ERIC EJ1164580: Using Systems Theory to Understand the Identity of Academic Advising: A Case Study

2017·0.1 MB·English

by  ERIC

Using Systems Theory to Understand the Identity of Academic
Advising: A Case Study
Sean Bridgen, Penn State New Kensington
For decades, advising practitioners and scholars normativetheoriesfromareductionistperspective.
have worked toward developing an identity for Systems theory provides a new alternative to
advising as a unique field of scholarly inquiry scientificreductionismforunderstandingacademic
and practice. To date, the identity crisis in advising (Banathy, 1996b; Checkland, 1981).
advising remains. This study presents an exam- Researchers of advising have borrowed ideas
ination and description of the function, purpose, from the social sciences and student development
and identity of a university advising system theory (Hagen, 2005; Schulenberg & Lindhorst,
through comparisons of ideals espoused by 2010). Since the late 1990s, advisors have pushed
advisors and administrators with practice. Based to engage in scholarship with the purpose of
on systems theory as a framework, this study developing a ‘‘professional, academic identity’’
shows that the identity of academic advising can (Schulenberg & Lindhorst, 2010, p. 24). As a
be misunderstood because of systemic issues. result, a few dominant paradigms have emerged
Addressing systemic flaws may help clarify the and shaped current theory and practice; however,
identity of academic advising within a specific these frameworks also contributed to an indistinct
system and possibly the field as a whole. identity of advising programs at institutions of
highereducation(Schulenberg&Lindhorst,2008).
[doi:10.12930/NACADA-15-038]
For example, in his landmark study, Crookston
KEY WORDS: academic advising, systems (1972/2009) drew a distinction between develop-
theory mental and prescriptive advising. He described
developmental advising as concerned with the
Despite ongoing efforts to define academic intellectual, psychosocial, and moral development
advising, the field continues to lack a distinctive ofastudentwhereasprescriptiveadvisingamounts
identity (Schulenberg & Lindhorst, 2010). When to form signing and paper pushing. In the
examined from a systems perspective, identity is significant aspect of his work, Crookston argued
defined by emergent functions or purposes. thatadvisingcanandshouldserveasanimportant
Although scholars and practitioners attempt to educative enterprise. Despite the long-term domi-
define advising theory, philosophy, and policy to nance as the advising paradigm in higher educa-
explainthewayadvisingoughttobepracticed,the tion, the developmental advising model has drawn
purposes and identity of a system is best considerable criticism from the advising commu-
understoodbysystembehavior,‘‘notfromrhetoric nity.
or stated goals’’ (Meadows, 2008, p. 11). Through In the late 1990s and early 2000s, researchers
a systems perspective, I examine and describe the beganpublishingquestionsaboutthedevelopmen-
functions, purposes, and identity of a university tal model as an adequate description of good or
advising system in which the ideals are espoused ideal advising practice is and should be (Hagen,
by advisors and administrators who practice at a 2005; Hemwall &Trachte, 2005, Lowenstein,
satellite campus of a large, public, multicampus 2005). In particular, Lowenstein (2005) argued
university. for learning-centered advising (p. 71) primarily
Examination from the perspective of systems concerned with student learning, and he also
theory provides a holistic view of advising. suggested that excellent advising looks much like
Understanding a particular system in this way excellent teaching. This notable challenge shifted
illuminates the strengths and weaknesses of the the paradigm from developmental advising to
systemasrelatedtothemissionandgoalsputforth teaching and signaled the emergence of other
bytheadvisingcommunity.Thisstudycontributes thought leaders in the field.
totheunderstandingofadvisingbecauseitreveals Hagen (2005) observed that academic advising
information about the way advising functions. To research need not be solely based on positivist
date, all published accounts of advising theory, epistemology. He explained that the way that
philosophy,andresearchdescribed constructionof scientists come to know and make meaning of
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 9
Sean Bridgen
phenomena does not encompass all ways to make Theoretical Framework
knowledge claims about advising; rather, advising Thetheoreticalframeworkofthisstudyisbased
scholars also employ hermeneutics (the study of on systems theory, which is an area of inquiry
interpretation), rhetoric, philosophy, narrative the- through which one attempts to understand the
ory, and other ways of knowing. Hagen (2005) wholeness of scientific and social problems. It
encouraged practitioners to renew their thinking speaks to ‘‘a constant yearning for understanding
about advising: ‘‘Once the metaphorical leap is the wholeness of the human experience’’ through-
made to view the student before you as a ‘text,’ out human history (Banathy & Jenlink, 2004, p.
thenallofthetruthclaimsofhermeneuticsbecome 40). In Western science, the quest to understand
available for your use’’ (p. 5). The literature wholeness began as early as Plato, continued
suggested that advisors, who come from a wide through the Enlightenment, and persists today.
rangeofacademicdisciplines,tapintothewisdom The systems movement has been the driving force
gained from their own fields and experiences to in understanding the wholeness of scientific
buildtheoriesuniquetoacademicadvising(Hagen, inquiry since the 1950s (Checkland, 2000).
2005; Lowenstein, 1999, 2005; Schulenberg & Scholars of systems theory maintain that all
Lindhorst, 2008). Musser (2006) offered an problems in the sciences (physical and social) are
example of a new approach in her description of fundamentallysystemicinnature(Hutchins,1996;
the used-systems theory as a construct to extend Meadows, 2008, Wheatley, 2006). Systems theory
the understanding of academic advising. is used to explain problems holistically, which
Musser (2006) established a foundational un- differs from the way in which Western science is
derstandingofthewayssystemsthinkingappliesto traditionally applied. To wit, Banathy (2006b)
advising. However, little else appears in the asserted that, because science became so special-
literature about advising in this context. Further ized since the Scientific Revolution of the 17th
study of college advising systems may reveal century, many investigators are ‘‘encapsulated in
emergent patterns in higher education systems. In their private universe’’ (2006, para. 5). Since
advocating for a systems examination, Banathy Descartes, scientists have solved scientific prob-
(1996a) suggested that lems by breaking them apart and continually
reducing them into increasingly smaller pieces.
people . . . cannot give direction to their The scientific method andthe practice of isolating
lives, they cannot forge their destiny, they and manipulating variables in controlled environ-
cannottakechargeoftheirfutureunlessthey mentscomposetheessenceoftraditionalscientific
alsodevelopcompetencetotakepartdirectly inquiry.
and authentically in the design of the This cornerstone of scientific inquiry, the
systems in which they live and work, and assumptionthatproblemscanbebrokenintoparts,
reclaim their right to do so (p. vii). causes practitioners of the method to overlook the
interactions and relationships between the parts;
InherkeynoteaddressattheNACADARegion2 thatis,theydonotconsiderwholeness.Checkland
Conference, Schulenberg (2010) challenged ad- (1981) argued that ‘‘systems thinking . . . starts
visorstotaketheleadinsuchreflection.Musser’s from noticing the unquestioned Cartesian assump-
workwasanimportantfirststepinusingsystems tion: namely that a component part is the same
theory to understand advising; this study contin- whenseparatedoutaswhenitispartofthewhole’’
ued this investigation. (p. 12). Furthermore, systems theory does not
exclude the method and practice of traditional
Research Questions science, but builds upon it. Systems theory shows
RQ1. How do administrators, faculty mem- the scientific method as valid but incomplete.
bers, students, and staff perceive the Systems theory complements, rather than ex-
purposes and functions of the advis- cludes, traditional science. To use an analogy, if
ing system at a specific university? scientific inquiry is used to examine phenomena
RQ2. What discrepancies, if any, character- under a microscope, those employing systems
ize the espoused objectives, policies, theory apply a wide-angle lens to see them.
procedures, and processes related to Systems theory offers researchers a means to
advising and the ways they are understand phenomena in a fundamentally differ-
enacted on a satellite campus of a ent way than does scientific inquiry; the former is
large, multicampus university? based on philosophical assumptions that differ
10 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Systems Theory
significantly from those that underpin traditional relatively open, delays in feedback may take
science. decades. Because of these large response times,
Two tenets of systems theory prove particularly changes made in a system can lead to counterin-
relevant to clearing up any confusion about the tuitive consequences.
purpose and identity of academic advising. First,
Research Methodology
complex social systems do not serve a single
purpose (Hutchins, 1996). According to Hutchins Iusedacasestudystrategytocollectqualitative
(1996),individualideasonthepurposeofasystem data.AccordingtoYin(2003),acasestudycanbe
differ such that a meaningful purpose cannot be usedtobetterunderstand‘‘contextualconditions—
attached to it. Furthermore, systems usually believingthattheymaybehighlypertinenttoyour
accommodate more than one purpose. Currently, phenomenon of study’’ (p. 13) Because one can
thepurposeofacollegedegreecanvarydepending onlyunderstandsystemsincontext,thecasestudy
on the point-of-view of the person asked about it. methodology proved an appropriate approach. I
Forinstance,abusinessleadermightbelievethata triangulatedfourdatasourcestoincreasereliability
college education prepares students for the work- and transparency, and I (a) reviewed extant
force,aprofessormightthinkthatitrepresentsthe documents from Mid-Atlantic University (MAU)
process of people learning to think critically to (pseudonym), (b) conducted semi-structured inter-
avoid being manipulated by power brokers (e.g., views with selected staff and administrators
business leaders). Many universities were founded associated with advising, (c) facilitated one focus
to carry out research, economic, service, or other group with a retention committee at the satellite
functions. In any case, the observer of the system campus, and (d) facilitated another focus group
defines the purposes of it. with undergraduates at the satellite campus. The
Thesecondprincipleofsystemstheory,thatone data were analyzed using an inductive approach
mustunderstandthewaysthepurposesofasystem andinterpretedthroughthelensofsystemstheory.
are realized to understand the system, also applies Thisstudywasconductedprimarilyatasatellite
toadvising.Ofcourse,theserealizationsarebased campus of MAU, a large public university with
on the subjective definitions of the purposes. In more than 90,000 students and over a dozen
addition, the underlying purpose of any living campuses distributed across one state. All of the
system,including asocial system,issurvival. One locations, including the main campus, operate
must acknowledge these assumptions when iden- under the same advising policies and procedures.
tifying purposes and determining theway they are However, the management in one centralized unit,
achieved within a system. the School of General Studies (SGS) oversees
System purposes are achieved through control academic administration of the campuses. MAU’s
mechanisms commonly called balancing or rein- foundational advising documents, such as the
forcingfeedbackloops.Abalancingloopmaintains Advising Handbook and Faculty Congress policy
stability in a system, and a reinforcing loop either papers, were intended to ground practice at MAU
increases or decreases the effect of incoming regardless of advisorlocation; however, leadership
information. A thermostat in a heatingsystemacts in each place enjoys independence to operate
as a balancing loop because it keeps the temper- within the established advising policies and takes
ature of an area within a preset range. An electric responsibility to implement advising under the
amplifier, such as used for a guitar, amplifies umbrellaMAUpolicy.Thegeographicdistribution
sound, so it acts as reinforcing loop, but a damper of the campuses creates mini-laboratories where
is used to attenuate vibrations of the strings and the espoused ideals of academic advising have
thusactsasanegativereinforcingloop.Thesesame been adapted to practice at each satellite campus.
feedback loops apply for modifying behaviors. Data were collected in two phases. Phase 1
These control mechanisms do not produce goals primarily included building rapport, gaining
immediate effects on systems; that is, responses permission, gathering documents for analysis, and
may be delayed. For example, when a thermostat identifying participants for the study. Creswell
ona homeheatingsystem isset at68degrees, the (2007) emphasized the importance of building
furnace often continues to run such that the rapport with gatekeepers at research sites, espe-
temperatureovershootsthesettingbyafewdegrees cially prior to case study research. Phase 2
beforethefurnaceshutsdown.Inmostphysicalor included specific data collection and analysis.
relatively closed systems, feedback delays can be During Phase 1, I gathered and analyzed data
relatively short, but in social systems, which are fromtheMAUacademicadvisingpolicy,websites
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 11
Sean Bridgen
of the Academic Advising Board, and the Council addition to the Director of Advising, the other
ofDeanstodeterminetheobjectives,policies,and focus group consisted of staff from the offices of
procedures of the advising system. Residence Life, Financial Aid, Athletics, Bursar,
Phase2ofdatacollectionconsistedof16semi- and Learning Support.
structured one-on-one interviews and two focus To identify the stated objectives and policies
groups. Participants from both the main and related to academic advising, I read, summarized,
satellitecampuseswereinterviewed.Atthesatellite andparaphrasedthepoliciestoprotecttheidentity
campus, the interviewees included of the institution. To identify similarities and
differences between data from the participants
(cid:2) 5 faculty advisors;
and the way that advising is defined in policy, I
(cid:2) 3 administrators, the Campus Dean, the
compared the summarized policies to the data
Associate Dean of Academics, the Asso-
collected from the interviews and focus groups. I
ciate Dean of Admissions;
interpreted the data through the lens of systems
(cid:2) 3 professional staff, the Registrar, the
theory using Hutchins’s (1996) principles of
Director of Financial Aid, the Director of
systems theory.
Advising; and
(cid:2) 1 support staff member.
Reliability and Validity
In positivist research, investigators measure
The interviews at the main campus were con-
reliability to determine whether a repeated study
ducted with the
is expected to yield the same results as found the
(cid:2) Current Dean of Advising, first time it was conducted. According to Merriam
(cid:2) Retired Dean of Advising, (1988), ‘‘Reliability in the traditional sense seems
(cid:2) Associate Dean of Advising, and to be something of a misfit when applied to
(cid:2) Administrative Director of the School of qualitative research. . . . That is, rather than
General Studies (who oversees all aca- demandingthat outsiders get the same results, one
demic programming at the satellite cam- wishestoconcur that,giventhe datacollected,the
puses). results make sense—they are consistent and
dependable’’ (p. 170). Because the purpose of
The first focus group consisted of students at a
qualitativeresearchisto ‘‘describeandexplain the
satellite campus. To maximize variability of
world as those in the world interpret it’’ and
students in the focus group, I obtained a list of
‘‘reliability and validity are inextricably linked,’’
200 randomly selected students from the Campus
qualitative researchers can establish reliability by
Registrar.Isubsequentlycontactedeachbye-mail.
establishing internal validity (Merriam, 1988, p.
One student responded, and he was ultimately
171). For qualitative research, one can use one of
unabletoparticipate.Asaresultofthisdifficultyin
several methods to establish internal validity, and
recruitment,Iinvitedstudentsviasocialmediaand
forthisstudy,Iuseddatatriangulationandmember
asked students in the campus dining hall to
checking.
participate; from these efforts, 4 students agreed
Through member checking, I attempted to
to an interview. Two students were advised by
confirm the interpretations of the data with those
faculty members who only advise students intend-
from whom the data were gathered. Member
ing to complete degrees at the main campus. One
checking can help clarify meaning and minimize
studentwasadvisedbyaprofessionaladvisor.One
participant was advised by a faculty member who misunderstanding between a researcher and a
teaches in the satellite campus 4-year program in participant. The researcher engages in ongoing
which the student was enrolled. Thus, a total of 4 member checking throughout the data collection
students participated in the focus group. phase of the study (Merriam, 1988).
Duringthecourseofthedatacollectionprocess, To ensure reliability for case study designs, a
I learned of a campus committee created to help researcher not associated with the initial study
increaseretentionrates.Participantssuggestedthat mustbeabletoundertakethesamecasestudyand
the people from this committee might offer obtain similar results to the original research. To
appropriatedatafor thisstudy.Stafffromthrough- ensure that the original and any follow-up studies
outthecampusservedonthiscommittee,andthey remain identical and accurate, errors and biases
all interacted with the academic advising system must be minimized in the first investigation (Yin,
because of the nature of their work. Therefore, in 2003). To meet these goals for reliability, the
12 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Systems Theory
researchermustcarefullydocumenttheprocedures the cooperation of administrators, the participants
and develop a case study protocol. may have responded differently than they would
withinterviewerstheydidnotknow.Tocontrolfor
Data Analysis
thispotentialofparticipantstoanswerguardedlyor
Data collection and analysis in descriptive case incompletely, researchers must build trust with the
study research are conducted simultaneously and participants and create a safe, nonjudgmental
continuously; that is, the data collection and environment for honest sharing.
analysis phases are undertaken at the same time Other limitations relate to participant response.
andbuildoneachother.Duringthe courseofdata Only four students volunteered to participate. In
collection and analysis, research questions are addition, every faculty advisor who participated
commonly refined, and data collection strategies reported that they value academic advising.
are often changed during the study as new Participation from faculty advisors who do not
information emerges. In this study, the research valueadvisingmayhaveaddedotherdimensionsto
questions did not need to be refined. the data.
According toYin(2009),fourstrategiescanbe
employedinanalyzingcasestudydata.Inthemost Findings
appropriate strategy for this study, ‘‘developing a The data collected in this study suggest
casedescription’’(p.131),theresearcherdescribes discrepancies between the way that the MAU
the findings within the context of a specific advisingsystemisdesignedtowork,asarticulated
theoretical framework. Yin (2009) advocated for in documented policies, and the way in which it
this approach when ‘‘the original and explicit functions as reported by participants. Faculty
purposeofthecasestudy[is]adescriptiveone’’(p. members, students, staff, and administrators indi-
131). catedthattheyperceiveamisunderstandingamong
Allone-on-oneandfocusgroupinterviewswere thoseinthecampuscommunityaboutthepurposes
recorded with a digital audio recording device. A and functions of academic advising. The sole
transcription service transcribed the audio record- professional advisor at the satellite campus and
ings. Using Nvivo 10 (QSR International, 2014), advising administrators at the main campus
all interview data were coded using a two-step expressed a shared understanding of the purposes
process. During the first step, I coded data to of advising and the way that the advising system
correspondtotheresearchquestionsforthisstudy. was designed to function, and they acknowledged
Then, I used open coding to identify themes and that the system does not function the way it was
subthemes that emerged within the data. intended.
The categories established were purposes of The university-wide academic advising policy
advising and function of advising. The categories was passed by the MAU Faculty Congress in the
were divided into the components of Hutchins’s 1970s,andithasbeenrevisedseveraltimes.Partof
(1996) framework for systems theory to (a) the policy defines the purposes of academic
describe the aspects of the advising system, (b) advising.Section1statesthepurposesofacademic
explainthewaycomponentsofthesysteminteract, advising:
(c) determine whether the system is effective and
the reasons for it working as intended, and (d) (cid:2) help students to set and achieveacademic
identifytheextenttowhichthesystemfunctionsin goals,
practice compared to the ideal as articulated in (cid:2) promote intellectual development and
archival documents. learning in and out of the classroom, and
(cid:2) encourage independent learning and aca-
Limitations of the Study demic decisions.
Because of the qualitative nature of this study,
thefindingsarenotgeneralizable,whichmakesup These purposes suggest that the university leans
the primary limitation of the research. In addition, toward using a developmental or learning-cen-
becauseoftimeandfinancialresourcerestrictions, teredapproachtoacademicadvisingratherthana
only one satellite campus and specific offices on predominantly prescriptive model.
the main campus were studied. Also, I had Among the participants, academic advisors and
professional relationships with some participants advising administrators expressed the deepest
at both sites, and although these connections understanding of the purposes of academic advis-
enabled me to gain access to the sites and obtain ing,andtheir reportedperceptionsofthepurposes
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 13
Sean Bridgen
of advising most closely aligned with the stated between what we dowith an individualwho
MAU goals and those reflected in the advising can say, ‘‘I learned these things and this is
literature. For example, they spoke frequently what’s important to me and this is why my
about the centrality of advising in a student’s higher education was valuable.’’ Regardless
educational experience and the ways that advising of the job they have or whatever, if they
can help students make connections between could say ‘‘this is why this was valuable,’’
courses and across the curriculum, which are then they raise kids in a different way. And
associated, in general, with a learning-centered or they make voting decisions in a different
developmental advising model. Although faculty way.Andwecanchangetherhetoricofwhat
advisors, nonadvising administrators, and other it is to have an educated citizenry. But, one
staff also acknowledged that advising entails more personatatime.Seeingthemeaninginwhat
than scheduling, their views became evident only they did, but it wasn’t just jumping through
in response to probing questions about it. Themes hoops and checking things off a list.
that emergedfrom theirimmediate responseswere
keeping students on track to graduate on time, TheDirectorofAdvisingatthesatellitecampus
retention, and career advising. All participants had aviewof academic advising similar to that of
were concerned about the low retention rates at the administrator at the main campus, and she
MAU. The Director of Advising stated that ‘‘it all identified the primary purpose of advising as
comesbacktoenrollment.’’Thebudgetisbasedon teaching. She emphasized that academic advisors
total enrollment, so when enrollment is down, play a key role in helping students engage in their
administrators feel pressure to increase retention educational endeavors. Although she explicitly
rates. stated that the purposes of advising are teaching
Professional advisors and advising administra- and student engagement, during her elaboration,
tors also discussed the importance of the role of the Director consistently stated that retention was
advisors with regard to retention and degree ultimately a function of academic advising at the
completion, but their responses were nuanced. campus.ThefollowingquotesfromtheDirectorof
They spoke of the importance of those issues as Advising capture this sentiment:
well as concerns aboutstudent debt with regardto
time to completion. However, advisors considered (cid:2)‘‘The more engaged we know our students
these functions as byproducts of good advising are,themorelikelywearetoretainthem.’’
rather than as the primary purposes of advising. (cid:2)‘‘Ithinkifthatengagementfromtheadvisor
Onemaincampusadvisingadministratorputitthis was effectivewith every student in that, it
way: would certainly help with retention.’’
Inmyview, Ithinkthepurposeofacademic Concluding her thoughts about the purposes of
advising is to facilitate students’ planning advising on campus, the Director of Advising
and executing a meaningful education. And admitted that retention remained the primary goal,
that’s it. Underneath that a whole bunch of reflectingthe positionof the nonadvisingstaffand
other very complex things. But fundamen- administratorsatthesatellitecampus.Althoughthe
tally, it’s about students being intentional Director of Advising understood the ideals of
abouttheireducationandbeingawareofthe advising as professed by policy and advising
opportunities and making decisions that administrators at the main campus, the pressures
mean something to them. That’s really it. of enrollment and retention resulted in advising
being viewed primarily as a retention tool at the
satellite.
Ispentalotoftimethinkingaboutwhatitis Similar to the verbiage from the Director of
we’resupposedtobeaccomplishing,howwe Advising, faculty advisors at the satellite campus
change students’ lives, how we could, over discussed the importance of advising for encour-
the long-term, by changing individual stu- aging students to engage and to make meaning of
dents’ lives have an impact on our higher their curriculum; the message comported withthat
education institutions, on society and other from main campus advising administrators and
things like that. I actually think it sounds advising policy. However, the advisors placed
ridiculous maybe, but I see a connection greater emphasis on advising as a retention tool
14 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Systems Theory
than on the stated policy. One faculty advisor’s studentsthat’sallthatmatterstothem.Inthe
viewencapsulatedthesentimentsoftheothers.He degree[Iadvisefor]wedohave12creditsof
described advising as a two-sided coin, with one what’s called consultation with advisor that
side being mechanical and the other side being are courses; I call it kind of a mini minor,
philosophical. He explained that the mechanical courses that enhance the degree but aren’t
side shows concern for timely completion of required for the degree. I try to get them to
degree requirements and course scheduling and consider content. What kind of courses fit
that the philosophical side shows concern for together in that picture, but for a lot of
helping students connect their course selections to students they’re just not interested in that.
their academic and career goals, as articulated in
MAU statements. Crookston (1972/2009) and Because of their other responsibilities, most
others delineated these sides as prescriptiveversus facultyadvisorscannottakethetimeorexpendthe
developmental versus learning-centered advising energy to turn students away with instructions to
(Crookston 1972/2009; Hagen & Jordan, 2008; come back after they have prepared for the
Lowenstein, 2005). Despite the admitted impor- meeting. The time crunch, coupled with students’
tance of the philosophical side, the mechanical littleinterestindiscussingthephilosophicalsideof
(prescriptive) side remains the focus of the advising, results in advising appointments that
advising practice at MAU. As the faculty advisor almost always focus on the mechanical aspects of
summarized: ‘‘So I think the theoretical and the advising.
philosophicalstuff ismoreimportant,butwedon’t Of the four students who participated in the
focus on it.’’ focus group, three were planning to finish their
When asked the reason that he was unable to degrees at the main campus, and one planned to
complete his degree at the satellite campus. These
focus on the philosophical aspect of advising, the
students also worked with different types of
faculty advisor stated that students come to
advisors. One student was advised by the Director
advising appointments unprepared; that is, he
ofAdvising;thestudentintendingtograduatefrom
claimed that they typically expect the advisor to
the satellite campus was advised by a faculty
tell them the classes they need to graduate and to
member who teaches in the student’s declared
buildtheircourseschedules.Furthermore,henoted
program;andtwostudentswereadvisedbyfaculty
that, in most cases, students do not want to have
members responsible for advising students who
morephilosophicaldiscussions.Anotheracademic
intend to complete degrees at the main campus.
advisorexpressedsimilarconcernsandfrustrations
These students were enrolled in different majors,
with the advising process:
and therefore, had different advisors.
ThestudentadvisedbytheDirectorofAdvising
Well,Iseeadvisingastohelpleadstudents,
very vocally spoke about the high quality of
but I think students see it as doing it for
advising she received. Her advisor was very
them.That’ssomething,especiallybecauseI
helpful in a number of ways, including in
have so many advisees that I do get
interpreting academic policy, in understanding her
frustrated with. I think a lot of the times
own strengths, and by suggesting courses to help
the students could do a lot of this on their
enhancehereducation.Thestudentenrolledinthe
own, and they just need confirmation that
satellite campus degree program had a similar
they’re going about it the right way, but
experience with his program faculty advisor. He
many of the students, for whatever reason,
stated,‘‘Idon’tthinkI’veaskedaquestionthatshe
justcomeinandexpectyoutodoitforthem.
didn’t...shewasn’tabletofindtheanswerorgive
That’s something I’ve been working with,
me the right direction or anything like that.’’
trying to give them more ownership over
One of the students who planned to complete
their degree. his degree on the main campus described a very
different experience than the advisees of the
Director of Advising and the program faculty
For a lot of students it’s very mechanical: member. He explained the reasons for displeasure
‘‘What are the courses that I need to with his interaction with his assigned advisor: ‘‘I
graduate? Who teaches it? What time is it haven’t had much advising experience. Recently I
at?Whatdaysaretheyat?DoIhavefriends had to drop a class and add another one, but my
who are in that course?’’ I think for a lot of advisor had like zero answers. I e-mailed her, and
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 15
Sean Bridgen
shewasjustlike,‘Idon’tknowwhattodo;gotalk eight-semester plans, and the university catalog),
to this person,’ and that was pretty much the base students should be relatively certain about the
of my advising.’’ courses theyneed to take, how to schedule them,
and those that satisfy specific requirements.
Discussion
Ironically, these tools were developed and
The two tenets of systems theory provide a provided to students so that advisors would have
useful framework for helping understand the more time to discuss philosophical issues.
identity of a system. The first tenet addresses the The system glitch for professional and faculty
multiple purposes of complex social systems advisorsstemsfromkeepingabusyscheduleand
(Hutchins, 1996), which are defined by the thus not turning away inadequately prepared
subjective interpretation of the people in the students and insisting they return only after
system. preparing for the meeting. In addition, the
pressure to retain students seems to result in a
Purposes of Advising as Reported by customer-service mentality through which the
Professionals advisors feel discomfort in holding students
The nonstudent participants interviewed for accountable. Advisors reported that, in some
this study reported multiple purposes for the cases, students do not demonstrate the ability to
advising system. They mentioned sustaining complete basic tasks, such as keeping a day
retention, enrolling students in proper courses at planner. One advisor reported that she spends
the correct time, teaching life skills, career significant time teaching students basic skills.
advising, and helping students with course While such training tangentially relates to the
selectionandmakingthemostoftheireducation. purpose of helping students to engage in their
Despite espousing similar purposes for advis- education, efforts dedicated to tutoring on
ing, professional advisors and nonadvising staff practical tasks prevent advisors from helping
andadministratorsexpressedverydifferentviews students develop intellectually, stated as a very
about the purposes of academic advising. Profes- important part of advising in the literature and
sional advisors see course selection, major university policy.
choice, and keeping students on track as by- Misperceptionsaboutadvisingheldbysatellite
products of advising. Administrators and the campus administrators and nonadvising staff can
professional advisor at the satellite campus did contribute to student misperceptions. For exam-
not mention retention as a purpose of advising; ple, a student who receives a class-selection or
however, when asked about the purposes of scheduling referral from an authority figure who
advising,theadministratorsandnonadvisingstaff views scheduling as a prescriptive advising
atthesatellitecampusclearlyprioritizedretention exercise might expect to receive only a list of
andkeepingstudentsontracktoreachtheirgoals. appropriate courses from the advisor. As a result
Professional advisors never mentioned career of erroneous presumptions about advising by
advising as a purpose of the advising system, thosemakingthereferrals,studentsmightneither
but faculty advisors, nonadvising staff, and anticipate nor engage in the kind of reflective
administrators reported it. process with an advisor that leads to the best
The faculty advisors interviewed reported a possible course-related decisions. This can result
desire to address more philosophical issues inthestudenthavingunfulfilledexpectationsand
related to advising and to spend less time on leaving an advising appointment feeling that the
advising mechanical in nature. The advising advisor was not helpful. Furthermore, these
literature characterizes the mechanical and phil- misunderstandings result in primarily prescrip-
osophicalgoalsasprescriptiveanddevelopmental tive, rather than developmental or learning-
advising, respectively (Crookston, 1972/2009). If centered, advising contrary to MAU policy.
they could prioritize philosophical aspects, advi- The faculty advisors, administrators, and non-
sor practice would align more closely with the advising staff showed no familiarity with the
advising goals as stated in MAU policy. Because advising literature and demonstrated little under-
students typically do not prepare for appoint- standing of the deep learning that the advising
ments, the advising sessions are dominated by policy advances. This lack of information stems
mechanical issues, such as checking degree from dearth of formal training about the theory
requirements and building semester schedules. and philosophy of advising. More problematic,
Withtheelectronictoolsavailable(degreeaudits, nonadvisors and campus administrators reported
16 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017
Systems Theory
advising purposes as more related to other have more time to doyour research . . . in some
functional areas, such as career services and way you’re being rewarded because you do not
learning support, than as helping students to set want to advise.’’ The tenure-track faculty mem-
academic goals, achieve intellectual development bers teachthree coursespersemester sothatthey
and learning, or engage in independent learning can dedicate more time to conduct research. The
and academic decision making. faculty members who do not enjoy advising are
In one of the most common responses, thus incentivized to practice less-than-excellent
advisors expressed the need to help students advising because students will seek out others
thinkaboutcareersandchoosemajorsthatleadto deemed better, thereby allowing the uninterested
certain careers. The participants mentioned pur- advisors more time to research. These two
poses more consistent with learning-centered or reinforcing loops, the positive one in which
developmental advising only when they were student access is increased and the negative one
directly asked about these purposes. In response through which research faculty members avoid
to the inquiry, the advisors agreed to the some advising responsibilities, characterize the
importanceoflearning-centeredordevelopmental means by which the advising system operates.
advising, but never offered goals of these Because of multiple demands on faculty
practices as purposes for advising despite ele- advisors, the increased time spent on advising
ments of these approaches embodied in the by good advisors counters their ability to discuss
published MAU advising policy. the philosophical topics encouraged by advising
policy. Compounding that dynamic, as explained
Effect of Reinforcing Loops on Advising by faculty advisors, many students arrive to
Musser (2006) explained Hutchins’s eighth appointments expecting their advisors to tell
principleofsystemstheory:‘‘Understanding how them the classes to take, keep track of their
a system achieves its purpose(s) is essential to degree completion, and build schedules suitable
understanding the system of interest’’ (p. 101). to them.
Advising purposes are achieved because some
advisors enjoy working toward the related goals. Retention as the Primary Goal of Advising
Faculty members at the satellite campus who do The emphasis on retention and keeping
notenjoyworkingonthese prioritiesdonotneed students on track for graduation overrides advis-
to advise or advise well because they are ing topics identified in the MAU policy, and
evaluated only on the number of advisees hence,persistenceoftenbecomestheonlysubject
assigned to them. discussed during an appointment. All study
As confirmed by one of the student partici- participants voiced concern about low retention
pants and the Campus Dean, students learn the ratesatthecampusbecauseenrollmentsaffectthe
identity of good advisors via word of mouth. budget. The campus Director of Advising con-
They seek the help of these good advisors rather cluded that ‘‘it all comes back to enrollment.’’
than those to whom they are assigned. This Advising issues that bubble up to the admin-
student behavior results in the effective advisors istration typically originate when a student
seeing more students than the advisors to whom perceives that the advisor has made a mistake
students were assigned. According to one faculty regarding course selection (despite a policy that
advisor,shehas70adviseesofficiallyassignedto clearly states students take responsibility for
her but she advises close to 120 students. In course selection). Because administrators get
systemstheory,thisiscalledareinforcingloop;in involved with advising only when complaints
the reality of this overloaded advisor, it is called surface, themessage that thepurposeof advising
‘‘good advising equals more advising’’ as stated primarily involves keeping students on track for
by the Director of Advising. graduation—retention—is reinforced. This rein-
Another reinforcing loop from the system forcing loop keeps the focus on retention over
dynamic of self-selecting good advisors means other important purposes.
that weak advisors to do less advising than Ironically, the university invests considerable
expected.Thisnegativereinforcingloopreinforc- resources to provide students with the tools they
es nonadvising priorities. For instance, formal need to ensure that they complete their educa-
incentives for the faculty are based on research, tional plans to graduation. Academic advisors
so as one faculty advisor noted, ‘‘[If] you are not fromtheAdvisingCollegetooktheresponsibility,
advising you are [doing less work], and thenyou withencouragementfromtheAcademicAdvising
NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017 17
Sean Bridgen
Board, to build 4-year semester plans for each of well, with technology not able to respond
the 160 majors at the university. In addition, the to the ‘‘human needs’’ components of
student information system includes a degree advising, academic advising finds itself
audit function, which generates a report of a surviving within an environment of dimin-
student’s academic record compared against any ishing student resources . . . and ironically,
degree that he or she has expressed interest in with greater student demands for contact.
completing. Furthermore, the university has (pp. 16–17)
dedicated much time and great attention to
develop and maintain various web sites with With rising tuition, low employment rates for
advising information for students and advisors recent college graduates, and disinvestment of
alike. The advising policy clearly states that public higher education, the need for advisors is
students must take ultimate responsibility for increasing. White and Schulenberg (2012)
scheduling the proper courses and checking their stressed the importance of advising assessment
own educational progress; the tools described to demonstrate to administrators that advising is
were created to aid in their self-management. If worth the investment. A rigorous assessment
studentsweretrulyheldresponsiblefortheirown programmustbeincludedasacrucialcomponent
progress such that they came prepared for in any advising system for determining whether
appointments, then advisors could spend more advising goals are accomplished.
time discussing the philosophical issues that can Toreachacademicadvisinggoals,allpersonnel
make advising the rich educational endeavor that associated with an advising system must be
the policy and advising literature define as the educated about the theory and philosophy of
purposes advising. advising so that they can understand the critical
Because advising is not formally evaluated or purposes of advising. If the people who interact
assessed, advisors receive feedback about advis- withthesystemdonotdeeplyinternalizethegoals
ing only when a student complains, which of the system, they will unlikely act in accordance
reinforces any anxiety about making mistakes. with the goals. Academic advisors must take
Because of all of the dynamics in the advising responsibility for the way that they practice
system, the primary purpose of advising at the advising. The necessary self-assessment and im-
satellite campus has emerged as prescriptive provement rely on measurable outcomes and
advising such that it effectively serves as the propertrainingsoadvisorscanbeheldaccountable
primary function of advising for many faculty for outcomes that are defined and explained;
members, staff, and students. expectationsforadvisingoutcomeswithoutproper
training or explanation would prove untenable.
Implications of the Study
Moreover, in this advising system study,
According to higher education researchers, advisors deemed ‘‘good’’ by students see more
academic advising makes up an essential compo- adviseesthanadvisorswithoutapositivereputation
nent for undergraduate education and student foradvising.Thetwothemesrelatedtothis,‘‘good
success (Kuh, 1997, 2010; Light, 2001; Low- advising equals more advising’’ and ‘‘advising
enstein, 2005; Schulenberg, 2010; Schulenberg & enables the weak to avoid advising’’ create
Lindhorst, 2010; White & Schulenberg, 2012). particularly problematic reinforcing loops because
White and Schulenberg (2012) explained: they reward unwanted behavior by enabling poor
advisors to see fewer students while earning the
Contemporary higher education faces in- same credit for advising as those who are deemed
creasing pressure from external sources to effective, who often receive overwhelming in-
demonstrate accountability. As support for creased advising workloads.
higher education dwindles at public institu- This unfair situation for good advisors also
tions, and as every program, service depart- harmsstudents.Asonestudentstated,‘‘IthinkifI
ment and unit may be asked to justify its had a helpful advisor like that I’d feel comfortable
existence; the activity of academic advising going to them to help me schedule, but after what
is not exempt from these pressures. With no happened the first semester, like, I know I
one (or thing) to replace the staff academic scheduled my second semester all by myself.’’ In
advisor, with faculty advisors stretched to other words, this student has decided to stop
their limits not only with advisees but with seeking the help of his advisor because of his
teaching and research responsibilities as experience with an advisor who did not want to
18 NACADA Journal Volume 37(2) 2017