ONCE AGAIN it is time to sign up for classes. For first years, this means taking part in an advising system which serves almost no purpose and inconveniences both students and professors. But the University should not get rid of first-year advising, because it could be helpful in theory. The solution is to totally revamp the advising system so professors are able to devote more time to it.
The lead editorial in the Nov. 2 Cavalier Daily ("Advice on advising") correctly pointed out some of the shortcomings of the advising system and was right in urging changes to the system. Currently, all students in the College who are first or second years and do not have a major are assigned advisers according to their living areas. Students keep this adviser until they declare a major, which the University requires by the second semester of their second year.
According to the observations made by many first years, the advisors sometimes are new professors who know almost nothing about the University and even lack information about their own departments. First-year students are forced to sign up for brief time slots to meet their advisers. What takes place in the advising meeting often can be useless and unproductive. The professor has an incentive to make the meeting go as quickly as possible, so he can meet with the next student he has to advise. The student may also want the meeting to end so he can simply get his advising card, rather than talking to someone who is of little help. This is an ineffective and pointless combination.
This is not how a good advising system ought to work. There are around 150 advisers for first- and second-year students without a major, and each one is responsible for roughly 30 students. Under a better plan, each adviser would meet with each first-year student three times a semester. This would enable the professor and student to actually get to know each other on a personal level, which would make it more likely that the student will be able to make well informed decisions about what classes to take and what majors to consider. Associate Dean Richard Handler, who is in charge of advising, said in an interview that this would not be too much of a time commitment for advisers and is reasonable.
More advising sessions only are useful if advisers know more about advising itself. Currently advisers are trained for a day each year before school starts. This training is not comprehensive enough. An adviser should know about all of the University's requirements, as well as some basic knowledge about different departments and classes. One way to help out advisers is for them to be evaluated.
This is an idea which some faculty already have suggested, according to Handler. Students should evaluate their advisers at the end of each semester, and these evaluations should be used in the same way that course evaluations are. Deans and long-time advisers should try to mentor the new advisers and critique them, perhaps by sitting in on an advising meeting, in order to help them improve. Students also have their own responsibility in this system. Students who miss advising sessions or are late without an excuse should be forced to register late for classes through ISIS.
A final part of an improved advising system is for advisers to receive benefits for their extra work. According to Handler, advisers used to receive $300 a year to reward them for advising until the early 1990s. Although the University does not have enough money to continue to do this, there are other ways to reward advisers; for example, they could be given preferential parking spaces.
Handler points out that the main concern with any advising system is whether faculty-student relationships can be forced upon the faculty and students from the administration. This is a very important point, and any new advising system will only work with the support of faculty and students.
Handler calls this new advising plan "a reasonable proposal to put out for discussion for a complicated problem." A worthwhile advising system for first and second years without a major can only occur if students and faculty put some effort into it. Although it may take a lot of work to establish a new advising system, it will be well worth it in the long run.
(Harris Freier's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at hfreier@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 4 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
