung 10 Lee, Hyun Jung 4 Lee, Jacquelyn Jean 14 Lee, Lorraine S 33 Lee, Rebecca 4 Leonard, Lynn A 2 Li, Hua 1 Linehan, Terry Jon 35 Loh, Ai Ning 10 Long, Amy Elizabeth 38 Long, Zachary T 10 Lopez Legentil, Susanna 10 Lu, Xin 8 Lugo, Gabriel G 2 Luo, Shanhong 23 Lydy, Max W 10 Lyon, James A 55 MacKain, Sally Joy 26 MacLennan, Jane 8 Maddalena, Sarah K 2 Malo-Juvera, Victor 9 Manning, Ruth Michelle 7 Marino, Christopher J 10 Masters, Daniel S 47 Mathews, Shirley Arlene 8 Maume, Michael O 12 Mautz, R David 20 McCaffray, Susan Purves 6 McCall, Jennifer Rettew 13 McClure, Kevin Richard 34 McDaniel, Anita K 28 McEwen-Campbell, Michelle R 25 McFarland, Stephen L 9 McGuire, Beverley Foulks 5 McKinney, Bruce Converse 25 McNamara, Dylan E 10 McNulty, Carol P 38 Mead, Ralph N 12 Mechling, Linda C 25 Mehl, Eva M 9

Meinhold, Stephen S 31 Melroy, Diane L 11 Mentor, Kenneth William 29 Meyer, Tracy H 55 Miller, Sara Elizabeth 18 Moallem, Mahnaz 8 Moffett, Clay M 106 Mollenauer, Lynn W 7 Montwieler, Katherine L 1 Moore, Kemille S 3 Morago, Brittany A 24 Morgan, Jeremy Bruce 11 Morgan, John Robert 1 Morge, Shelby P 30 Morling, Magdalena A 7 Mrak, Norma Ariadna 6 Murdock, Nancy Lee 25 Murrell, Nathaniel Samuel 5 Myers, Bryan 25 Narayan, Sridhar 28 Nathanson, Robert 4 Newlin, Keith 12 Nguyen, Peter V 137 Nguyen, Simone P 3 Nix, Jeffrey R 18 Noel, Nora E 29 Noland, Daniel W 5 Noles, Erica Cheree 26 Nooner, Kate Brody 24 Nooner, Scott L 11 Noor Al-Deen, Hana S 24 Olsen, Richard Kenneth 18 Olson, Vibeke 11 Ousley-Exum, Denise M 1 Overman, William Henry 26 Pabst, D Ann 12 Pack, Glenn A 32 Palmer, Timothy N 25 Pappamihiel, N. Eleni 36 Parker, Diane Louise 23 Parker, Noelle Cameron 7 Pastor, Diane K 25 Pastore, Raymond Stefan 18 Patterson, Laurie J 55 Pawlik, Joseph R 12 Peel, Katie R 8 Pena, Tracy Marie 30 Pence, Toni B 7 Penneys, Darin S 6 Persuit, Jeanne M 19 Pilgrim, Carol Ann 26 Pitts, Raymond C 25

Pond, Richard S 27 Porco, Alessandro Stefano 6 Porter, Thomas W 66 Posey, Martin H 2 Potts, Linda F 10 Pourrezajourshari, Saba 33 Prentice, Christopher R 14 Pricope, Narcisa G 6 Priester, Carolina 48 Puente, Antonio Enrique 1 Pugh, Linda C 15 Pullum, Stephen J 24 Rabidoux, Salena Ann 1 Rack, John Edward 6 Randolph, Linwood J 10 Ray, Anirban 7 Reamer, Amy Craig 115 Reber, Eleanora A 17 Reeves, James Herbert 34 Reid, Paula V 33 Reid-Griffin, Angelia R 5 Reilly, Colleen A 12 Rhodes, Ginger Alayne 15 Rhodes, Ryan G 11 Ricanek, Karl 31 Rice, John S 21 Richardson, Granetta L 42 Richie, Nivine F 16 Roberts, Chadwick Lee 26 Robinson, Carolyn A 15 Rodriguez, Carlos L 17 Roer, Robert David 1 Roney, Kathleen M 29 Root, Robin A 8 Roseboro, Donyell L 2 Rosen, L Drew 47 Rotenberg, James A 28 Rowan, Noell L 13 Sackley, William H 50 Salwen, Barry David 1 Salzman, Thomas M 6 Santana, Shannon A 32 Satterlie, Richard A 14 Sauer, Penny A 24 Sawrey, Damon Kim 21 Sawyer, Rebecca Shields 37 Scharf, Frederick S 10 Schell, George P 23 Schmid, Walter Thomas 2 Schuhmann, Peter William 35 Schweninger, Lee Franklin 6 Scott, Julie Ann 24

Scribner, Lisa L 61 Seaman, Alana N 4 Seaton, Pamela J 2 Seidman, Michael M 8 Shefsiek, Kenneth P 8 Shields, Ann Tamlyn 26 Shynett, Jerald G 2 Sibona, Christopher J 21 Siegel, Robert A 4 Sigler, Kevin Joel 50 Silva, Andre Bruno 34 Silva, Shannon Lee 34 Simmonds, Devon M 33 Simmons, Scott E 16 Sinclair, Susan M 32 Skrabal, Stephen A 6 Smith, Michael S 40 Smith, Robert W 7 Snider, Anthony G 50 Song, Bongkeun 1 Soques, Daniel F 35 Sorensen, Mark D 6 Spaulding, Robert Mark 6 Spencer, Fredrika Justesen 53 Spencer, Helena K 5 Spieser, David E 3 Spivey, Laura M 35 Sprod, Lisa K 23 Stapleton, Ann E 11 Steele, Shawn A 16 Sterrett, William Lindsay 61 Stevens, John J 5 Stiles, Curt Howard 1 Strong, Jessica Danielle 13 Sumerel, Elizabeth Ashley Bissette 6 Sutherland, Jean-Anne 29 Swafford, Doris J 19 Sweeney, Meghan M 24 Tagliarini, Gene A 27 Tanny, Jarrod M 4 Taylor, Alison 12 Taylor, James Benjamin 44 TenHuisen, Matthew L 9 Tirrell, Jeremy W 7 Todd, Marsha Anne 23 Toll, Pamela W 13 Tompkins, Jack A 39 Toney, Allison Faye 10 Toth, Jeffrey P 23 Townend, Paul A 6 Trimble, Frank Patrick 24 Trokhimenko, Olga Valentinovna 3

Tseh, Wayland 23 Turrisi, Patricia Ann 28 Usilton, Larry Winfield 8 Van Camp, Carole M 23 Vandenberg, Angelena Marie 14 Vanderminden, Jennifer A 28 Varadarajan, Sridhar 9 Verzella, Margaret Mary 22 Vestal, Donald A 49 Vetter, Ronald J 1 Wagenseller, Edwin H 13 Waity, Julia F 28 Walker, John Lewis 4 Walters, Elizabeth M 10 Wang, Ying 8 Wang, Yishi 12 Washington, Wendy Donlin 26 Watson, Ethan D 47 Webb, Michael R 11 Weber, David E 25 Webster, William David 1 Wentworth, Michael Douglas 5 Whipple, Kerry L 49 White, James Wilson 12 White, Mary J 1 White, Michael D 3 White, Patricia Hart 25 White, William H 6 Wilbur, Ami E 1 Wilcox, Aaron T 14 Willey, Joan Dewitt 1 Williard, Amanda Southwood 8 Woditschka, Stephan 12 Wray, Barry A 35 York, Reginald O 13 Zervos, George T 6

academic advising task force report july 15, 2017 advising task...relationship respectful of the...

Documents