Members in Attendance

Albert Matheny, Chair (2006-2007), University of Florida

AD HOC:

Pat Folsom (Advisor Training and Development Commission Chair), University of Iowa

Rich Robbins (Summer Institute Advisory Board Chair), Cornell University

Pamela Marsh-Williams (Administrators' Institute Advisory Board Chair), University of Massachusetts-Amherst

Betsy McCalla-Wriggins (Annual Conference Advisory Board Chair), Rowan University

Maura Reynolds (Publications Advisory Board Chair), Hope College

OUTGOING:

Kathy Davis (2007), Southwest Missouri University

David Spight (2007), The University of Texas at Austin

CONTINUING:

Melva Harbin (2008), University of Texas-Austin

Glenn Kepic (2008), University of Florida

Leigh Cunningham, Ex Officio, NACADA Executive Office

Members Absent

AD HOC:

Cindy Iten (Advising Administration Commission Chair), University of Kentucky

Jayne Drake (Advisor Training Video Advisory Board Chair), Temple University

Sharon Aiken-Wisniewski (Assessment Institute Advisory Board Chair), University of Utah

Karen Thurmond (Webinar Advisory Board Chair), University of Memphis

OUTGOING:

John Burton (2007), Metropolitan State University

Susan Campbell (2007), University of Southern Maine

Chrissy Davis (2007), Seward Community College

Nikki Allen Dyer (2007), Wor-Wic Community College

Molly Wier (2007), Eastern Michigan University

CONTINUING:

Nora Allen (2008), University of Louisville

Chris Armstrong (2008), University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign

Zalika Brown (2008), Harold Washington College

Stephanie Gillan (2008), Temple University

Rhonda Sprague (2008), University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point

INCOMING:

Maria Avalos (2009), Texas Lutheran University

Karen Boston (2009), University of Arkansas-Fayetteville

Deborah Hull (2009), Arizona State University-Tempe

Lori Ufford (2009), Columbia Gorge Community College

Documents Provided

• Experienced Academic Advisor Professional Development Needs Survey - Executive Summary of Results
• Experienced Academic Advisor Professional Development Needs Survey - Results from Web
• Analysis of Professional Development Survey by Stephanie Gillin

Following a welcome and introduction those present, Albert began the meeting.

I.  New Business - Discussion of how the Committee can address professional development needs across all aspects of NACADA

Albert began by reviewing NACADA’s strategic goals that relate directly to the Professional Development Committee. He noted that essentially all five of NACADA’s goals relate directly or indirectly to professional development, so that our task is to make our goals carry NACADA’s goal farther for 2007-2008. This is largely a matter of creating linkages between our committee and other NACADA committees, commissions and interest groups.

• In particular, research is something that professional development is all about and is sort of an unexplored horizon in our organization, thus a stronger connection with the Research Committee needs to be developed. We can promote research that identifies models of advisor development, for example, and these could be very valuable to the Member Career Services Committee and its goals. In effect, one linkage (to Research) becomes two linkages (to Member Career Services as well).
• The point of making research a priority for our committee is that research results are coin of academic commerce, and they make it possible for us to converse with higher level administrators. As Stephanie Gillin’s valuable review (above) of the survey of experienced advisors points out, these veterans complain that they can’t seem to influence their superiors about the importance of advising in their institutions’ academic missions. Thus, we need to provide them some ammunition!
• Related to the above points is the importance of working on a “career ladder” of professional advising that NACADA can then use to establish an argument for progressive promotion in the advising ranks in the academy. Some schools (like Temple and UF) already have these, and yet most schools don’t allow for any promotion at all. This is not good for advisors’ career plans nor is it good for NACADA. Again, we already have strong interest from the Member Career Services Committee on this topic, and we need to explore its development with that committee this year.
• Of course, career consciousness among advisors is a primary motivation for involvement in NACADA and for attendance at state, regional, and national NACADA meetings and institutes.
• Another way to promote professional development is to motivate advisors to seek awards on their campuses and, even more importantly, to motivate higher administrators to provide awards for advising . The very presence of advising awards encourages travel to advising conferences, for example, because it gives advisors funds to do so. Another advantage of promoting advising awards on campus is that it makes advising more relevant for promotion and tenure in the case of faculty advisors. With a strong message of “advising as teaching,” we can help our faculty advising colleagues make a better case for their advising efforts, and this leads to the next point about advisor training.
• There is an upcoming revision to the Faculty Advisor Training Video, and we need to have input into that, because training is the foundation of professional development.
• Given all of the above, it might be a good idea to consider staging a National Pre-Conference Session entitled “Speaking Truth to Power” (with apologies to Aaron Wildavsky who wrote a book by the same name), in which we provide advisors and advising administrators information about how to articulate their message about advising to the administration on their campuses.

Discussion occurred during the presentation of these points, and here are the comments of committee members. Someone suggested that the career ladder models should be developed with sensitivity to the different types of academic institutions, and that it would be a good idea to work with the different Commissions (e.g., Two-Year Commission and Small Colleges and Universities Commission) to develop appropriate models (apologies for not noting the source of this suggestion).

• Rich suggested adding something about research on career ladders and enrollment management to Summer Institute (SI) curriculum.
• Betsy agreed that this would be good for SI, particularly if it gave people some samples of the types of research they could do that would add to the body of knowledge even if they are not PhD-level scholars.
• Betsy also suggested that if we could identify places where higher administrators gather and have NACADA higher administrators seek to have opportunity to speak to them about the importance of advising.
• Pamela talked about the new track at Administrators Institute as one avenue for this, but Kathy said she thinks it is important that we go to them, not just try to get them come to us. Pat recommended the Big Ten CIC meeting as one example of a place this could be implemented.
• Rich shared that the Board voted intentionally to seek relationships with eight other organizations (such as NASPA and ACPA), and these might be helpful in gaining the attention of higher level administrators about NACADA and advising.
• Kathy mentioned that previous Pacesetter winners could be good contacts in this regard.
• There were also suggestions about how to encourage better attendance at events and better use of NACADA materials on our campuses for training and advisor awareness. It was suggested that we could develop “facilitation questions” to go with Clearinghouse articles and other materials that might assist advisors in leading brown bags lunches or other campus get-togethers. We could also facilitate ways for conference attendees to write up “what I learned at conference” reviews to give to their administrators when they return home.
• Glenn suggested the committee beef up its web presence on these and other issues, since many members can’t get to the venues and still need professional development guidance at a distance.

II. Meeting Adjourned.