ERIC EJ1164577: Perceptions of Effectiveness and Job Satisfaction of Pre-Law Advisors

2017·0.26 MB·English

by  ERIC

Perceptions of Effectiveness and Job Satisfaction of Pre-law Advisors
H. Gibbs Knotts, College of Charleston
Claire B. Wofford, College of Charleston
Despiteplayinganimportantrole,preprofession- becomes very important for students considering
al advising has received little research attention. law school attendance. However, very little re-
For this study, 313 U.S. preprofessional advisors search has focused on undergraduate pre-law
were surveyed in 2015. Drawing on work advising. Furthermore, we do not know of any
adjustment and social cognitive career theories, study in which pre-law advising was examined
we analyzed the job satisfaction and perceived from the perspective of the advisor. In this study,
effectiveness of pre-law advisors. The major weusedworkadjustmenttheory(WAT)andsocial
findingsrevealthatadvisorshavingalawdegree, cognitive career theory (SCCT) to explore the
the ability to secure more resources, and a importance of attending to pre-law advisors’ own
commitmenttospendingsignificanthoursweekly senseofjobsatisfactionandefficacy.Our research
inadvisingtendtobemoresatisfiedandperceive was designed to provide information for both
themselves to be more effective in helping advisorsandinstitutionaladministratorsonwaysto
students gain admission to law school and improve pre-law advising programs.
preparing them for academic success than other
pre-law advisors. Other factors related to partic- Literature Review
ipant self-perceptions on advising future law Inhisclassic1972article,reprintedin1994and
students are also discussed. 2009, O’Banion explained that academic advising
includesfivecomponents:explorationoflifegoals,
[doi:10.12930/NACADA-16-006]
exploration of vocational goals, program choice,
KEY WORDS: pre-lawadvising, preprofessional course choice, and scheduling courses. O’Banion
advising (2009) wrote about the importance of beginning
withthefirsttwosteps,onexploration,notingthat
Students facing the decision to attend graduate, ‘‘many programs of academic advising flounder
medical, or law school weigh many factors, becausetheybeginatstepthree‘programchoice’’’
including the amount of time necessary to earn (p. 83). For O’Banion (2009), colleges should
an advanced degree, the cost of additional tuition focus on student development and provide the
and lost opportunities while out of the workforce, resources to help students address a fundamental
and the job prospects for graduates with advanced question:‘‘HowdoIwanttolivemylife?’’(p.83).
degrees.Academicadvisorscanplayavitalrolein Using similar rationale, the Council for the
helping students think about life after college and Advancement of Standards in Higher Education
the decision to attend professional school. Munski outlined advising standards that include ‘‘prepara-
(1983) noted, ‘‘A growing number of undergrad- tion of students for their careers, citizenship, and
uates are asking academic advisors this question: lives’’ (2014, p. 5).
‘Which of these courses will help me get a job?’’’ Although general agreement about the impor-
(p. 17) More recently, research has shown that tance of a developmental perspective in academic
Millennialstudentsfeelpressuretoselectacertain advising remainselusive,Habley(2004) calledfor
major or pursue aparticularcareergoal,andsome a dual-advising model through which students
express ‘‘overly optimistic visions of their future receive guidance from both faculty members and
career options’’ (Montag, Campo, Weissman, primary-role advisors (see also, Montag et al.,
Walmsley, & Snell, 2012, p. 31). Preprofessional 2012). In this approach, advisors employed
advisorscanhelpstudentstemperexpectationsand primarily to advise can assist students in orienting
navigate the range of choices they face. tocollege,learninghowtoregisterforclasses,and
Throughthisarticle,weconsideraspecificand processing the majors on campus (Montag et al.,
timely type of preprofessional advising: pre-law. 2012). In contrast, faculty advisors provide ‘‘indi-
Applications to law schools are reaching 15-year vidualized attention to students, guiding them
lows(Kitroeff,2015),andthejobprospectsforlaw through career options, and connecting them to
school graduates remain gloomy (Harper, 2015); resources relevant to their major’’ (Montag et al.,
therefore, consultation with a pre-law advisor 2012, p. 32). Although some rely solely on the
76 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Pre-law Advisors
facultytoadvise,thedualadvisingmodelhasbeen McGill, & Menke, 2013; Rajecki & Lauer, 2007;
extended to some pre-law advising programs. Woolston, 2002). However, more study is needed
The dual model has receivedcriticism by some to better understand preprofessional advising on
higher education observers. Benjamin Ginsberg, a collegecampuses.Thisstudyfocusesonaspecific
political science professor at The Johns Hopkins subset of preprofessional advisors: pre-law advi-
UniversitytoldTheNewYorkTimesthat‘‘academ- sors.
ic advising should be done by academics . . . According to the Pre-Law Advisors National
professional advisers seldom have the qualifica- Council (2013), ‘‘The basic functions of the pre-
tions in the field about which they are offering law advisor include providing or identifying
advice’’ (Selingo, 2014, p. ED8). Charlie Nutt, appropriate resources concerning legal education
Executive Director of NACADA: The Global and the legal profession, and assisting advisees in
Community for Academic Advising, countered: thelawschoolapplicationprocess.’’Inthisarticle,
‘‘Whenitcomestohelpingstudentsbeengaged,to two keyaspects ofpre-lawadvising are examined:
givetheadviceaboutwhattheyneedtodooutside advisor job satisfaction and advisor effectiveness
the classroom, faculty are not always the best’’ as perceived by advisors.
(Selingo, 2014, p. ED8). In analyzing the preprofessional advising situ-
In terms of career advising, some faculty ation,wedrewuponbothWASandSCCTtoframe
advisors have created innovative approaches to the study. Originally articulated by Dawis, Lof-
help students think about life after college. For quist,andWeiss(1968)andthenupdatedbyDawis
example, some departments offer courses to help and Lofquist (1984), WATis used to focus on the
studentswithcareer-orientedadvisinginarangeof congruity of employees with their work environ-
disciplines, including geography (Munski, 1983) ments. The closer the match between an employ-
and political science (Collins, Knotts, & Schiff, ee’s skills, abilities, and values and the organiza-
2012). Nevertheless, the practical steps necessary tionalenvironment,thebettertheemployeeadjusts
to apply to a professional school may involve within the workplace (Bretz & Judge, 1994).
issuesnottypicallycoveredbyatraditionalfaculty WAT provides a way to assess and predict a
or primary-role advisor. variety of measures of vocational success, includ-
Tofillthevoidforstudentsseekinginformation ing job satisfaction (see, e.g., Dahling & Librizzi,
on graduate-level academic opportunities, many 2015; Hackman & Oldman, 1980; Hesketh &
college campuses employ a specific subset of Gardner, 1993; Locke, 1984; Lyons, Brenner, &
academic advisors known as preprofessional Fassinger, 2005). According to WAT, job satisfac-
advisors, who assist students planning to enter a tion is reached when the work environment meets
professional graduate program, such as law, theneedsoftheemployee.Thebettertheemployer
medicine, or health care. Preprofessional advisors provides the reinforcers that align with the
help students with a range of concerns, including employee’s needs and values, the more job
courseplanning,researchopportunities, andappli- satisfactiontheemployeewillexperience(Hesketh
cations to professional schools (see, e.g., Univer- & Gardner, 1993; Hesketh, McLachlan, & Gard-
sity of Cincinnati, 2016; University of South ner, 1992). In turn, the more satisfied the
Carolina, 2016). Graduate-level programs are employees, the lower the rates of employee
typically quite competitive, and preprofessional turnover and the higher the productivity expected
advisors can assist students in navigating the in the organization (Wright & Davis, 2003).
process and ‘‘stimulate an advisee to consider Perhaps not surprisingly, the adequacy of
[choices] in a way that he or she has not before’’ resources and time to complete tasks has been
(Richardson, 2013). identified as a key factor in predicting and
Despite the prevalence of preprofessional ad- enhancing job satisfaction among employees
visingandthepotentiallyimportantroleitcanplay across a range of industries and workplace
on college campuses, little research has been structures(Bozeman&Gaughan,2011;Kalleberg,
devoted to this topic. Studies have focused on the 1977; Mottaz, 1984, 1987; Rynes, Gerhart, &
experiences of ‘‘unsuccessful medical school Minette, 2004). Workers who have served in their
applicants’’ (Corder, 1982), advising in graduate positions for a relatively long time may be more
programs (see, e.g., Knox, Schlosser, Pruitt, & satisfiedwiththeirjobsbecausetheskillstheyhave
Hill, 2006; Schlosser, Lyons, Talleyrand, Kim, & gainedenablethemtoattainbetterjobrewardsand
Johnson, 2011), or discipline-specific undergradu- control their work environments (Hunt & Saul,
ateadvising(see,e.g.,Karr-Lilienthal,Lazarowicz, 1975; Kalleberg, 1977; Mottaz, 1987). Although
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 77
H. Gibbs Knotts & Claire B. Wofford
weexploredseveralotherfactorsaboutthepre-law Methods
advisorandtheinstitutionsinwhichtheywork,we We used the Fall 2014 Law School Admission
expectedthefactorsoftimeinthejobandaccessto Council (LSAC) Directory to compile the list of
resources to prove particularly helpful in under- possible study participants. The LSAC Directory
standing the job satisfaction levels of pre-law includesthenamesandcontactinformationoftwo
advisors. categories of advisors, sole/coordinating advisors
SCCT also provides a theoretical approach to and supporting advisors. Because we placed
understanding a variety of aspects of career emphasis on the experiences of the primary-role
development, including reasons and ways individ- advisors at each institution, only the sole/coordi-
uals select certain career paths and their perfor- nating advisors were surveyed. The LSAC Direc-
mance in their chosen occupations (Lent, 2005; tory also included some additional information
Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). Regarding job about the potential participants. For the entire
performance in particular, like WAT, SCCT population of pre-law advisors, 89.5% work at 4-
emphasizes the dynamic and interactive relation- year institutions and 10.5% work at 2-year
ship that exists between an employee, employee colleges. The LSAC Directory also listed the U.S.
behavior, and the work environment (Bandura, region where each pre-law advisor is employed:
1986). 10%intheMidwest,28%intheNortheast,11%on
Self-efficacy, the sense of an individual’s own the Pacific Coast, 20% in the South, 14% in the
‘‘capabilities to organize and execute courses of Southwest, and 7% in the West. It included
action required to attain designated types of information on the status of pre-law advisor
performances’’ (Bandura, 1986, p. 301), has been employersasminority-designatedinstitutions:Five
of particular interest to SCCT scholars. Self- percent work at Historically Black Colleges and
efficacy arises from a complex interplay among Universities, and 7% advise at institutions that
personal attributes of the individual employee, the belongtotheHispanicAssociationofCollegesand
employee’s overt behaviors, and the performance Universities.
domain in which the individual operates (Lent et The final list of potential research participants
al., 1994; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2005). Self- featured 1,396 valid e-mail addresses. The survey
efficacy is enhanced when an individual achieves was administered online to the identified pre-law
success with a specific task and declines with advisors in February 2015. The surveyentered the
repeated experiences of failure (Lent et al., 2005). field on February 4, and two follow-up e-mails
One’s answer to ‘‘Can I do this?’’ (Lent et al., were sent reminding pre-law advisors about the
2005) is directly connected to performance goals survey. We received 313 completed surveys for a
set by the individual, and thus, by the level of response rate of 22%.
performance. When combined with high outcome The respondents displayed a good mix of
expectations, a strong sense of self-efficacy regional diversity: 21, 31, 10, 21, 12, and 6% in
augments performance behaviors across a range the Midwest, Northeast, Pacific Coast, South,
of institutionalenvironments(Bandura,1986;Lent Southwest, and West, respectively. Most respon-
et al., 2005; Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998). dents identified as faculty members (76%), with
Scholarshavealsoidentifiedthevariousfactors 24% classified as staff. In terms of education, the
thatshapeself-efficacy.Alongwithanindividual’s majority held either a JD or PhD (62%), 19% had
personal traits (Bandura, 1986) and assessment of earned both degrees, and 18% had neither. In
the requirements of a particular task, the extent to addition, 60% of the respondents were male; 40%
which the individual has performed on similar were female.
tasks in the past appears to be relevant (Gist & Results from the completed surveys were
Mitchell, 1992). In addition, assessment of one’s supplemented with a data set of college character-
ability to complete a task successfully depends, in istics from College Results Online (The Education
part, upon the availability of resources, such as Trust,2015).Amongtherespondents,58%worked
funds and time (Bowen & Lawler, 1992; Gist & ataprivate,nonprofitinstitution,and42%worked
Mitchell, 1992; Spreitzer, 1996; Xanthopoulou, at a public college or university. The majority of
Bakker, Demerouti, & Schaufeli, 2009). As a respondents worked at 4-year institutions (96%),
result, we focused, in particular, upon resources, and 4% worked at 2-year colleges.
timespentonadvising,andthelengthofserviceas In terms of location, 75% of respondents
a pre-law advisor as likely factors in pre-law reported working in cities or suburbs, and 25%
advisors’sense of self-efficacy. wereemployedinruralareasortowns.Inaddition,
78 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Pre-law Advisors
45% of the schools offered master’s degrees, 30% particular, we also asked respondents how long
awardedonlybachelor’sdegrees,and24%granted they had worked as a pre-law advisor.
doctorates. Toassessjobsatisfaction,weaskedrespondents
to rate their level of satisfaction on a standard 7-
Instrument point Likert-type scale. Response options were
Todeveloptheinstrument,wedrewonourown very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neither satisfied
experiences as a department chair and as pre-law nor dissatisfied, satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied,
advisors. In addition, the inventory of questions andvery dissatisfied. Toexamine the effectiveness
was derived, in part, from existing research of variable, we asked respondents to rate their own
political science department chairs and relevant effectivenessinhelpingstudentsgainadmissionto
literature. For this project, we selected three law and school and the extent to which they
dependent variables associated with pre-law advi- believedthattheyhadpreparedstudentstosucceed
sors: job satisfaction, sense of effectiveness in in law school. We included the item on helping
helpingstudentsgainadmissiontolawschool,and students succeed in law school because we think
perception of their own effectiveness in helping that, despite eventually losing contact with most
students succeed in law school. We selected these undergraduateadviseeswhograduate,advisorscan
variables for severalreasons. We hoped to provide help prepare students entering law school for the
new information about the happiness of pre-law academic challenges they will face. In particular,
pre-law advisors can assist students in improving
advisors with their own work and their self-
study skills, time management, and networking
perceptions on their success in guiding students
abilitieswithclassmatesandfacultymembers,and
interestedinlawschool.Becausejobsatisfactionis
they can help with work-life balance, the mastery
related to employee retention and productivity
of which contributes to successful academic
(Cooper, Knotts, McCord, & Johnson, 2013;
performance in a graduate program.
Wright & Davis, 2003), we expected administra-
Bothitemsoneffectivenesswerepresentedas7-
tors to show interest in the satisfaction of pre-law
factor Likert-type scales: very effective, somewhat
advisors. We also asked about participants’ feel-
effective, effective, neithereffective nor ineffective,
ings of self-efficacy because this factor has been
somewhat ineffective, ineffective, very ineffective.
tiedtolevelsofjobperformance(Gist&Mitchell,
Asareliabilitytestforthedependentvariables,we
1992;Stajkovic&Luthans,1998).Inaddition,we
computed two Cronbach’s alpha statistics. The
were interested in whether the same factors that
Cronbach’s a for the two effectiveness measures
explain job satisfaction and self-efficacy for other
was .718, and the Cronbach’s a across all three
employeesapplytopre-lawadvisors.Moreover,we
dependent variables was .696. In both cases, these
wantedtogenerateinsightintotheprecisewaysin
results indicate a high degree of internal consis-
which pre-law advisors and others in institutions
tency across the measures of dependent variables.
mightbetteradvanceadvisingandstudentsuccess.
Contributing to assured content validity after
In terms of the independent variables, we
the initial construction of the pre-law instrument,
focused on the degree-earning background of the
survey research experts and pre-law advisors at
advisor (e.g., JD, PhD, or both) and whether he or
several institutions inspected the drafted question-
she held a faculty or staff position. Because of
naire. Their comments on the reliability and
debatesover thevalue of the dual-advising model,
validity of the measures and feedback on ways to
we expected the responses to provide insight into improve wording were received and incorporated.
the numbers of pre-law advisors on the faculty or For example, we adopted several suggestions for
on staff and whether this status shaped their items on the institutional characteristics of respon-
reported levels of satisfaction or perceived effec- dents’ workplaces, and we improved the survey
tiveness. response options for the dependent variables. The
In addition, we were interested in the applica- measureofjobsatisfaction,althoughasingleitem,
bility of factors that might explain job satisfaction demonstratedgoodconstructvalidity.AsBozeman
andself-efficacy,ingeneral,ofpre-lawadvisors,so and Gaughan (2011) reported, employing a Likert
we included a series of questions related to the scaletoanswerquestionsonjobsatisfactionlikely
budget, financial compensation for pre-law advis- produces both reliable and valid results (pp. 168,
ing duties, the amount of time spent advising, and 171).Themeasureofjobeffectivenesswasworded
the adequacy of resources. Because of the in a straightforward manner and was based on the
relevance of past performance to self-efficacy, in Likert scale often seen in the relevant literature
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 79
H. Gibbs Knotts & Claire B. Wofford
Figure 1. Job satisfaction among pre-law advisors
(see, e.g., Bandura, 1986). More details about the response category) for this question. For the other
survey,includingquestionwordingandcoding,are category, 22% of respondents indicated that they
featured in the Appendix. are somewhat effective in helping students gain
admission to law school. Approximately 5% of
Results
pre-law advisors selected the neutral response
Thefindingsonthefirstobjective,todetermine
categoryorindicatedsomelevelof ineffectiveness.
the level of job satisfaction among pre-law
Wealsoexaminedpre-lawadvisors’perceptions
advisors,areshowninFigure1.Oftherespondents
about their ability to help students prepare for
to this survey, 20% reported being very satisfied
academic success in law school. The responses to
andnearly36%reportedbeingsatisfied,represent-
this question are presented in Figure 3. Approxi-
ing the modal category. In addition, 24% of
mately 22% of respondents indicated that they are
respondents reported being somewhat satisfied.
very effective and 36% reported that they are
We also studied the perceived effectiveness of
effective.Inaddition,22%ofrespondentssuggest-
pre-law advisors. Perceived effectiveness was
edthattheyaresomewhateffective,and18%chose
examined via two different questions on helping
aneutralresponse.Veryfewrespondentsindicated
studentsgainadmittancetolawschoolandfinding
thattheyareineffectiveinhelpingstudentsprepare
academic success in law school.
Figure 2 shows the responses to the question for academic success in law school.
about respondents’ perceptions of effectiveness in Wealsoinvestigatedthefactorsthatmightmake
helping students gain admittance to law school. pre-law advisors feel more or less satisfied with,
Slightly more than one third of respondents and effective at, their jobs. We computed three
reported being very effective, and nearly 39% regression models to predict individual advisors’
indicated that they are effective (the modal job satisfaction and the self-assessments of their
80 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Pre-law Advisors
Figure 2. Effectiveness self-rating of helping students gain admission to law school
effectiveness in advising students for admission to mine the degree to which a particular variable
and success in law school. affected respondents’levels of job satisfaction and
Because of the ordinal nature of the dependent perceptions of effectiveness.
variables,weusedanorderedlogitmodel.Because We modeled advisors’ reported levels of job
of the skewed distribution of the dependent satisfaction. The results from the two-tailed tests
variables, we re-coded them as dichotomous (0¼ arelistedinTable1.Asshowninthetable,fourof
neither/somewhat effective, 1 ¼ effective/very the independent variables were significant. In
effective; 0 ¼ neutral/somewhat satisfied, 1 ¼ particular, advisors who served longer as a pre-
satisfied/very satisfied), and then, as a precaution, law advisor (p , .10), spent more hours on
we included themin a scobitmodel toaccount for advising (p , .05), possessed more adequate
the skewness. The results did not change in any resources (p , .01), and held a JD (p , .10)
meaningfulway from those reported herein. reportedhigherlevels ofjobsatisfactionthantheir
The independent variables included the pre-law peers who rated these areas with lower scores or
advisor status as faculty or staff, number of years did not have a JD. The enrollment, SAT scores,
advising pre-law students, the (self-reported) Carnegie classification (The Carnegie Classifica-
adequacy of the advisor’s resources, the degree tionofInstitutionsofHigherEducation,2017),and
earned (i.e., a JD or not), the Carnegie classifica- theinstitutionaspublicorprivateappearedtoexert
tion(TheCarnegie ClassificationofInstitutionsof no effect on advisor satisfaction.
HigherEducation,2017)oftheinstitution,statusas The predicted probabilities indicated that ade-
publicor private,numberofstudentsenrolled,and quacy of resources exerts the largest substantive
the average SAT score at the respondents’ influence on pre-law advisor job satisfaction. As
institutions. To ease interpretation of results, theamountofresourcesrosefromtheminimumto
predicted probabilities were calculated to deter- the maximum, the probability of advisors rating
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 81
H. Gibbs Knotts & Claire B. Wofford
Figure 3. Effectiveness self-rating of helping students achieve academic success in law school
themselvesasverysatisfiedrosefrom0to48%,an being very satisfied rising from 10 to 40% as the
increase of almost 50 percentage points. The number of hours rose from the minimum to the
impact of the number of hours spent advising maximum. Advisors serving the longest and those
was also relatively large, with the probability of with a JD were more likely to rate themselves, by
as many as 6 percentage points, as very satisfied.
Table 2 displays the results for the two models
Table 1. Advisors’self-reported job satisfaction
of perceived job effectiveness. As shown in the
by ordinal logit regression (N¼224)
table,thenumberofhoursspentadvising(p,.01)
Factor Coefficient (SE)
and the adequacy of the budget for advisors (p ,
Years Served .020* (.013) .01) were significant predictors of advisors’ self-
Hours Advising .043** (.020) assessment for both effectiveness measures. The
Resources .808*** (.094) lengthoftimespentasadvisor(p,.05)wasalsoa
Faculty (cid:2).006 (.346) significant predictor of the advisors’ perceived
JD .459* (.266) effectivenessinhelpingstudentsgainadmissionto
Carnegie .145 (.222) law school; longer-serving advisors rated them-
Enrollment .000 (.000)
selves as more effective than did peers with less
Public .930 (.378)
advisingexperience.However,thisfactorwasnota
City/Suburb .455 (.342)
significant predictor of the perceived effectiveness
SAT Score .000 (.000)
of helping students succeed in law school.
Note. *p , .10. **p , .05. ***p , .01 (two- In terms of the advisor’s background, status as
tailed test). Carnegie classification comes facultyorstaffprovedanonsignificantpredictorof
from The Carnegie Classification of pre-law advisors’ self-perceived effectiveness in
Institutions of Higher Education (2017). helping students gain admission to law school.
82 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Pre-law Advisors
Table 2. Advisors’self-assessment of effective- spent advising rose from the minimum to the
ness in helping students gain admission maximum possible, the probability that advisors
to and achieve academic success in law rated themselves as very effective at helping
school students gain admission to law school rose from
Academic 16 to 95%, an increase of nearly 80 percentage
Admission to Success in points. The percentage of advisors who reported
Factor Law School Law School helping students succeed in law school increased
less than it did for reports of assisting students
Years Served .027** (.013) .018 (.013)
gaininglawschooladmittance,from11to74%,or
Number of .123*** (.025) .081*** (.020)
63percentagepoints,accordingtothechangefrom
Hours
the minimum to the maximum number of hours
Resources .457*** (.083) .328*** (.078)
devoted to advising.
Faculty .297 (.370) 1.67*** (.378)
The amount of resources available for pre-law
JD 1.01*** (.283) .558** (.259)
advising also exerted significant influence. For
Carnegie (cid:2).570** (.236) (cid:2).551** (.218)
assisting students with law school admission,
Enrollment .000 (.000) .000 (.000)
advisors who rated themselves as very effective
Public .268 (.365) .563* (.360)
City/Suburb .332 (.345) (cid:2).651* (.336) rosefrom8to55%astheresourcesvariablevalue
SAT .000 (.000) .000 (.000) rose from the minimum to the maximum. For
N 225 224 helping students succeed in law school, the effect
was almost as large, rising from 6 to 31% as the
Note. Entries are ordinal logit regression
resources increased from the minimum to maxi-
coefficients with standard errors in
mum possible.
parentheses. Carnegie classification comes
Thedataindicatethatearningalawdegreealso
from The Carnegie Classification of
affects advisor perceived effectiveness. Advisors
Institutions of Higher Education (2017).
with a JD reported that they are very effective at
*p , .10. **p , .05. ***p , .01. (two-
helping studentsaccesslaw school,by22percent-
tailed test)
age points, and they indicated being veryeffective
at helping students succeed in law school, by 9
However, it was significant and positive (p , .01)
percentage points, over those without the JD.
for advisor ratings of themselves as helpful in
Advisors who work at doctoral-granting institu-
students’successinlawschool.AdvisorswithaJD
tionsratedthemselvesasveryeffectiveatassisting
were more likely to rate themselves as more
students with law school admission, by 20
effective in helping students gain admittance to
percentage points over those at bachelor’s degree–
lawschool(p,.01)andsucceedinginlawschool
granting schools; for helpings students succeed in
(p , .05) than advisors without a JD.
law school, the difference was approximately 15
The negative and significant coefficient for the percentage points. Finally, advisors who work at
Carnegie variable (The Carnegie Classification of public institutions were more likely to rate
Institutions of Higher Education, 2017) indicates themselves as very effective at helping students
thatadvisorsatundergraduate-onlyprogramsrated perform well academically in law school, by 10
themselves as more effective at assisting students percentage points over advisors who work at
with both admission to and success in law school private institutions.
than those at institutions that offer master’s degree
or doctoral programs. Pre-law advisors who Conclusion
worked at public institutions rated themselves as Preprofessional advisors play a key role on
more effective in helping students succeed in law manycollegeanduniversitycampuses.Therefore,
school(butnotingainingadmission)thanadvisors the various ways these advisors carry out their
at private institutions. The average SAT score and dutiesandthewaysinstitutionscanbettersupport
enrollment numbers were not significant predic- their efforts remain important. This study provid-
tors. ed new information about one subset of prepro-
The predicted probabilities show that the fessionaladvisors,pre-lawadvisors,theirlevelsof
numberof hoursspentadvising created the largest job satisfaction, and their self-perceptions of
effectonratingsofparticipants’owneffectiveness. helpfulness in advising students interested in law
As the variable capturing the number of hours school.
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 83
H. Gibbs Knotts & Claire B. Wofford
Resultsshowthatmostofthepre-lawadvisors Although beyond the scope of this study, the
in this study reported being quite satisfied with factors identified may prove important as pre-
their positions. The level of satisfaction seems to dictors of student perceptions of advisor effec-
depend primarily on the amount of resources the tiveness. In future studies, researchers might
advisor can access, and to a lesser extent, the include investigations of other types of prepro-
amount of time the respondent spends advising. fessional advising, such as that related to pre-
More advisors with a JD or who have served a medical and pre-dental student admissions and
relatively long time reported being more satisfied success.
than their less tenured peers and those without a Like all research, our study was limited by
JD. In an interesting finding, despite differences specific aspects of the chosen approach. Although
in perceptions between both groups, faculty we sought to ensure that the responses were
membersdidnotexpressmoreorlesssatisfaction representative of the larger population of pre-law
thanstaffadvisors,nordidadvisorsatundergrad- advisors, a higher response rate would have given
uate, public, and large institutions report satisfac- us more confidence in the results. In addition,
tion levels meaningfully different than their some of the questions we asked were relatively
counterparts at other institutions. These findings blunt or contained concepts that might be better
suggestthat,regardlessofwhetherfacultyorstaff understood through alternative measurement strat-
are hired as pre-law advisors, higher education egies. In future work, scholars might explore the
administrators can enhance the job satisfaction of term resources in more detail; moreover, unpack-
pre-law advisors by providing enough resources ing the concepts of job satisfaction and self-
and giving them sufficient time to fulfill advising efficacy might provide interesting results in future
responsibilities. studies. As others noted, employees can be
Results on pre-law advisors’ perceptions of satisfied with and feel effective in certain aspects
effectiveness showed great similarity to job of their jobs and not others (Bandura, 2006;
satisfaction results and fit well with existing Kalleberg,1977).Morenuancedmeasuresofthese
research on self-efficacy. In this study, resources two concepts might enhance the validity of the
and the time spent advising proved the most results presented herein.
significant factors affecting self-perceptions of Althoughweincludedonlypre-lawadvisorsin
efficacy. However, the most important predictor this study, the findings speak to advising more
of perceived effectiveness was not resources (as generally.Thisstudyhighlightstheimportanceof
with job satisfaction), but the amount of time two important, albeit limited, resources: time and
devoted to advising. The more hours per week the money. The findings provide empirical evidence
participants spent on pre-law advising, the more that these resources affect both job satisfaction
effective they rated themselves as effective. and the perceived effectiveness of pre-law advi-
Advisors with a law degree and those at under- sors. Theory suggests that the correspondence
graduate institutions also considered themselves between the needs of employees and the organi-
more effective than their counterparts at other zation affect job satisfaction. Previous research
institutions and without the JD. In contrast to the also identifies an individual’s sense of self-
findings on job satisfaction, we found differences efficacy as important for career development and
between faculty and staff self-ratings: Faculty professional success. Practitioners should, when
members gave themselves higher effectiveness possible, attempt to obtain more time and greater
ratings for helping students succeed in law school resources. Our findings demonstrate that the
than staff did. However, faculty members did not presence of time and resources can increase the
rate themselves more effective in helping students levels of reward felt by pre-law advisors in their
gain admission to law school than staff did. positions and the quality of guidance they feel
Perhaps advisors with a JD rely on their personal theycanprovidestudents.Inaneraofdownsizing
experiencewithalegalorgraduate-leveleducation and consolidation, higher education leaders need
such that they express confidence in their abilities to consider the ways decisions about workload
to advise students about academic success; they and resource allocation affect advisors and
also may feel that they understand the skills advisees. If they want to improve the level of
necessary to succeed in high-level degree pro- job satisfaction and effectiveness among pre-law
grams. advisors, administrators might consider course
Future research could expand on this work by releases for faculty pre-law advisors, additional
measuring student perceptions of effectiveness. funding for pre-law advising programs, and
84 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Pre-law Advisors
increasingthenumberofformallydesignatedpre- Dawis, R. V., Lofquist, L. H., & Weiss, D. J.
law advisors on campus. (1968). A theory of work adjustment: A
revision. Minneapolis: Universityof Minneso-
References ta Press.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of The Education Trust. (2015). College results
thought and action: A social cognitive theory. online. Retrieved from http://www.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. collegeresults.org
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self- Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-
efficacy scales. In F. Pajaras & T. Urdan efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determi-
(Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. nants and malleability. Academy of Manage-
Greenwich, CT: Information Age. ment Review, 17(2), 183–214.
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler, E. E. (1992). The Habley, W. R. (2004). The status of academic
empowerment of service workers: What, why, advising: Findings from the ACT Sixth Na-
how, and when. Sloan Management Review, tional Survey (Monograph No. 10). Manhat-
33(3), 31–39. tan, KS: National Academic Advising Asso-
Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). Job ciation.
satisfaction among university faculty: Individ- Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work
ual, work, and institutional determinants. The redesign: Reading. Addison-Wesley, Boston,
JournalofHigherEducation,82(2),154–186. MA.
Harper, S. J. (2015, August 25). Too many law
Bretz, R. D., and Judge, T. A. (1994). Person-
students: Too few legal jobs. The New York
organization fit and the theory of work
Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.
adjustment: Implications for satisfaction, ten-
com/2015/08/25/opinion/too-many-law-
ure, and career success. Journal of Vocational
students-too-few-legal-jobs.html?_r¼0
Behavior, 44(1), 32–54.
Hesketh, B., & Gardner, D. (1993). Person
The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of
environmentfitmodels:Areconceptualization
Higher Education. (2017). Definitions. http://
and an empirical test. Journal of Vocational
carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/definitions.php
Behavior, 42(2), 315–332.
Collins, T. A., Knotts, H. G., & Schiff, J. (2012).
Hesketh, B., McLachlan, K., & Gardner, D.
Career preparation and the political science
(1992).Workadjustmenttheory:Anempirical
major: Evidence from departments. PS: Polit-
test using a fuzzy rating scale. Journal of
ical Science and Politics, 45(1), 87–92.
Vocational Behavior, 40(3), 318–337.
Cooper, C. A., Knotts, H. G., McCord, D. M., &
Hunt,J.W.,&Saul,P.N.(1975).Therelationship
Johnson, A. (2013). Taking personality seri-
ofage,tenureandjobsatisfactioninmalesand
ously: The five-factor model and public
females. Academy of Management Journal,
management. The American Review of Public
18(4), 690–702.
Administration, 43(4), 397–415.
Kalleberg, A. L. (1977). Work values and job
Corder, B. W. (1982). The unsuccessful medical
rewards: A theory of job satisfaction. Ameri-
school applicant: A challenge in advising.
can Sociological Review, 42(1), 124–143.
NACADA Journal, 2(1), 48–51.
Karr-Lilienthal,L.K.,Lazarowicz,T.,McGill,C.
Council for the Advancement of Standards in
M., & Menke, D. (2013). Faculty advisors’
Higher Education. (2014). Academic advising attitudes towards undergraduate advising in a
programs: CAS standards and guidelines. college of agriculture and natural sciences: A
Retrieved from https://www.nacada.ksu.edu/ non-experimental study. NACTA Journal,
Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/CAS- 57(2), 35–44.
Advising-Standards.aspx Kitroeff, N. (2015, March 19). Law school
Dahling, J. J., & Librizzi, U. A. (2015). applications set to hit 15-year low. Bloomberg
Integrating the theory of work adjustment News.Retrievedfromhttps://www.bloomberg.
and attachment theory to predict job turnover. com/news/articles/2015-03-19/law-school-
Journal of Career Development, 42(3), 215– applications-will-hit-their-lowest-point-in-15-
228. years
Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A Knox,S.,Schlosser,L.Z.,Pruitt,N.,&Hill,C.E.
psychological theory of work adjustment. (2006). A qualitative examination of graduate
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. advising relationships: The advisor
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 85