Peer Advising monograph Exemplary Practice Application Guidelines

 

Narratives are now requested for consideration as possible exemplary practices to be included in the second edition of the NACADA Peer Advising Commission-sponsored monograph. The intent is to identify outstanding examples of points made within the new monograph which will include all chapters from the current edition of the monograph (see chapter list at http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Monographs/M13.htm) along with two new chapters that will address: 1) the assessment of peer advising and 2) the use of technologies within peer advising.

Nomination narratives are limited to no more than 2000 words. Nomination narratives also may include up to three pages of supplementary documents supporting points made in the narrative. Nominations should also include a letter of support from an administrator over the program director (e.g., Dean, Provost, etc.). Failure to follow nomination guidelines will result in the disqualification of the nomination.  Email questions and completed narratives to publish@ksu.edu.

Nominations with support letter submitted by March 5, 2012 to publish@ksu.edu will be considered for possible inclusion.

Selection Criteria

Final selection of exemplary practices for inclusion in the monograph will be based upon the following criteria:

• Program illustrates salient points within the monograph
• Applicability to other institutional settings, advising delivery systems, and/or types of students.
• Variety of institutional types represented in the overall monograph
• Student learning outcomes intended to result from the program
• Demonstrated effectiveness of the program (assessment data)

Narrative Guidelines

In the up to 2000 word narrative include the following:

Identification information:

• Name of college/university
• State/province or country where you are located
• Institutional type: Public, private (non profit), or proprietary (for profit)
• Institution classification (choose the one that best describes your institution)
• Doctorate granting university  
• Master's college or university
• Baccalaureate college or university
• Associate's college
• Tribal college
• Special focus institution (theology, health professions, art institute, etc.)
• Institutional Size (student head count)

General program information

• Name of your peer advising program
• Peer advising program director's name, title and email address (also include nominators name, title and email if different from director)
• Title of individual responsible for supervising peer advisors on your campus if other than director.
• Mission and/ or vision statement for peer advising program
• Student population group served by your program (e.g., freshmen, transfers, minority students)
• Why and how your program was started
• How long your program has been in existence

Program support and delivery

• How your peer advising program is funded (e.g. student fees, budget line item etc.)
• How your program is structured (e.g. as a centralized unit with an advising center, decentralized with campus departments/schools/colleges, a combination of the above). Provide any additional details that will help explain the administrative structure of your program.
• How your program is delivered to students (e.g. one-to-one, seminars, non-credit group meetings, for credit course)
• How peer advisors are utilized on your campus, (e.g. what roles do they play such as friendly contact with students, independent academic advisors for first year students, work as academic advisors in residence halls or advising center)
• How peer advisors are recruited on your campus, (e.g. faculty/staff or student organization nomination, targeted letters sent to student leaders, posters/recruitment flyers on campus)
• Are peer advisors compensated? If so, how? (e.g. course credit, stipend, scholarship, hourly wage).
• Are peer advisors recognized and/or rewarded on your campus beyond compensation? If so, how? (e.g. peer advising award, dinner, certificate from Dean/President).
• Do you have a training program? If yes, describe key competencies and topics covered in training. Include sample handouts as an addendum to the narrative.
• Assessment for the PROGRAM
• Performance evaluation process in place for INDIVIDUAL PEER ADVISORS

Program outcomes

• What you consider to be your programs most distinctive features?
• What you consider to be your programs strengths and challenges?
• Please supply assessment data to support Outcomes

Submission and Selection

Submit the narrative, up to three pages of supporting documentation, and the administration letter of support via email to  publish@ksu.edu no later than March 5, 2012.  

The selection committee will narrow the submissions to a group of finalists by mid-May. Directors of programs selected to go to the final selection round will be contacted shortly thereafter with questions and/or suggested revisions from the selection committee. Final determination of programs to be included will be made in July.  

Additionally, directors of programs selected to move to the final round will be asked to provide two short (200 word) student essays. One essay should focus on a student who benefited from the program. The other, from a peer advisor, should discuss how he or she has been impacted from the experience. Edits/revisions to narratives and student essays for programs moving the second round will be due in mid-September.

---

Question: How can I make our submission stand out in the crowd?

Answer: Because we anticipate many submissions the editors advise all to highlight unique features that will stand out to the selection committee. Look at the first edition of the monograph and see if any of the areas discussed in those chapters are features of their peer advising program. The use of technology and assessment efforts are two new chapters in this monograph and the selection committee will be looking for narratives that exemplify what these authors will be discussing in those chapters. Finally be sure to meet the submission deadline since late submissions will not be considered.