Archived Advising Communities

  • Advising Second Year Students, 2018
  • Doctoral Students (Merged with Advising Graduate and Professional Students), 2018
  • Ethics & Legal Issues, 2018
  • Large Universities, 2019

What is Archiving?

The field of higher education constantly changes and advising is a continually changing profession. Some Advising Communities run their course as trends come and go. In order to stay current with the profession and association, all Advising Communities will be assessed on a continual basis utilizing annual reporting requirements, the AC Chair Self-Assessment Rubric, the Advising Community Self-Assessment Rubric and Division Rep and Cluster Rep input as evidence of efficacy of the Advising Community in helping to meet the Division goals. All Communities should be actively engaging their members around their topic to help academic advisors help students.

Should a “critical incident” occur with an Advising Community, such as a Chair stepping down mid-term, these same assessment methodologies will be used to determine whether or not to seek another Chair or to start an assessment that could result in archiving the group. 

Should the decision be made, after careful consideration, to archive a group, this process entails letting the members of the group know that the group is no longer active. It will not be an option for future members to select as one of their Advising Community selections (each member is allowed to join 4 Communities) when they become a member or renew their membership. The group's webpage and LISTSERV are removed and it essentially goes dormant. 

Archived groups may be revived should the effort to bring a group back be member driven. Archived groups must follow the complete Process to Become an Advising Community in order to become an active Community again.

What is a Critical Incident?

Critical incidents that will prompt an assessment of the viability of an Advising Community and/ or archiving of an AC can include:

  • Chair stepping down from their role
  • Lack of a Steering Committee to help with the work of the Community and to support leadership development for future Chairs
  • Significant member complaints about a lack of activity within an AC
  • No communication over a prolonged period from the Community with the Executive Office, Division Reps and Cluster Reps
  • Missing key deliverables to maintain minimum expectations as outlined in the AC Chair Self-Assessment Rubric and the Advising Community Self-Assessment Rubric
  • Continually not reaching Advising Community goals or focus on rudimentary goals that don’t align with the minimum expectations of Advising Communities as outlined in the AC Chair Self-Assessment Rubric and the Advising Community Self-Assessment Rubric

Barring any critical incidents that may prompt an assessment, Division Reps will be using the Annual Report to ensure that the AC Division goals are being met through the existing Advising Communities. An AC may be asked to complete the Advising Community Self-Assessment Rubric as a group activity and as a tool to prompt further analysis of the group’s annual goals.

Following is a process to determine whether or not a Community will remain on active status within the AC Division upon submission of the Annual Report:

  • Year 1 of no AC activity, as indicated by report/rubric or lack of report/rubric.
    • AC will be under observation
    • Tracking will occur amongst various groups (e.g. is the Chair communicating with AC Representatives or AC Steering Committee Members?)
    • AC Division Representatives will provide specific items on which the AC will be asked to focus during observation year(s):
      • If the AC meets the minimum requirements outlined and completes required reports, the AC will no longer be under observation and will return to active status.
      • If the AC is unable to meet the minimum requirements outlined, AC Representatives will research the following:
        • Does the AC have a history of struggle to secure nominations for AC Chair (i.e., no members running or interested in running for chair)?
        • Has the Chair communicated with the assigned Steering Committee Member or AC Division Representatives or Executive Office Liaison?
        • Has there been any activity via the AC listserv/email/social media?
        • Was there activity at Annual Conference (i.e. Division Fair, training attendance, group business meeting at annual)?
        • Was there any activity outside of Annual Conference to engage members not in attendance at that event?
      • If the group is determined to be fully inactive, the AC may be archived if there’s a history of inactivity across multiple Chairs/years or if members are notified of the status of the Community and do not speak out on its behalf.
        • Item to note- during a probation year, the AC is still able to submit sponsored sessions at annual.
  • Year 2 - Probation year
    • AC Division Representatives will provide specific items on which the AC will be asked to focus during continued probation year(s)
      • If the AC meets the minimum requirements outlined and completes required reports, the AC will return to active status.
      • If the AC does not meet the minimum requirements, the AC will be archived.
      • Item to note- ACs on probation will still have access to division funding and reimbursement in the hopes of providing tools for the AC to get back on track.