Title:
Research versus Assessment: What's the Difference?
Victoria
A. McGillin, Dean, Wheaton College (Member, Advising
Assessment Commission; former chair, NACADA Research Committee)
One
frequent question heard from NACADA members is, "What's the difference
between research and assessment?" The following is an effort to
articulate both the overlap, and the distinctions, between these
two.
In
our workshop on advising research and grant proposal development
(available as PowerPoint slides at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/Research_Related/index.htm),
the NACADA Research Committee discusses the similarities and differences
between research and assessment. The following is a synopsis.
Goals
The
goals of experimental research and program assessment differ significantly.
While research focuses on the creation of new knowledge, testing
an experimental hypothesis, or documenting new knowledge, assessment
and evaluation focus on program accountability, program management,
or decision-making and budgeting.
That
is, while research is designed to document or measure a phenomenon
not formerly recorded, e.g. applying a new theory to an advising
encounter and documenting how well a model "explains" what is
going on between advisor and advisee, program assessment provides
information to your campus about whether you are achieving prescribed
goals, expending resources wisely or meeting a documented campus
need.
Methods
While
the methods employed in good program assessment and evaluation
may be similar to those used in good research, they need not be.
The range of methods employed in both may range from subjective
field observations through objective questionnaires. If your key
assessment question is how your campus advising compares to national
data on advising (such as the ACT survey), the use of a nationally-standardized,
reliable and valid instrument would be crucial to answering that
question. However, nationally-standardized instruments may not
always "fit" your campus as they may utilize differently-named
services or institutional structures not present. When an existing
measure just won't do, good research AND good assessment practices
call for the development of a reliable and valid new measure.
We must be wary of developing a "quick and dirty" measure in an
effort to just "get a quick answer" to our questions, without
taking the time to ensure our measures are reliable or valid for
our own campuses.
One
major methodological difference between research and assessment
is that researchers will "experimentally manipulate a variable"
(for example, randomly assigning students to one model of orientation
or another), while program evaluation tends to be non-random (we
rarely have the luxury of such random manipulation of our students).
At best, assessment just looks at "natural" differences that emerge,
such as comparing students who chose one orientation event over
another).
Results
Just
as experimental research and program assessment differ in their
goals, they also differ in the use of their results. Research
results are expected to be generalizable beyond one's own campus,
with implications for similar institutions or similar populations.
Program assessment results are applicable only to one's own campus.
While both are of great value, research should contribute new
knowledge to the field. When opening the NACADA Journal, you expect
documentation of research that began as an advising question and
culminated with statistically significant research of an advising
method, theory or programmatic intervention that you can apply
with some assurances of success.
Conversely,
program assessments are designed to be site-specific and crucial
for campus decision-making. Good program assessment ensures that
you are responsive to the changing (or unchanging) needs of your
populations. You may want to reuse the same measure each year
to document the high level of program success over time. Your
results may be particularly appropriate for the NACADA Journal's
Tool Box section that highlights examples of best advising practices
that link to current research in the field.
Finally,
while research should provide possible answers to identified questions,
it should also generate new research questions from the results.
For example, if one's data showed that both male and female students
were more critical of male advisors than female advisors, the
researcher would want to explore this research question further.
Assessment, however, looks for answers. Viewed from an assessment
standpoint, such results might lead to interventions, such as
additional training for male advisors and the desire to assess
the effectiveness of that intervention on one's campus.
Audience
Given
these differences, it is not surprising that there are vastly
different audiences intended for program assessments, as compared
to research. Assessment results are targeted for the key decision-makers
on your campus. When budgets are cut, new programs proposed or
accreditation rolls around, assessment/evaluation reports help
you make a case for your program. As I am fond of saying, "Whoever
gets to the table with numbers first, wins." The ability to produce
an executive summary of key assessment findings (no more than
2 pages) documents the effectiveness of your work and moves your
programs to the top of the funding lists, ahead of those supported
only by anecdotal information.
In
contrast, research is intended for the field of advising and higher
education as a whole. Your results will be read by many, debated
and critiqued, copied and expanded upon to generate even newer
knowledge. While a one-page executive summary submitted to your
dean may get you funding for a new advising initiative, your colleagues
outside your institution look for full documentation of the research
that led you to this question, the literature review of the theory
that guided your process, details on the methods you used, the
results (strengths and weaknesses) of this study, and the conclusions
you drew based upon your research . The 15-20 pages, with bibliography,
necessary for a published article, would only gather dust if submitted
as part of a funding request to most deans or VPs.
Connecting
It All
Let
me conclude by emphasizing the most crucial point of connection
between assessment and research. Good assessment/evaluation can
be expanded into good research. Good research should lead to even
better assessment procedures. Good assessment makes use of the
best conceptual and theoretical models and the best research measures
or methods. With valid and reliable measures, campus-specific
questions may have national implications. A phenomenon identified
on your own campus may be the cutting edge for an issue of significant
importance.
Finally,
find significant resources on advising assessment on the Assessment
of Advising Commission Web Page: http://www.advising.hawaii.edu/nacada/assessmentIG/aaig.asp.
We urge you to consult with the NACADA Research Committee http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/Research_Related/researchagenda.htm.
They seek cutting-edge proposals. Your assessments may lead to
a critical (and fundable) piece of research!
President's
Letter
Dear
Colleagues,
After
every NACADA National Conference, I return to my campus with a
true sense of belonging to a profession that has student learning
and development as its core value. I am reassured that I associate
with a diverse group of advising colleagues who approach their
life's work with this point of view or perspective. I am also
reassured that there is a professional association that has as
its focus the promotion of academic advising within higher education
along with the professional development of its members. These
beliefs shape how I think about NACADA, my colleagues and my work.
The
ideas of perspective/point of view and shared beliefs are an important
piece of a graduate seminar I teach titled "College Student Development
Theory and Practice." Throughout the course, the students and
I explore the ideas and concepts underlying various paradigms
and the impact these ideas have on theory, research and practice.
To guide our discussions, I use Guba's (1990) definition of paradigm
as - "an interpretive framework, a basic set of beliefs that guides
action" (p. 17). Together, through the examination of psycho-social/identity
development, cognitive-structural and typology theories, we hope
to arrive at a basic set of beliefs that will guide their personal
theories and practice as entry- level professionals.
NACADA
is developing a strategic plan that promotes a distinct mission
and reflects a shared set of beliefs. The plan will be an "interpretative
framework" that "guides action" as the leaders and membership
address the work of the association and ultimately the work we
all do in our educational contexts. Within higher education, NACADA's
role is to:
-
Champion the educational role of academic advising to enhance
student learning and development.
-
Affirm the role of academic advising in supporting institutional
mission and vitality.
-
Address
the academic advising needs of higher education.
-
Advance the body of knowledge of academic advising.
-
Encourage
the contributions of all members and promote the involvement
of diverse populations.
During
this next year, the leadership of the various NACADA Divisions
(regions, commissions/interest groups and committees) as well
as the Board of Directors will be calling on you, the membership,
to be involved in shaping our work, in shaping our goals and,
ultimately, in shaping our shared vision of NACADA. As President,
I encourage you to get in involved with the association. The Executive
Office staff, your regional chairs or the chairs of various commissions,
interest groups and committees can serve as your contacts and
information sources as you seek a meaningful way to connect with
your colleagues and with NACADA. We need your involvement, your
knowledge and your skill as we work to promote academic advising
and support the learning and development of our students.
In
closing, I hope to see many of you at the regional meetings this
coming spring where we can, once again, connect with colleagues
and explore our "advising paradigm!" Thank you for the important
work you do each day!
Best
wishes,
Ruth
A. Darling
President
NACADA
Guba,
E.G. (1990). The alternative paradigm dialog, In E.G. Guba (Ed.),
The paradigm dialogue (pp. 17-30). Newbury Park , CA
: Sage.
2nd
Annual Academic Advising Administrators' Institute
February
2-4, 2004
TradeWinds
Island Grand Hotel
St. Pete
Beach, FL
Topics:
-
Advisee/Advisor Ratios
- Assessment of
Advising
-
Benchmarking for Advising Programs
-
Budget Management/Financial Planning
-
Campus Connections/Campus Politics
-
Components of Successful Advising Programs
-
Evaluation and Reward
For complete
schedule go to:
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Events/AdminInst/index.htm
Assessment
of Academic Advising Seminar
February
5-6, 2004
TradeWinds
Island Grand Hotel
St. Pete
Beach, FL
Topics:
-
Definition and Types of Assessment
-
Planning for Assessment
-
Outcomes Assessment of Advising
-
Advising Program Assessment/Evaluation
-
Advisor Assessment/Evaluation
-
Strategies/Techniques of Assessment
-
Assessment Tools
For complete
schedule go to:
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/AssessmentSeminar/index.htm
The
Justification for Case Studies in Advisor Training and Development
Heidi
Koring, Chair
Advisor
Training and Development Commission
Training
and development of advisors becomes ever more central to the effectiveness
of the advising process with the increasing diversity and complexity
of our students' environments. While there is no "one-size-fits-all"
method for advisor training and development, case studies are
among the most useful items in the trainer's tool box.
Case
studies are an effective part of the training process whether
advisor training takes place as a single workshop, or as series
of continuing in-service meetings, or in formal presentations
or informal discussions. The use of case studies was pioneered
by the Harvard School of Business faculty in the late 1960's.
Currently used to enhance skills development of a variety of populations,
case studies add richness and complexity to advisor training,
reflecting the complex environment of contemporary college students.
Case studies not only help advisors come to grips with the ambiguities
and complexities of student development, but aid them in improving
human relations and problem solving skills. Case studies can be
used as exemplars of carefully defined problems, providing advisor
with opportunities to practice analysis of an advising situation.
Presenting a platform for addressing differences in advising styles,
case studies stimulate personal and professional growth and reflection.
Cases can be used with advisors at all levels of experience, engaging
them in discussion and simulating problem solving in real life
situations.
Good
cases are realistic and personalized to the advisors' milieu.
They are dramatic enough to engage the participants and ambiguous
enough to allow for multiple interpretations. To prepare effective
cases, collect anecdotes from advisors throughout the academic
year. Asking advisors to reflect in writing on difficult situations
can yield rich material for case studies. When turning the raw
material of experience into cases for training, it is wise to
assemble a team of stakeholders to read the anecdotes and discuss
the issues addressed in each. Simultaneously, develop a list of
resources that could help advisors address each case. Work from
the issues creating composite cases that address one main question
and at least one subordinate issue. If you are working from real
experiences, make sure that details are changed so the persons
involved in the original anecdote are not recognizable. Divide
cases into categories by issue for use when planning training
events.
Since
the traditional case study approach uses small or large group
discussion, begin with advisors enumerating the issues presented
in the case. Discourage any tendency to find easy closure by encouraging
participants to consider the case from different characters' points
of view. Ask "what if" questions. Consider locus of control and
responsibility issues. What aspects of the case are within the
advisor's locus of control? What aspects are not? Ask probing
questions about each character's motivation. Look for hidden agendas.
Use a team approach to problem solving by encouraging the exploration
of resource and referral possibilities. Discuss how college confidentiality
policies would affect each case. If appropriate, ask if the gender
or ethnicity of characters affect the outcome of the case. Explore
several related cases to develop the best practices or procedures
for dealing with a particular advising challenge, at your institution.
Less
traditional delivery methods can be used when approaching cases.
Enlist the cooperation of theater or broadcast majors to make
videos acting out specific cases. At some colleges and universities,
faculty and student organizations are eager to produce case study
vignettes as projects. The NACADA faculty advisor training video
contains eight brief vignettes, six of which show a developing
relationship between a first year student and a new faculty advisor
and two scenarios exploring the needs of adult students. If the
training event includes trainees who are comfortable with each
other, have participants role play cases. Begin an advisor training
electronic list which features one case a month for discussion.
To
stimulate your use of case studies with advisors, here's a scenario
that can be adapted to your institution for advisor training:
Lisa
is a first year student from a neighboring state. She attended
a competitive "magnet" school with a 90.3% average and 1200 SAT's
(27 Composite ACT). During orientation she tells you she's considering
a pre-veterinary science track because she loves animals. Her
midterm grades are B's and C's in calculus and biology. When she
meets with you at midterm, she slumps in her chair and doesn't
make eye contact. She's lost a lot of weight. Through her hesitant
replies, you learn that math and science are tougher than she
expected. She says she's dumber than she thought. She has a lot
of headaches and sleeps a lot. She's missing classes because she
says it doesn't matter if she goes. She tells you she's thought
about going home, but is sure her family would just say she's
a failure. Besides, her parents are getting a divorce and she's
not sure where she would live. She says she knows you can't help,
so maybe she'll just "give up."
-
What specific problems or issues are raised by this scenario?
-
What additional information might you need to handle the scenario?
How would you get it?
-
What problems or issues would you refer? How?
-
What problems of issues could you address yourself? How?
Want
to know how others are using case studies? The new monograph,
Advisor Training: Exemplary Practices in the Development of Advisor
Skills, features several Exemplary Practices utilizing case studies.
Find information at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Monographs/index.htm#train.
Heidi
Koring
Lynchburg
College
434-544-8235
koring@lynchburg.edu
Academic
Probation, Dismissal and Reinstatement Issues:
A
Research Challenge
Johanna
Pionke, Chair
Probation
Dismissal & Reinstatement Issues Interest Group
Why do
some students fail to succeed in college? What interventions are
most successful with these students? There is great demand for
research revolving around these questions. As chair of the Probation,
Dismissal & Reinstatement (PDR) Issues Interest Group, I challenge
you to approach your PDR students from a research perspective.
Students
typically do not come to college expecting to fail. Instead, most
enter college with the expectation that they will have the opportunity
gain knowledge that can help them earn a better living for themselves
and their families. Research verifies that students often believe
that there are few reasons why they will not succeed. They view
academic probation or dismissal as something that will not happen
to them.
Bartlett
(2002) cites the 2001 Cooperative Institutional Research Program
(CIRP) Annual Survey of Freshman Students showing that 44.1% of
freshmen reported earning "A" averages in high school. 57.5% of
freshmen estimated their chances of making at least a B average
in college as being very good. 76.5% of students expected to earn
a bachelor's degree while 20.8% thought they had a very good chance
of graduating from college with honors. Only 0.9% felt there was
a good chance they might drop out of college temporarily, while
0.7% felt chances were very good that they would drop out of college
permanently. Among this same cohort of students, 67.9% rated themselves
above average in academic ability, though only 45% ranked themselves
above average in writing ability and 44.2% ranked themselves above
average in mathematical ability.
Despite
students' positive attitude regarding their academic abilities,
many end up on the academic probation, suspension or dismissal
rolls. At the conclusion of each academic term, advisors, faculty
and administrators review these students' academic progress and
wonder why they were not successful. We look for ways to identify,
or predict, those who are at greatest academic risk so that we
may prevent their downward spiral. We question whether we should
intervene with students who are struggling academically, or if
it is better to invest time and
resources
on more successful students.
In journals,
books and other publications, we search research for information
relating to academic recovery issues, yet find little available.
At conferences, it's often Ôstanding room only' in sessions discussing
intervention programs at other institutions. Yet different student
and program variables affect an institution's intervention program.
Programs vary widely in terms of their requirements, structure,
and level of intrusiveness. Some require a weekly class while
others rely upon regular contact with advisors or mentors. Some
intervention programs utilize group activities and tutorial support
services, while still others require counseling services. Some
programs are organized at the departmental level; others are college
wide.
With
so many different variables, it is difficult to attribute student
academic success or failure directly to participation in an intervention
program. What roles do student characteristics play in a student's
ability to succeed? Do students' academic preparation, job and
family responsibilities, study skills, or locus of control affect
success? Is there a way to account for these variables?
At the
conclusion of each academic term, I challenge you to look for
research questions within the components of your institution's
probation, dismissal and reinstatement procedures. Turn these
into research projects and share your results with the Probation,
Dismissal & Reinstatement (PDR) Issues Interest Group at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/InterestGroups/C25/index.htm.
Reference:
Bartlett,
Thomas. (2002, February 1). Evaluating Student Attitudes is More
Difficulty This Year. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Volume
29, Issue 21, p. A35, 4p.
At the
NACADA Clearinghouse after December 1 -
Higgins,
Beth (2004, December 1) "Advising Students on Probation"
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/AdvisingIssues/Probation.htm
Johanna
Pionke, Chair
Kent State
University
330-672-0956
jpionke@kent.edu
NACADA/Kansas
State University Announces the First On-Line
Graduate
Certificate in Academic Advising
It's not
too late to apply and register for the courses
"Foundations
in Academic Advising"
"Multicultural
Counseling & Advising"
For information:
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/GraduateCertificate/index.htm
Courses
begin January 25, 2004
From
the Executive Office
CERTIFICATION
- the much used word within NACADA these days and the most often
confused. As the Association strives to bring greater professional
recognition to advisors, it is exploring a number of ways to recognize
the knowledge and skills that advisors attain and utilize in providing
effective academic advising.
Currently,
there are four distinctly different initiatives being considered
that in some way involve a form of the word, "certificate". They
include a "participation certificate", an "advising certificate
program", a "graduate certificate program in advising", and "advisor
certification". Now do we see why folks might be confused??!
The "participation
certificate" is simply a NACADA certificate given for completion
of a specific NACADA professional development event such as the
Academic Advising Summer Institute and/or the Advising Administrators'
Institute. It simply denotes that a person participated in that
event and hopefully that they gained some advising knowledge from
that participation. That knowledge, however, is not assessed in
any way.
An "advising
certificate program" is being explored by the Professional Development
Committee as an opportunity for members to obtain recognition
for having participated in a series of professional development
activities that would cover a broad spectrum of advising information.
A "certificate" might then be awarded to verify exposure to this
broad spectrum of knowledge. Again, this knowledge would not be
assessed or verified in any way.
The Graduate
Certificate Program in Academic Advising is a totally independent
Graduate Program offered by Kansas State University . Participants
in this program earn academic credit and upon completion of the
five courses, receive a Graduate Certificate from Kansas State
University verifying completion of the program. Of course, each
course includes knowledge assessment.
"Advisor
Certification" is the subject of the work of a NACADA Task Force
charged with exploring the potential for a "professional" certification
program and designation for academic advisors. This Task Force
is identifying the knowledge and skills that effective academic
advisors should possess and how this knowledge and these skills
can be assessed to earn the designation as a "Certified Advisor".
Any or all of the above programs might serve as leading toward
the professional certification designation through the attainment
and assessment of the knowledge and skills presented by each along
with experience and other learning opportunities. The Executive
Office is seeking estimates from "certifying" entities as to the
costs that would be incurred in assessing the advising competencies
as identified by the Task Force and other expenses to anticipate
in the administration of such a program. That information will
be utilized to determine if such a program would be cost effective
and viable for academic advisors.
I hope
this helps everyone understand the many uses of the word "certificate"
and how your association is working to enhance the recognition
you deserve for your continued education and your expertise. We
welcome any suggestions for synonyms!
Roberta
"Bobbie" Flaherty
NACADA Executive
Director
785-532-5717
nacada@ksu.edu
2004
Advising Awards Program
Now
is the time to begin assembling your awards submissions for the
2004 NACADA Awards Program. All award nominations/applications
will be due March 8, 2004 . Look for your postcard in the mail
announcing the awards!
Recognition
at the national level can enhance the visibility of quality academic
advising on your campus or in your state or region. There are
several categories of awards including:
Outstanding
Advising Awards
Outstanding
New Advisor Awards
Outstanding
Institutional Advising Program Awards
Service
to NACADA Award
Virginia
N. Gordon Award for Excellence in the Field of Advising
Pacesetter
Award
Summer
Institute Scholarships
NACADA
Scholarships
Student
Research Awards
Electronic
Publication Awards
Service
to Commission Awards
Research
Grants are also awarded by NACADA. Retiree Recognition and final
submissions for Research Grants are due June 7, 2004.
Applications and information on all of these items can be found
on the NACADA web site at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Awards/index.htm.
A
new award, called the "New Advisor Award", is being introduced
with the 2004 awards program. The criteria for this award are
very similar to the current Outstanding Advising awards, with
the additional stipulation that this award is for individuals
who have served in advising roles for 3 years or less. There are
two sub-categories for this new award-Primary Role and Faculty
Advising. Additional details for this new award will be provided
in the 2004 Awards Call for Nominations.
Another
change are the addition of two sub-categories for the Electronic
Publication AwardsÑweb sites and CDs/other. Additional details
for these new sub-categories will be provided in the 2004 Awards
Call for Nominations.
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Awards/AwardsCall.htm
Advising
Awards Presented at the National Conference in Dallas
The
2003 Award Recipients were honored at the Awards Ceremony on Saturday
evening of the conference. A complete list of winners and their
institutions can be found at
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Awards/
and
pictures of many of the recipients are located at
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/NationalConf/2003/oa_winners/
Editor's
notes: This article makes a useful
distinction between quantitative research and program assessment.
It should be noted that the NACADA Journal also publishes articles
using qualitative, historical, philosophical/theoretical, and
descriptive research methodologies. Find out more about NACADA
Journal guidelines at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Journal/journal_guidelines.htm
Each year
the NACADA Research Committee supports experimental (quantitative)
and qualitative research through its research grant award. Find
out more about NACADA Research grants at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Awards/Grants.htm.
2004
National Conference
Building
Bridges:
Advisors
as Architects for the Future
Wednesday,
October 6 - Saturday, October 9, 2004
Cincinnati
Convention Center
The
Call for Proposals is now online!
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/NationalConf/2004/index.htm
Submission
Deadline: February 9, 2004
Proposals
are earnestly encouraged from novice as well as experienced presenters,
researchers and practitioners. If you have special techniques,
ideas or practices to share, please consider submitting a proposal.
We want to hear from you!
Conference
Chair: Barbara Bucey, University of Cincinnati
NACADA
Career Services Corner
Jennifer
L. Bloom, Chair
NACADA
Member Career Services Committee
Dear
Career Corner: I just found out that I have been invited
to participate in a videoconference interview-do you have any
advice on how to approach this interview?-Signed, Video Neophyte
Dear
Video Neophyte: Congratulations on making it to this
preliminary interview stage-it means that the written materials
you submitted caught the attention of the selection committee.
The key now is to prepare like you would for any interview-do
your homework on the institution, the position, and your potential
new boss and colleagues. Please request the full job description
from the search chair as well as other materials that will prepare
you for the interview-strategic plans for the unit and/or the
institution, written materials that the institution distributes
to prospective students, organizational charts, mission statements,
etc. You will also want to contact people in your network of colleagues
that are or have been affiliated with this institution. Find out
as much information about the position, the person who held this
position previously and why they left, and the culture of the
unit.
Here are
some specific tips concerning the videoconference itself.
- Do not use your
institution's video facilities for a position at another university
without the full consent of your boss. Keep in mind that most
Kinko's stores have videoconferencing facilities.
- Practice the
connection and do a mock interview before the actually interview.
- Establish which
party will be responsible for the reconnection if the connection
fails. Always have a telephone number that you can call on the
other end in case of a problem. Do not let a failed connection
faze you.
-
Make
sure you arrive at the facility early and eliminate all potential
distractions.
- Try not to talk
over other people-wait for them to complete their sentences or
questions before responding appropriately.
- Dress like you
would for an in-person interview.
- Have fun-smile,
look happy, and share your enthusiasm for this position.
This new
NACADA Newsletter feature will be a regular column. Submit questions
on-line at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/AdministrativeDivision/career.htm.
Questions will be answered anonymously.
Want
to read more about it?
Kennedy,
J. L. (1996). Job interviews for dummies. Foster City: IDG Books
Worldwide Inc.
Krannich,
C. R.,& Krannich, R. L. (1999). 101 dynamite answers to interview
questions. Mannassas Park : Impact Publications.
Martin,
C. (2001). Interview fitness training: A workout with Carole Martin
the interview coach. San Ramon , California : Interview Publishing.
Martin,
N. A. & Bloom, J. L. (2003). Career Aspirations & Expeditions:
Advancing Your Career in Higher Education Administration. Champaign
, IL : Stipes Publishing.
NACADA
Journal Seeks Editorial Board Members
A.
Purpose and Overview
The NACADA
Journal, the journal of the National Academic Advising Association
, seeks to enrich the knowledge, skills, and professional development
of people concerned with academic advising and student success
in higher education. Through its journal and other activities,
NACADA is dedicated to the enhancement of student development
by supporting the professional growth of academic advisors and
the advising profession.
B.
Qualifications
Publications
in peer-reviewed journals (preference for NACADA Journal publication)
Experience
in academic advising
Interest
and strength in quantitative and/or qualitative research methodology
Active membership
in NACADA
Terminal
degree (preferred)
C.
Expectations
Review manuscripts
for significance, appropriateness, research design, analysis,
and quality of writing within 30 days of receipt.
Provide
constructive feedback to authors in order to improve manuscripts.
Ability
to use Microsoft Word and email with attachments.
Annual attendance
at the Editorial Board meeting held during the NACADA National
Conference each year. (Preferred)
D.
Appointment
Editorial
Board members serve three-year terms that begin and end at the
national conference. An Editorial Board member may serve non-consecutive
terms.
E. Application
Applicants
familiar with the field of academic advising who are interested
in seeking membership on the Editorial Board should submit an
email message to Journals@ksu.edu stating interest in and rationale
for serving as a member of the NACADA Journal Editorial Board.
A professional resume prepared in Microsoft Word ".doc" format
should be attached.
Applications
will be considered on a rolling basis until all positions are
filled.
2004
NACADA LEADERSHIP ELECTION INFORMATION
In early
January 2004, on-line ballots for the NACADA 2004 Leadership elections
will be available to NACADA members. Please complete and submit
the applicable ballots by the deadline specified to be included
in the final official tally.
Listed
below are those leadership positions being elected. The newly
elected leaders will take office in October 2004 following the
national conference in Cincinnati , Ohio . A complete list of
candidates can be found on the NACADA web site at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Election/2004/2004CandidateList.htm.
Each candidate's platform statement is linked to her or his name
on this list for easy reference.
If you
have questions about the election in general or the ballots once
they become available, contact the NACADA Executive Office at
nacada@ksu.edu or call (785) 532-5717.
BOARD
OF DIRECTORS:
- President (term
October 2004-October 2005)
- Vice President
(term October 2004-October 2005)
- Board of Directors
(3 Positions, 3-year term each October 2004-October 2007)
DIVISION
REPRESENTATIVES:
REGION
CHAIRS (term October 2004-October 2006):
- Region 2-Mid-Atlantic
[PA, NJ, VA, DE, DC, MD]
- Region 4-Southeast
[GA, AL , MS, FL, Puerto Rico ]
- Region 6-North
Central [ND, SD, MN, IA, NE, Saskatchewan , Manitoba ]
-
Region 8-Northwest [MT, ID, OR, WA, AK, British Columbia , Alberta
]
-
Region 10-Rocky Mountain [UT, WY, CO, AZ, NM]
COMMISSION
CHAIRS (term-October 2004-October 2006):
-
Advising
Administration
-
Advising
Students with Disabilities
-
Advising
Transfer Students
-
Assessment
of Advising
-
Engineering
and Science Advising
-
Faculty
Advisors
-
Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, & Allies Concerns
-
Multicultural
Concerns
-
Small
Colleges & Universities
-
Undecided
& Exploratory Students
-
Term-October
2004-October 2005 (will elect for 2-year term beginning with
2005 elections)
-
Advising
Education Majors
-
ESL
and International Student Advising
Newly
Appointed NACADA Leaders
NACADA
President Ruth Darling has appointed the following members to
leadership positions beginning in October 2003. Congratulations
to you all and a BIG thank you for agreeing to serve your organization!
Administrative
Division Representative: John Mortensen
Regional
Division Representative: Brian Glankler
Journal
Co-Editors: Terry Kuhn and Gary Padak
Administrators'
Institute Advisory Board:
Susan
Campbell, Chair
Alice
Reinarz
Rich
Robbins
Gene
Calderon
Lynn
Freeman
Vicki
McGillin
Carolyn
Collins
Tom
Grites
Albert
Matheny
Summer
Institute Advisory Board:
Wes
Habley, Chair
Nancy
King
Susan
Campbell
John
Burton
Tom
Kerr
Dorothy
Turk
Wanda
Martin
Peggy
King
Casey
Self
In addition,
Barbara Bucey is Program Chair for the 2004 National
Conference.
CAS
Standards Revision Announced
The Council
for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS) announces
the release of a major revision of its landmark publication, the
Book of Professional Standards for Higher Education, and an updated
version of the CAS Self-Assessment Guides (SAGs). Available August
29, the new 2003 book of standards and guidelines incorporates
significant updates, including new general standards with greater
detail about desired outcomes in student learning and development.
The standards for Academic Advising are presently under going
a major revision as well. Newly revised self-assessment guides
(SAGs) feature an effective means for measuring how these standards
are being met in all 30 functional areas. SAGs are available in
both print and interactive CD-Rom formats (both PC and Mac). The
CD-Rom also includes a new PowerPoint presentation and an E-learning
course to assist institutional staff and faculty members in completing
the SAGs.
Further
information and online orders are available through the CAS web
site (http://www.cas.edu). The book, which replaces the 2001 edition,
is available separately or in a special package with the interactive
CD-Rom including the full set of SAGs. The SAGs are also available
for individual purchase and immediate download. The book and SAGs
can be ordered from CAS, One Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 200 , Washington
, D.C. 20036-1188 . Telephone: (202) 862-1400, Fax: (202) 296-3286.
The National
Academic Advising Association is a member of CAS and strongly
endorses these standards to its members. Founded in 1979, CAS
is a consortium of educational associations that promotes quality
educational practices through the promulgation of standards and
guidelines for 30 programs and services in higher education. Individuals
and institutions from the 32 CAS member organizations comprise
a professional constituency of well over 100,000 professionals.
Excellence in educational practice is a central goal of CAS that
is achieved through the implementation of standards in all areas
of practice in higher education. This vision for excellence is
consistent with contemporary goals for accountability and bring
an effective approach-the CAS approach-to program assessment.
The CAS approach is based on concepts of self-regulation and self-assessment,
and all CAS materials are geared to this approach to quality assurance
in higher education.
CAS serves
higher education programs and services by providing:
-
Descriptions
of state-of-the-art programs and services
-
Designs
for programs and service development and assessment
-
Criteria
for institutional self-studies and preparation for accreditation
-
Opportunities
for staff development
-
Outcomes
for student learning and development
-
Frameworks
for accountability
Visit
http://www.cas.edu for orders for all CAS materials, a full account
of the work of CAS, links to each member association Internet
sitees and to the leadership of CAS, and a brief PowerPoint presentation
providing an overview of the CAS approach.
NEW
In
the Clearinghouse!
Advising
Issue overviews
-
Advising
At-Risk Students
-
Multicultural
Awareness
-
A
Guide to Restructuring Advising Services
-
Advising
Students on Probation
Find
the resources you can use on the Web at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Clearinghouse/overview.htm
NACADA
Academic Advising Summer Institute
The
most comprehensive professional development event for academic
advising
Join
your colleagues for one of the two Summer Institutes offered in
2004!
June
6-11, 2004 , Renaissance Waterfront Hotel and Conference Center
, Portsmouth , VA
or
August
1-6, 2004 , Hyatt Regency Hotel in Milwaukee , Wisconsin
The
Institute utilizes an effective integration of a variety of learning
formats!
Expert
group presentations with small group discussions organized by
institutional type, workshops and topical sessions, all led by
skilled practitioners, provide a wide variety of opportunities
to become involved. Through these activities, you will develop
a network of supportive colleagues throughout the nation, design
an action plan to refine or redesign advising at your institution
and investigate advising options for student success.
The
Institute is designed for individuals or teams who have responsibility
for academic advising
-
Academic
advising campus task force members
-
Teams
or individuals from an institution desiring to refine or redesign
campus advising services
-
Advising
program directors
-
Campus
administrators including deans or vice presidents with responsibilities
for advising
Join
us for a week designed to make a difference for you and your institution!
Further
information and registration materials are located at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu
NACADA
CONFERENCE CALENDAR
Academic
Advising Administrators' Institute
St.
Pete Beach February 2-4, 2004
Assessment
of Academic Advising Seminar
St.
Pete Beach February 5-6, 2004
Academic
Advising Summer Institute
Portsmouth
, VA June 6-11, 2004
Milwaukee
, WI August 1-6, 2004
National
Conference
Cincinnati
, OH October, 2004 Chair: Barbara Bucey
Regional
Conferences-2004
| Region |
Date* |
Location* |
Chair |
| 1.
Northeast |
March 24 - 26, 2004 |
Burlington, VT |
Beth
Higgins
Gail Stepina |
| 2.
Mid-Atlantic |
March 11 - 13, 2004 |
Princeton, NJ |
Bill
Johnson
|
| 3.
Mid-South |
April 14 - 16, 2004 |
Charleston, WV |
Stan
Coberly
|
| 4.
Southeast |
March 7 - 9, 2004 |
Univ of Mississippi, MS |
Charles
Gates
Sue
Hodge
|
| 5.
Great Lakes |
April 22 - 24, 2004 |
Chicago, IL |
Kristi
Bloom |
| 6.
North Central |
April 15 - 16, 2004 |
St. Paul, MN |
Tonia
Baxter |
| 7.
South Central |
May 27 - 29, 2004 |
Overland Park, KS
|
Jill
Anderson-Hieb |
| 8.
Northwest |
April 21 - 23, 2004 |
Seattle, WA |
Jason
Boyd |
|
April 21 - 23, 2004
|
Pasadena, CA |
Gwen
Fleming |
| 10.
Rocky Mountain |
March 3 - 5, 2004
|
St. George, UT |
Debra
Bryant |
See
detailed information at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu
e-mail nacada@ksu.edu call 785-532-5717
Northeast
Region 1- Celebrates 20 Years of NACADA
Region
1 looks forward to its annual regional conference to be held
March 24, 25, and 26, 2004 with excitement-2004 marks the 20th
anniversary for the Northeast Region. Our conference planning
committee is taking us back to where it all began-the Radisson
Hotel in beautiful Burlington , Vermont ! We think the conference's
theme, "The
Past, Present and Future of Academic Advising" will provide
members with opportunities to help us celebrate our accomplishments
and set the stage for an exciting future in the field of academic
advising. The deadline for receipt of conference proposals was
December 1, 2003 . As always, the conference planning committee
is spending much time thinking about activities to bring members
together for networking and having a good time!
In Dallas
, the Region 1 meeting focused on the strategic planning initiative
that is currently underway within the national organization. The
membership present used the time to reflect on the current status
of the Region, to identify an 'ideal' state, and to brainstorm
some ideas that could/would move the Region toward achieving its
ideal. Below are some of the ideal concepts as well as ideas to
achieve them.
Ideal:
-
Increased
number of presentations at the regional and national levels
-
Increased
communication
-
Leadership
Training
-
Mentoring
-
Strengthened
sense of the professional community
-
Ways
to connect with like colleges
-
Increased
attendance at conferences and regional meetings at national
-
More
cohesion-understanding how things/activities fit together re:
the continuum of professional development
-
Local
Connections
-
Networking
opportunities-like State meetings and Receptions at national
-
Celebrate
more
Ideas
to Move Toward the Ideal:
-
Networking
-
Reception
at national
-
State
gatherings
These
should be held at the beginning of the conference so folks
can connect
-
Colored
nametags to symbolize region and/or state
-
List
of participants by college
-
Regional
or State Dinner group at national and regional conferences
-
Scholarships
for attendance at conference
-
Communication
via e-mail or website
-
Develop
some career paths
-
Research
proposals between/among institutions (cross-institutional
studies are virtually non-existent)
-
Region
1 T-shirts
-
Mentoring:
-
link
less experienced and new folks with more experienced members
-
link
by population of student served
-
link
a "veteran" with someone who is thinking about
the profession
Susan Campbell
Northeast
Region 1 Chair
207-780-4547
scamp@usm.maine.edu
Mid-South
Region 3
I'd like
to begin my first submission to the NACADA newsletter by recognizing
the great job Julie Taylor has done as the Region
Chair for the past four years. Julie has been instrumental in
creating a collaborative spirit among the members of our region,
and she has had the wisdom to allow people to utilize their skills
and interests in contributing to region activities. Involvement
in Region 3 is at an all time high, with a competent and active
Steering Committee in place! Thanks again, Julie, for a job well
done.
I don't
know about you, but I think I personally benefit as much if not
more from the regional conference than I do the national! Not
that the national doesnUt have a lot to offer, but the smaller
regional conference seems to offer even greater opportunity for
significant networking with folks who are in closer geographical
proximity to my campus. While the selection of presentations is
more limited, we never have a shortage of helpful and informative
sessions. Not only that, but the regional always seems to be affordable!!
With
that in mind, I hope all of you in Region 3 will begin to make
plans to be with us in "wild, wonderful West Virginia,"
where "adventures in advising will abound!" We've set
the dates: April 14-16. Our facility is great-we'll be at the
Town Center Marriott, located in the heart of downtown Charleston
, West Virginia . The hotel/conference center is adjacent to a
three story mall, and the hotel amenities will be more than adequate.
I also
want to encourage you to submit a proposal to present a session
at the conference. Your programs and ideas are the lifeblood of
any regional conference, so donUt be shy about making a proposal
(a special call to those of you who presented in Dallas-come and
share those ideas with us in Charleston as well!). Deadline for
submission was December 1, 2003 .
I'm looking
forward to working with all of you as the chair for Region 3.
Please feel free to contact me with ideas, concerns, suggestions-or
just to say "hello".
Rob
Mossack
Chair, MidSouth
Region 3
Lipscomb
University
615-279-6297
rob.mossack@lipscomb.edu
Great
Lakes Region 5
Hello
and Welcome from Region 5!
I'm excited
to be the new Region 5 chair! It's shaping up to be an exciting
year for the Region! The Steering committee (made up of the Region
chair, the state liaisons, and the 2004 conference chair) has
allotted $2500 in grants for professional development for and
the formation of new allied institutional organizations. Three
awards were made for professional development to existing allied
organizations. The recipients are the
In addition,
new allied organizations are located at
If your
institution or your allied organization is interested in applying
for one of these grants, put it on your list for next year. More
information on the grants can be found at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Regional_Divisions/region5/index.htm.
If you have
not yet done so, mark your calendars for the 2004 Regional conference
to be held in Chicago April 22-24. Details can also be found at
the Region 5 website. Finally, I'd like to specifically recognize
this years' NACADA Region 5 National Award Winners:
Congratulations!
Individual
-
John
W. Miller, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater , Whitewater ,
WI , Pacesetter Award
-
Virginia
N. Gordon, Ohio State University , Columbus , OH , Service to
NACADA
-
Donna
Stiller, Kent State University, Kent , OH , Outstanding Advising-Primary
Role
-
Margaret
Steele, Ohio State University, Columbus , OH , Outstanding Advising-Primary
Role
-
Muriel
S. Keller, Purdue University , West Lafayette , IN , Outstanding
Advising-Primary Role
-
Debra
Heiber, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater , Whitewater , WI
, Outstanding Advising-Administrator
-
Cheryl
Banachowski-Fuller, University of Wisconsin-Platteville , Platteville
, WI , Outstanding Advising-Faculty
-
Luis
G. Hermosilla, Kent State University , Kent , OH, Outstanding
Advising-Faculty
-
Susan
Johnson, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater , Whitewater , WI
, Outstanding Advising-Faculty Certificate of Merit
-
Julie
A. Fischer, University of Toledo , Toledo , OH , Student Research
Winner - MasterUs Degree
-
Harold
RHalS Caldwell, Ball State University , Muncie , IN , Service
to Commission Award Winner - Technology in Advising Commission
-
Evan
Graner, DePaul University , Chicago , IL , NACADA Scholarship
-
Dana
T. Zahorik, Fox Valley Technical School , NACADA Scholarship
-
Creative
Staffing: Using Shared Advisors to Maximize Student Success,
(Cathy Buyarski, Program Director), Indiana University- Purdue
University Indianapolis , Indianapolis , IN , Outstanding Advising
Program
-
College
of Human Ecology Advising Center, (Lynn Forsblom, Program Director),
Michigan State University , East Lansing , MI , Outstanding
Advising Program Certificate of Merit
-
PACADA
Professional Development Programming, (Gerald A. Ripke, Program
Director), Purdue University , West Lafayette , IN , Outstanding
Advising Program Certificate of Merit
-
Evolution
of Pre-Engineering Office, (Donald C. Woolston, Program Director),
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison , WI , Outstanding
Advising Program Certificate of Merit
Rebecca
Ryan
Chair, Great
Lakes Region 5
608-265-5460
rjryan@wisc.edu
North
Central Region 6
Come to
historic St. Paul , Minnesota for the Region 6 2004 NACADA Conference
to be held in the Radisson Hotel on the mighty Mississippi . Please
join us.
"Responding
Creatively in Challenging Times"
When:
April 15-16, 2004
Where:
St. Paul , Minnesota
Region
6 is in full gear preparing for this energizing conference. Come
network with colleagues. Find out how others are making things
work in this era of shrinking budgets and growing needs. Check
out the web page: http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Regional_Divisions/region6/confindex.htm/
Why not
submit a proposal for a presentation?
All are
invited to share their ideas those new to the field, experienced
veterans, faculty advisors, professional advisors, those at small
schools, those at large research institutions. We're looking for
ideas about best practices for advising as well as for research-driven
presentations. We'd like to see roundtables, individual presentations,
workshops, and panel presentations. As advising professionals,
what can we do to positively impact our c |