Maura Reynolds, Chair, Small Colleges & Universities Commission

"A theory doesn't have to be right to be useful" (Grow, p. 127).

This year, I've met with a group of colleagues to discuss Maryellen Weimer's Learner-Centered Teaching. The book has spurred fruitful conversation about teaching. It has also prompted me to consider whether some of its ideas may apply to faculty advising, especially at small colleges.

Weimer distinguishes between student-centered and learner-centered teaching and opts for the latter, "Being student-centered implies a focus on student needs. It gives rise to the idea of education as a product, with the student as the customer and the role of the faculty as one of serving and satisfying the customer. Faculty resist the student-as-customer metaphor for some very good reasons" (xvi).   In contrast, "Being learner-centered focuses attention squarely on learning: what the student is learning, how the student is learning, the conditions under which the student is learning, whether the student is retaining and applying the learning, and how current learning positions the student for future learning. The student is still an important part of the equation. When instruction is learner-centered, the action focuses on what students (not teachers [or, I'd add, advisors]) are doing" (xvi).

Weimer's distinction between student-centered and learner-centered teaching is mirrored by Hemwall and Trachte's critiques of developmental academic advising and their adoption of a learning paradigm for advising (1999; 2003). Such considerations are not just of recent interest: the theme of the 1984 NACADA Conference was "Academic Advising as a Form of Teaching."

As Grow reminds us (above), situating advising in a learner/learning/teaching-centered framework can be useful whether it is "right" or not. In the spirit of William Cronon's essay (1999), I suggest these connections:

• Connecting advising with institutional mission . Hemwall and Trachte (2003) remind us that, while faculty may have looked at institutional mission statements, students may not be aware of them. How do institutional goals and students' personal academic goals connect?   With what parts of the mission do students feel most comfortable?   Which will stretch them?   Using the mission statement as foundation, faculty can encourage advisees to view their education in a larger context as a process with more than private, personal significance (important though it is).   In this way, faculty can help bring to life mantra-like phrases--"responsible citizenship" and "citizen of the world"-- in most mission statements. "We all long for something we can do that brings us deep joy and meets some significant need beyond ourselves" (Mary Sue Gast, cited in Manning, 1999).
• Connecting advising with general education . Since they determine and teach the curriculum, faculty should do more than provide a list of requirements; they can talk with students about their rationale.   What was written in 1988 rings true in 2004, "Perhaps the most urgent reform on most campuses in improving general education involves academic advising. To have programs and courses become coherent and significant to students requires adequate advising"   (Task Group on General Education, p.43).
• Connecting advising with self-reflection.   Talking about general education and institutional mission is not sufficient. Students need opportunities to integrate what they learn. Advising offers a venue for such reflection:   faculty encourage students to look forward to setting or editing learning goals and to look back to see where they've been. Skillful learners grow in their ability to analyze and reflect in ways that lead to accurate self-knowledge (Weimer, 195). This self-awareness involves emotion as well as intellect. While some may rejoice in newly-discovered interests and abilities, others may mourn a future which may no longer be feasible.
• Connecting advising with complexity. None of these connections involves once-and-for-all-time conversations. Instead, each can evoke richer, more complex thinking each time it is considered. The learning goals students set (as well as those goals colleges encourage them to set) are complex and transcend classrooms and advising appointments. "[A]s with any other human growth, development is not linear, predictable, and exclusively forward" (Weimer, 175). Students may come seeking a degree; we hope they leave understanding that "education is not something any of us ever achieve.. Rather, it is a way of living in the face of our own ignorance, a way of groping toward wisdom in full recognition of our own folly, a way of educating ourselves without any illusions that our education will ever be complete" (Cronon, 4). Complex, indeed!   As students become more complex in thinking, their capacity for empathy and appreciation of difference increases, as does their refusal to take refuge in simplistic views of complex issues (Knefelkamp, 8-9).

Heady stuff. And humbling as well. In their teaching and advising, faculty can create environments to foster learning, but the decision to learn rests with the student-advisee.

When we consider advising in a learner-centered framework, we discover fruitful and challenging opportunities to involve faculty in advising and to support learners. The Small Colleges and Universities Commission plans to offer several sessions about faculty advising at the 2004 conference in Cincinnati . Hope to see you there!   Until then, let conversation continue on the small college and university list-serve at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/list serve/C08.htm .

References

Cronon, W. (Winter 1998-1999). Only Connect : The goals of a liberal education.   The Phi Beta Kappa Key Reporter , 64 (2), 2-4.

Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149.

Hemwall, M.K. & Trachte, K.C. (1999). Learning at the core: Toward a new understanding of academic advising. NACADA Journal, 19 (1), 5-11.

Hemwall, M.K. & Trachte, K.C. (2003). Advising and Learning: Academic advising from the perspective of small colleges and universities. National Academic Advising Association: Manhattan , KS .

Knefelkamp, L.L. (1984). Academic advising as a form of teaching. Keynote address in Proceedings of the eighth national conference on academic advising . Philadelphia , PA , 1-12 .

Manning, M. M. (1999). Liberal Education for our life's work. Prepared for The Association for General and Liberal Studies, October 28.   Retrieved 2-23-04 from http://www.novalearning.com/Liberal_Education_Final_Draft.pdf

Task Group on General Education (1988). A new vitality in general education: Planning, teaching, and supporting effective liberal learning . Washington , D.C. : Association of American Colleges.

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-Centered Teaching . San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.

President's Letter

Dear Colleagues,

One of my favorite questions to ask students is, "What's going on?" - with the follow up, "Tell me about it."   This spring, I have had the privilege of asking many NACADA members this same question during round table sessions at several Regional conferences. I have learned that the membership is facing similar challenges and is asking NACADA to help them meet these challenges in similar ways.   I'd like to share with you a few of these concerns and how various NACADA programs and services can be of help to you.

"Budget cuts are killing my travel budget. I need professional development opportunities that are easily accessible and on-line."

• Stay in close contact with your Region and its professional development programs through Regional conferences, State meetings and "drive-in" conferences.
• Be sure to read the electronic publications sent to you from the Executive Office - the Association Highlights and the NACADA Newsletter.
• Consider the NACADA web site as an opportunity to have a weekly, 30 minute "professional development session" right in your own office or at home. Read new articles written by our expert members on "hot topics" or use the Clearinghouse search option to gather information on best practices in an area of interest to you.
• Contact Associate Director, Charlie Nutt, to ask about the Kansas State University on-line graduate certificate in academic advising. ( cnutt@ksu.edu )

"Assessment" is the campus buzz word and a new expectation. I don't have any background in assessment and don't know where to start."

• Go to the NACADA web site and click on the Assessment Commission's web page for information on best practices and assessment programs.   Consider joining the Commission's list serve to take part in discussions and to ask questions.
• Consider attending the NACADA Assessment Institute - February 2005 in Florida .
• Watch for the Assessment Monograph on CD-rom that will be available Fall 2004.

"I need to be "at the table" when decisions are made on my campus about academic advising. How do I get there and then make sure I'm heard?"

• Be knowledgeable about issues, trends and best practices in advising. Read the many NACADA publications (such as the Journal, Newsletter, the new monograph scheduled for release in June reporting on the 2003 National Survey on Academic Advising).
• Build partnerships with other campus units that focus on student learning and development, e.g. other advising units, faculty governance structures, curriculum committees, Teaching/learning Centers, Career Services, Orientation, First Year Studies, Minority Student Affairs and Enrollment Services.    One voice with a shared vision is powerful.
• Remember that being political and strategic is not a "bad" thing!

I have enjoyed the many conversations I have had with our members this spring. These connections have helped me grow professionally and have given me and other members of the Board of Directors, a true sense of the concerns our colleagues face each day. Just as we encourage our students to "connect" with the communities on our campuses, I encourage you to "connect" with your community of colleagues through NACADA.

Best wishes,

Ruth A. Darling
President

Leslie Hemphill, Past-Chair, Advising Students with Disabilities Commission

To be successful, those responsible for advising students with disabilities must look beyond what would be considered the normal scope and range of advising office responsibilities. This requires flexibility, coordination, and a willingness to step outside prescribed administrative roles.

On some campuses, large and proactive Disability Student Services (DSS) offices facilitate a number of services for students with disabilities including advisement, counseling, technological assistance, and tutoring. Although this kind of organization provides the opportunity for the coordination and flexibility of services suggested earlier, bureaucratic adherence to job descriptions may prevent a DSS office from fully utilizing its resources. One of the ironies of higher education is that the flexibility and coordination so often found in large DSS offices can also be found in much smaller institutions where a few individuals must wear many hats.

In fall 2002, Cloud County Community College , a small, rural two-year college, lost its only sign language interpreter. Through the use of student signers, parents and note takers, the two students who required sign language services were able to successfully complete the academic year. However, it was apparent that if the college was going to provide appropriate services for deaf students, a dependable method of providing services must be developed. Attempts to obtain a new interpreter proved unsuccessful since no one was willing to commute to north central Kansas for a part time signing position.  

During this time, the college received a flier from the Midwest Center on Postsecondary Outreach (MCPO) describing their program to train C-Print Captionists. C-Print captioning is a method that provides real time captioning for students with hearing impairments. Laptop computers and specialized phonetic software are employed to allow a typist to equal the conversational speed of a classroom instructor.

Normally C-Print training would not be an area of concern for an Advisement Office. However, due to our college's size, the faculty and staff of the Advisement and Counseling Center are responsible for a variety of programs and services, including both advisement and accommodation for students with disabilities. Our difficulties meeting the needs of hearing impaired students meant that we viewed the training described in the flier with great interest and seriously discussed the possibility of training someone on our campus to become a C-Print Captionist.

Two salient issues quickly emerged as we brainstormed possibilities. Who would receive the training, and how would the training be funded?   A candidate for C-Print training must type 60 - 70 words per minute and possess good language skills. The candidate must also be conscientious, reliable and dedicated to our students. Looking at these skills, the obvious candidate was DeeDee Coppoc, long-time NACADA member and our Advisement Center Coordinator. Of course, accommodation in general, and C-Print training specifically, are not in the job descriptions of most advising coordinators. But, with administrative permission, the coordinator was willing to participate in the C-Print training.

Funding became our next concern. MCPO agreed to provide $400 to assist in underwriting the cost of the software, meals, lodging and transportation to the C-Print training site in Milwaukee . The Advisement Center Staff turned to the college's Perkins Grant coordinator for a laptop computer and the funds necessary to complete the project. With this support, we were set.

Training began through a series of taped assignments that familiarize the trainee with the basics of the software and the more common phonetic abbreviations. Over forty hours of this training is required before the trainee actually leaves for the weeklong training session in Milwaukee . The College's C-Print "Trainee" arriving in Milwaukee , is greeted with an intense nine to four schedule for the first four days with a two-hour reprieve on Friday. Each day consists of review, introduction of new material, testing and practice, practice, practice.

The training has been worth it. As soon as the advisement coordinator returned to campus, she began providing C-Print captioning for students with hearing impairments. Now advisors and instructors working with these students are assured that quality accommodations are provided.

This story is not offered as a model but as a metaphor. Many advising offices have no need to offer C-Print Captioning. However, other needs exist that can, and do, affect our ability to advise students with disabilities. Given the opportunity to address problems in creative ways, solutions are available. It requires a willingness to stay current with innovations in technology. But, most importantly, it requires advisors who remain open to new, and sometimes unorthodox ways, to provide accommodation for students.

Want to discuss creative solutions or C-Print Captioning?   Join the Advising Students with Disabilities Commission list-serve at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/list serve/C16.htm

Leslie L. Hemphill
Chair-elect, Advising Students with Disabilities Commission
(785) 243-1435
lhemphill@cloud.edu

Just as one of the most popular features on the evening news is "Everybody Has a Story", so too, every advisor has a story.

Despite the fact that some may think advisors to be a generic group, advisors are indeed diverse. We come from different backgrounds, advise different students, and work in vastly different settings. In short, every advisor has a different VANTAGE Point!

In coming issues we will feature the unique story of one advisor who makes up our diverse association.

The Challenge of Advising Truly Non-Traditional Students
Don Sebera, Ohio University

Did you know that print-based distance-education programs bring higher education to incarcerated individuals? I advise students enrolled in one such program.

While some may advise the occasional incarcerated student who enrolls in a print-based class requiring no Internet access, it is unlikely that your program actively recruits these individuals as a student. Our program does.

The Ohio University program evolved into a total distance-education program, as on-site programs disappeared after legislation eliminated Pell Grant eligibility for incarcerated students. Although delivering services to incarcerated students was a political hot potato for many institutions, our program persisted, and over the last three years, monthly enrollments have tripled.

What are your ideas about this student population group? Take a moment and give it some thought before proceeding. Have some ideas? Let’s see how accurate you are.

About 95% of our current students are male. Their average age is 33 years. They typically come from California, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, and Texas. Most impressive, their collective college GPA is 3.2. Many seek, but few earn Bachelor’s degrees. In fact, just five of 38 degrees awarded since 2000 were baccalaureate degrees. These students pursue business-oriented associate degrees to become self-employed, believing their recent position with the state or Federal government will not provide a resounding endorsement for others to hire them. They honestly seek a second chance, and I like to believe most earn it.

Like most incarcerated individuals, a majority of these students are under-prepared, and developmental math and English courses are in heavy demand. Many have little or no college and the GED is their only academic credential. Yet, ironically, the incarcerated program produces my brightest students.

Although our students typically take twice as long to earn a degree as on-campus students, there are exceptions. One student has completed half the degree requirements in only two-and-a-half year and is on track to finish the remaining courses in the next year-and-a-half, while maintaining a 3.3 GPA. Another student earned an ‘A’ on a special project to gain senior level math credit in modern algebra. Prior to incarceration, another student worked internationally under a different name and did not have access to original documents. He completed the experiential learning program by producing the required documentation from memory. These experiences are not uncommon. In fact, on-campus professors frequently comment that our students have been the best distance students to ever take their class.

While these students’ academic achievements are impressive, the hurdles they overcome only add credence to their accomplishments. Study environments and testing conditions are often poor. Institutional respect for education varies by facility and thus many students have little assistance or support from prison staff. Often, students are limited to courses that require no hardbound books, or contraband items, such as highlighters or maps.  Courses, such as introductory aviation, are deemed to be security threats and are not allowed.

Money is paramount. Because these students do not qualify for federal financial assistance, family members sacrifice to cover enrollment expenses for the individual who was once the family breadwinner.

Advising these students is a challenge! Most communications take place through U.S. Mail; therefore advising these students is time consuming; reading and writing letters consumes a majority of my time. Phone communication with the student is almost non-existent, though communication with families is frequent. Each student provides release of information forms upon entering the program. These forms save time, and frustration, when addressing issues related to material shipments, courses, finances, degree requirements, and careers. It is one-stop shopping at its best.

The humanistic side of advising these students is most significant. As their academic advisor, I understand why they are incarcerated, because they tell me. I know their horrible mistakes and must remind myself that I work with a student, who often is also a parent, and not just a felon. I feel their pain when a new student calls for information and gives a prison address. I feel their frustration and helplessness at not being able to make things better or to change history.

I have learned to work with a population who will one day live on the outside. Without education, many will find their way back to prison. With education, many more will lead productive lives and contribute to society, rather than take from it.

If you have the opportunity to work with incarcerated students, reserve judgment for later. View your opportunity as an investment in the betterment of society. Most likely it will be an investment that returns more than any Wall Street bull market.

Don Sebera
Ohio University
Independent and Distance Learning Program Advisor
sebera@ohio.edu

From the Executive Office

Each year, the NACADA Board of Directors and the Council meet at the site of the upcoming National Conference on Academic Advising. So, March 19 & 20, they met in Cincinnati and discovered a vibrant downtown setting that should please conference goers in October.   They tasted Cincinnati barbeque, chili on spaghetti, and some German fare. They discovered an entertainment area across the river in Kentucky and they checked out the hotels that will be hosting the conference attendees. All are excited about their return in October and look forward to another tremendous National Conference!

The Council and the Board also worked diligently on the business of the Association.  As NACADA entered the second year of the new organizational structure, it was clear that the structure is sound, albeit benefiting from continuous fine tuning.

The Board conducted teleconference meetings between the fall and spring meetings and during those meetings approved the following: a partnership with ACT, Inc. to publish the results of the National Survey on Academic Advising as a NACADA Monograph this spring; co-sponsorship of some NACADA Awards by ACT, Inc.; a budget allocation for the Commission/Interest Group fair during the National Conference; a Small Colleges/Universities Commission request for a Service to Commission award.

During their meetings in Cincinnati, the Council and Board had productive discussions concerning the value of member volunteers in the association, how we could better train those volunteers to enhance the number willing to volunteer, how we could better support their work as volunteers, how we can enhance their willingness to serve in leadership roles, and how to ensure diversity among the leadership. Both the Council and the Board discussed how we might better provide for diversity at all levels within the organization - diversity in race, gender, sexual orientation, institutional type, institutional size, advising role and geographic location. A more proactive approach to identifying the advising expertise of individuals is a primary goal at this time.

Additional items discussed included:   appointment of a Publications Task Force to review the role of a new series with Jossey-Bass; positive financial position of the association; preliminary summaries of membership surveys; review of other associations' dues and conference costs compared to our relative low costs; appointment of a National Conference Task Force to recommend any changes; discussion about a Conflict of Interest policy; membership plan goals; partnership with First Year Experience group on updating the joint monograph; review of draft of Core Values Statement update; review of draft of Task Force report on Definition of Academic Advising; and review of draft of plan for Executive Office evaluation.

The Council and Board both worked on the Strategic Plan by rating the overarching organization tasks proposed for each strategy and then prioritizing the tasks. Tasks specific to individual units are to be included with their individual unit goals and objectives.The Executive Office will follow up with recommended target dates for the completion of each task, assignment of tasks by unit, and identification of additional resources needed to accomplish each task. The Board will, hopefully, finalize the Plan during a teleconference call yet this spring.

I think you will like what you see in the Plan and hopefully will comment on anything that may have been overlooked that could benefit NACADA members and the field of advising. The Strategic Plan will be continuously reviewed and updated by the Board of Directors to guide the Association in its work and allocation of resources!   Communicating your needs to the Board is crucial to the success and relevance of the Plan.

Roberta "Bobbie" Flaherty
Executive Director
(785) 532-5717
nacada@ksu.edu 

"What do you mean I can’t student teach? I’ve completed almost all my courses! You can’t do this to me!"

How can a student reach this point in the program without meeting the basic admission requirements? If we permit students to begin taking education classes, where is the line drawn beyond which the student cannot enroll in additional courses without meeting admission requirements? Do we, as advisors and educators, have a responsibility to help students meet the admission requirements? What approaches have been utilized and how effective are these strategies?

An e-mail polled the NACADA Advising Education Majors Commission list serve regarding these questions.
1: What test/scores are required for admission to teacher education? Results ranged from:

• ACT. High: Sub scores Reading 27, English 25, Math 27. Low: 21 composite score
• PPST (Praxis I). Sub scores: Reading 178 – 172, Writing 176 – 171, Math 178 – 173. Composite score: 526 – 516.
• Other instruments used: CLAST, THEA, CBEST, WEST-B, C-BASE

2: When must requirements be met? Results ranged from:

• Prior to semester student enrolls in upper division education courses
• By end of sophomore year/beginning of junior year

3: How many credit hours of education courses can be taken before full admission status is granted? Results range:

• 3 - 60 credit hours
• most in the 3-15 credit hour range

4: What is available to assist students in meeting the General Academic Proficiency (GAP) requirement?

• Tutoring Centers; faculty or peer tutoring
• Remedial courses
• PLATO – Web-based program
• Supplemental Instruction
• Learning Plus
• Workshops for Praxis I

5: If students cannot meet the GAP requirement, what options are available?

• Student advised to change major
• Student changes university
• Student blocked from taking further education courses until meet requirement

As a regional open enrollment university, Murray State University permits students with an ACT composite score below 21 to begin taking education courses. Students are not permitted to enroll in practica courses (the 16 required credit hours taken the semester prior to student teaching) without admission into teacher education. Most denials result from failure to meet the GAP requirement.

The concept of blocking practica enrollment is troublesome. Why has the student been permitted to continue in the program to this point? What has been done to assist the student? How could the stress and trauma of ‘blocking’ be alleviated or reduced? In the past, MSU has tried tutoring and remedial courses with limited success and a new approach was needed.

Our new policy is based on the premise that there are excellent future teachers who have difficulty passing the GAP admissions requirements. Astin (1999) maintains that it is our responsibility to be a ‘talent developer’ of students. Public schools are guided by the philosophy of ‘No Child Left Behind’. In the same vein, McCabe (in Callan, 2000) supports ‘No One to Waste’ suggesting that we must provide opportunities and resources for college students to be successful. Astin (1998) argues for a paradigm shift from ‘identifying smart students’ to ‘developing smartness’ so no future teacher is wasted.

The new MSU plan addresses teacher education admission in the freshman orientation course as suggested by Boylan (1999). A lab component is now included that focuses on test preparation through discussion groups and lab practice. Discussions concentrate on time and stress management, study skills, and test taking strategies. Participants construct knowledge and develop analytical and critical thinking skills as they discuss of the ‘hows and whys’ of test questions. As participants take responsibility for discussion and practice, the paradigm shifts from instruction to learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995). Feedback for this semester’s pilot test group has been very positive with participants stating that the discussions about the ‘hows and whys’ of test questions are most helpful.

The Advising Education Commission would like to hear the strategies used on your campus to solve this dilemma. Let us know on our list-serve at
N-EDMAJORS@LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
(Instructions for subscribing to the list serve are found at: http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Commissions/C22/list serve.htm)

Lee Kem
Advising Education Majors Co-Chair
(270) 762-2797
lee.kem@coe.murraystate.edu

References

Astin, A.W. (1998) Remedial education and civic responsibility. National Crosstalk, 6(2), 12-13 Retrieved from http://highereducation.org/crosstalk/pdf/ctsummer98.pdf

Astin, A. W. (1999, Spring). Rethinking academic “excellence”. Liberal Education, 7-18.

Barr, R B., & & Tagg, J. (1995) From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change Magazine, 27(6), 13-15. Retrieved from http://critical.tamucc.edu/~blalock/readings/tch2learn.htm

Boylan, H.R. (1999). Exploring alternatives to remediation. Journal of Developmental Education, 22(3), 204-10. Retrieved from http://www.ced.appstate.edu/centers/ncde/reserve%20reading/V22-3alternatives%20to%20remediation.htm

Callan, P. M. (2000, Fall). An interview: Robert McCabe. National Crosstalk, Retrieved from http://www.highereducation.org/crosstalk/ct1000/interview1000.shtml

The election of NACADA leadership positions for terms beginning in October 2004, began on January 9 when the new online voting system was made accessible to all eligible voting NACADA members. Candidates were seeking election to a variety of positions, including NACADA President, Vice President, Board of Directors members, Region Chairs, Commission Chairs, and Committee Chairs. The election process for these positions concluded on February 6 after which all valid votes were tallied.   Julia Wolf and Bob Maddula in the Executive Office were responsible for developing and implementing the successful on-line voting system.  

The election of the Division Representatives for the Administrative and Regional Divisions for the two-year term beginning in October 2004 was held immediately after the conclusion of the general election.   Only those individuals who would be serving as Unit Chairs within his/her respective division as of the conclusion of the national conference in Cincinnati this fall were eligible to vote for these elected Division Representative positions.

The 2004 election results are as follows:

Board of Directors :

Board of Directors (3-year term each, 2004-2007):        

Division Representatives:

Elected :

Administrative Division Representative (2-year term, 2004-2006): Rich Robbins, Cornell University
Regional Division Representative (2-year term, 2004-2006): Kazi Mamun, University of Southern California

Appointed :

Commission & Interest Group Division Representative (2-year term, 2004-2006): Maura Reynolds, Hope College

Region Chairs (2004-2006):

Mid-Atlantic Region 2: Jon Steingass, Virginia Commonwealth University
Southeast Region 4: Annie Turman, Georgia State University     
North Central Region 6: Carol Gruber, University of Minnesota
Northwest Region 8: Sarah Ann Hones, Southern Oregon University
Rocky Mountain Region 10: Beth Isbell Tapley, University of New Mexico

Commission Chairs (2004-2006):

Advising Administration: Linda Chalmers, University of Texas-San Antonio
Advising Students with Disabilities: Les Hemphill, Cloud County Community College
Advising Transfer Students: Troy Holaday, Ball State University
Assessment of Advising: Victor Macaruso, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Engineering & Science Advising: Jeanette Sorensen, University of Nevada-Las Vegas
Faculty Advisors: Kathy Stockwell, Fox Valley Technical College
LGBTA Concerns: Lynne Carlson, University of Southern Florida
Multicultural Concerns: Tina McNamara, Marquette University
Small Colleges & Universities: William Van Dusen, Regis University
Undecided & Exploratory Students: Elizabeth Higgins, University of Southern Maine

Commission Chairs (2004-2005):

Advising Education Majors: Karleen Edwards, Hofstra University
ESL & International Student Advising: Lizette Bartholdi, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

Committee Chairs (2004-2006):

Finance Committee: Celeste Pardee, University of Arizona
Membership Committee: Brandy Zito, University of Alabama
Research Committee: Joyce Buck, Pennsylvania State University

Election Statistics :

Of the 6562 current members who were eligible to vote in the general elections, 1278 (19.5%) voted online. This year's voter response was higher than in last year's election, which yielded a turnout of 18% and about the same as in 2002 (20%). The eligible NACADA membership at the time the 2004 online voting system was implemented was 6.4% higher than that in 2003. This figure could be slightly affected by the fact that students and retirees are now eligible voters.

In the Board of Directors race, a voter response of 16.4% (3239 votes cast out of a possible 19,686 votes) was received for the three positions elected. Each NACADA member could vote for up to three members of the Board of Directors. For the positions of President and Vice President, response rates of 19.0% (1250 votes) and 16.9% (1106 votes) were received respectively. Of the seven Committee Chairs eligible to vote in the Administrative Division Representative election, all seven chairs voted (100%). Of the 10 Region Chairs eligible to vote in the Regional Division Representative election, eight votes were received (80%).

Of the 2620 total ballots offered for the five Region Chair races, 484 total votes were cast (18.5%), varying as follows: Region 2-134 votes (16.6% of its eligible voting members at the time ballots were made available); Region 4-126 votes (21.4%); Region 6-63 votes (16.3%); Region 8-59 votes (19.0%); and, Region 10-102 votes (19.4%).  

Of the 6762 total ballots offered for the 12 Commission Chair races, 1320 total votes were cast (19.5%), varying as follows: C03-Multicultural Concerns-120 votes (17.0%); C05-Advising Administration-298 votes (21.2%); C08-Small Colleges & Universities-109 votes (17.0%); C13-Undecided & Exploratory Students-279 votes (19.2%); C15-Faculty Advisors-71 votes 18.1%); C16-Advising Students with Disabilities-34 votes (14.7%); C18-Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered & Allies Concerns-32 votes (27.8%); C19-Advising Transfer Students-183 votes (17.6%); C21-Engineering and Science Advising-74 votes (24.8%); C22-Advising Education Majors-27 votes (19.3%); C26-ESL & International Student Advising-9 votes (19.2%); and, C32-Assessment of Advising-84 votes (29.5%).

Of the 29 total ballots offered for the three Committee Chair races, 18 total votes were cast (62.1%), varying as follows: Finance Committee-6 votes (85.7% of its eligible voting members at the time ballots were made available); Membership Committee-5 votes (35.7%); and, Research Committee-7 votes (87.5%).

Two Region Chair races, five Commission Chair races, all three Committee Chair races and the Vice Presidential race were uncontested. This may explain some of the lower response rates received.

The following totals and percentages are presented for comparison purposes:

GENERAL ELECTION	2004	2003	2002	2001	2000	1999	1998	1997
# of eligible voting members at election time	6562	6170	5775	5215	5017	4199	3623	3590
# of members voting	1278 19.5%	1111 - 18%	1124 - 20%	1376 - 26%	1079 - 22%	1089 - 26%	950 - 26%	1208 - 34%
# of regional ballots cast	484 18.5%	621 - 17.7%	432 - 18%	772 - 25%	458 - 22%	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available
# of commission ballots cast	1320 19.5% (12 races)	605 - 17.7% (7 races)	968 - 18% (9 races)	No chairs elected	691 - 20%	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available
# of committee ballots cast	18 62.1% (3 races)	Data not available	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a

The NACADA Board of Directors and the Executive Office appreciate the time that NACADA members took to study the qualifications and platform statements of the candidates and cast their votes online. We also thank all individuals who participated in the election, the candidates who ran for office as well as those who nominated them.  We congratulate those who have been elected to leadership positions;  their willingness to make this commitment to NACADA is greatly appreciated.

If you or a colleague are interested in serving in a NACADA Leadership position and would like to be a candidate in next year's elections, the 2005 Leadership Recommendation Form must be submitted to the Executive Office by October 15, 2004 . An online form will be available later this summer on our web site at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Election/index.htm , which can be completed and submitted electronically. NACADA members will be notified of its availability via e-mail in the monthly "NACADA Highlights". There will also be a version of this form available at this same site that can be printed out, completed, and sent by mail or fax to the Executive Office. Forms can also be submitted at the NACADA National Conference in Cincinnati at the National Conference. Leadership Recommendation forms will be available in the conference program, at the NACADA display booth, and at the conference registration area.

NACADA would like to recognize individuals receiving campus awards in 2004 for outstanding academic advising, faculty advising, or advising administration. If your institution has given such an award this year, please e-mail the following information to Julia Wolf (jqwolf@ksu.edu) at the NACADA Executive Office: exact name of the award plus the award recipient's name, position title, department/unit, institution, mailing address and e-mail address. Please note that these advising award recipients do not need to be current NACADA members.

Thanks to those who have already sent notification to NACADA of your campus awards given out this year. The recipients of these campus advising awards will be listed on the NACADA web site at the link below with links from our home page to the Awards "Cumulative Recipient Lists."

http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Awards/CampusAwards.htm

NACADA applauds these individual on their achievements!  Congratulations to you all!

              In February, over 200 participants took part in NACADA's Second Annual Academic Advising Administrators' Institute in St. Pete Beach, Florida. The events proved to be very successful!!   Institute facilitators Susan Campbell, Rusty Fox, Alice Reinarz, Catherine Joseph, George Steele, Eric White, Nancy King, Ruth Darling, Charlie Nutt and Rich Robbins led the participants through an intense and detailed study of issues facing today's advising administrators including changing student demographics, hiring, training, and motivating staff, effective utilization of technology, campus politics, and assessment. As a part of the two and a half day institute, participants focused on a specific issue or concern and developed an action plan to implement on their campuses. Carol Doris , Georgia Perimeter College , stated "Outstanding experience! It helped me clarify a path for effecting a change on my campus."

              For a day and a half following the Institute, over 230 participants had the opportunity to focus specifically on the issues surrounding the assessment of advising in higher education at NACADA's Assessment of Advising Seminar. Seminar facilitators Susan Campbell, Rich Robbins, Ruth Darling, Tom Grites, Charlie Nutt and Vicki McGillin worked closely with the participants to explore a model for assessment of advising including mission and vision development, goal development, program and student learning outcomes development, and strategies and tools utilized for measurement. Seminar participant Jane Jacobson , Iowa State University , stated, "I came with very little understanding of assessment. I am leaving empowered to help launch an assessment initiative in our college." Thanks go out to our participants for all of their feedback which is being used to develop the Seminar into an institute.

              If you missed either of these exciting events, plan now for the third Annual Administrators' Institute, expanded Assessment Institute, and an additional Seminar in Florida in February 2005. As information becomes available, it will be posted to the NACADA Web site and announced in the monthly NACADA Highlights.

Are you in the process of redefining academic advising on your campus?   Would an outside perspective from an expert in the field would be helpful? Look to the NACADA Consultants Bureau for assistance!   Our Consultants are higher education professionals who bring real world experience, theoretical knowledge, and a genuine interest in helping you and your institution. The NACADA Consultants Bureau can provide a full assessment of your advising services and programs in a written report that includes recommendations. The Bureau also provides keynote speakers, workshop presenters, and other assistance as needed at a reasonable cost.   If you would like more information about the Consultants Bureau, please send an email to nacada@ksu.edu or contact the Executive Office at 785-532-5717.

A great deal of NACADA's outreach is realized through the work of the Regional Division. Several times each year, the ten regional chairs, elected by the members of their regions, meet to discuss the programs and professional development opportunities carried out in each region. One of these meetings is a face-to-face meeting prior to the annual national conference. The remaining meetings are conducted via teleconference and email. Each Regional Chair works with a regional steering committee to oversee all regional initiatives, including conferences and state drive-in workshops conducted in their respective regions.

Thanks to the hard work done by these individuals and their committees, NACADA members have several opportunities for professional development each year. If you have an idea for a one-day advising workshop at your institution, or within driving distance, please contact either your state representative or your Regional Chair to suggest topics and ideas. There is always room for improvement and for growth! The Web site for the Regional Division, with contact information for your region is located at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Regional_Divisions/index.htm

If you would like to become more involved, joining a local workshop planning committee, your regional conference planning committee, or the regional steering committee are all excellent ways to grow and give something back to the organization as well.

Much of the recent discussion within the Regional Division has focused on meeting the needs of our members and reaching out to potential new members. We are always open to, and interested in, your thoughts about how we can better serve you, the member. Please don't hesitate to put NACADA to work for you by suggesting new ideas that could benefit you and your institution. Start by suggesting ideas to your Regional Chair. Please be sure to check out what is happening at your region on your regional Web site at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Regional_Divisions/regions.htm

Terry Musser
Regional Division Representative
(814) 865-7576
txm4@psu.edu

The 20 th anniversary conference for Northeast Region 1 held in Burlington , Vermont was nothing short of fantastic!   This marked the largest attendance of ANY Northeast Region 1 conference with over 270 colleagues representing Canada , New York , Rhode Island , New Hampshire , Maine , Massachusetts , Connecticut , and Vermont celebrating "The Past, Present, and Future of Academic Advising."    Back by popular request as featured speaker was Charlie Nutt, NACADA Associate Director. In addition, and making the conference celebration particularly special, was the presence of NACADA President Ruth Darling who kicked off the conference with her welcoming remarks. (Our special gift to her was a piece of Maine pottery filled with the little guest room shoe sponges that she apparently "took a shine to"!)  

This year marked the inauguration of the Northeast Region 1 "Excellence in Academic Advising Awards". Recipients of these awards were nominated by colleagues from their institutions and/or state/province.   Invitations to submit nominations were part of the conference attendance confirmation process . Five awards were presented during the luncheon to:

• Shoshana Kalfon , Concordia University
• Christine Sohl , University of New Hampshire
• Rick Gatteau , Stony Brook University
• Duncan Harris , Manchester Community College ( Connecticut )
• Lisa Ryan , Cornell University

Congratulations to our NACADA colleagues!

Congratulations also go to Gail Stepina ( University of New Hampshire ) and Beth Higgins ( University of Southern Maine ) who, as co-chairs, put together a superb conference. They were assisted by conference planning committee members: