Because underprepared first-year students do not often seek academic and personal assistance voluntarily, these authors believe advisors must be intrusive in their approach to helping students navigate the college environment. The concept of intrusive advising was pioneered by Robert Glennan and his associates in the seventies (Glennan, 1975), and further refined in subsequent writings (Glennan, 1983; Glennan & Baxley, 1985; Glennan, 1991). According to Glennan, in intrusive advising, the institution takes the initiative. Advisors do not wait for students to come forward to ask for help but insist that students make frequent appointments throughout the year to check on their progress, identify crisis situations, offer options, make referrals, and motivate students toward academic success.
(1988) However, intrusive advising does not ordinarily mean "hand-holding" or parenting. Rather, it does mean active concern with the students' academic preparation and a willingness to assist them in exploring services and programs that can improve their skills and motivate them to complete their degree, certificate, or educational plan. It also means taking an interest in them personally and approaching them with an open and caring attitude. Such a personal and intentional relationship will help reduce and psychological distance between faculty and students that many first-year students experience when they enter institutional of higher education.
Effective advisors of underprepared students must insist upon regular contact with their advisees regardless of whether or not advisees think it is needed. This intervention allows the advisor to head off potential problems before they arise and reduces the need for crisis management more typical of the underprepared student's style. In crisis, underprepared students tend to spend their energies blaming others rather than solving problems (Spann & VanDett, 1982; DeBoer, 1983). In a preventative mode, the advisor can help the student anticipate problems and model problem-solving skills and strategies.
The literature on advising cites frequent examples supportive of the proactive, action-oriented, intrusive approach to advising being advocated here. For example, Glennan and Baxley (1985) describe the philosophy of intrusive advising as one in which students are contacted throughout on a regular basis throughout the year instead of waiting until the normal once- or perhaps twice-a-semester mandatory advising session or until the student is in serious academic trouble. Earl conceived of intrusive advising as deliberately structuring intervention activities at the first sign of academic difficulty in order to motivate the student to seek assistance. Intrusive advising blends both prescriptive advising and developmental advising (the integration of academic, personal, social, and career goals) in that the advisor is systematic and directive in offering assistance to students while supporting them in identifying developmental needs and accomplishing educational goals. Furthermore, Earl believes that throughout the academic year, and during advising sessions with underprepared first-year students, the advisor should monitor and evaluate the student's performance, recommend specific course placement based on high school performance and college entry testing, and refer students when needed to counseling and learning assistance services. Because there is constant contact with students, advisors have the opportunity to develop rapport, become familiar with students' abilities, discuss their progress, assist in their decisions about majors and careers, and refer them to other programs to meet specific needs. In turn, entering students find a supportive advocate and ally with whom they feel secure in discussing academic and personal concerns.
While some authors (e.g., Earl, 1988) believe that intrusive advising begins with the first sign of academic difficulty, intrusive advising should begin even earlier through an "early alert" intervention activity. In an early alert system, underprepared students are identified even before they arrive on campus through a series of measures such as high school performance indicators, SAT, or ACT scores, state-mandated competency tests, and student self-reported data on their academic and personal needs. This information is provided in advance of the student's arrival and allows the advisor to anticipate possible problems students might face before they get into difficulty and to work with students in taking necessary actions to prevent problems from occurring.
Another element of intrusive advising is effective communication. DeBard (1987) suggests that advisors be person-centered rather than bureaucratic. Underprepared students need to feel that questions about alternative actions will be received empathetically and openly, not processed through a bureaucracy of academic policies and procedures. This approach takes into consideration their short-term options as well as their long-term needs. Making referrals to resources both within and without the institution, as needed, send a message to entering students that they are important in a system where too often a student is "just a number." DeBard also believes that the need for empathy does preclude the need for providing information to students to help them explore alternatives and seek constructive action that will allow them to realize more of their potential.
Go to Sidebar Content