This week at DGS, I had my onsite evaluation with Keith. It sounds like he would like to keep me around next semester and that there are opportunities to get involved with the office in a different way, maybe through Pre-Law advising or through National and International Scholarships.
I also attended that IlliAAC Conference. IlliAAC is the organization on campus for academic advisors. I became a member and had the privilege to attend this brief conference. There were 3 sessions in which you could choose to attend different speakers. Dr. Wise was the keynote speaker. This was a great chance for me to network, show my face, and learn. I attended a discussion about Academic Advisors as lifesavers. They specifically talked about how to help students who were struggling. I also went to a talk by two people at The Career Center. They talked about their return rates for appointments and some of the strategies that they do to boost their return rates. Finally, I went to a session on study abroad to learn about programs that are offered. Overall, this was a really good experience for me. All of the sessions were important to me. Study Abroad is helpful because up to this point, all I have been able to tell students is "Go to the study abroad office. They will help you figure out what program is good for you because there are a lot." Now I can at least speak to the variety of programs and what those programs are about and some of the financial aspects involved as well.
I appreciated hearing from The Career Center (TCC) on student return rates because I always tell each of my students to come back in another time if they have more questions. However, I have never made it a set goals for a student to come back whereas the counselors at TCC set a percentage goal for return rates. Thus, they are more deliberate and strategize how to get students back into the Center. They don't want students to come back just to boost their numbers, but they grounded their efforts in a recent dissertation by someone in EPOL and her work on self-efficacy after returning back for a second appointment at TCC.
Finally, I received some strategies on how to help failing students get by and to help them better succeed. Overall, I took away that communication with the student is key and that tough conversations are going to happen but they are necessary.
I spent 6 hours at the IlliAAC Conference, 1.5 hours reading and blogging, and 20 minutes with my internship evaluation.
I read an article this week about advising in different spaces (Arms, Cabrera, & Brower, 2008). Undeclared students were the participants. The three locations of advising were at a traditional central advising office, a traditional residence hall, and at a living-learning community. No matter the location of advising, the students were equally engaged with their advisors but students in living learning communities with access to their advisors had the most enriching educational experiences. These are discouraging findings because DGS has advising at satellite locations including the undergrad library, a cultural center, and a living learning community. Like the article says, in theory, satellite locations for advising sounds like a great idea, but at these findings do not make it seem like it is worth the resources it might take to provide such advising. I am somewhat surprised by these findings. I am surprised because it seems more and more, students want service, and they want it now. With more technology, they want information and help promptly, and if advising is everywhere on campus, it is reasonable to hypothesize that students would be more engaged with advising because they would utilize those services for quick help. More research would be helpful in understanding why there is not stronger engagement between students and advising at locations outside of the central advising office.
Arms, J. H., Cabrera, A. F., & Brower, A. M. (2008). Moving into students' spaces: The impact of location of academic advising on student engagement among undecided students. NACADA Journal, 28(1), 8-18.
Friday, December 14, 2012
Friday, December 7, 2012
Dec 3-7
This week, I received feedback on the blog post I wrote last week. I spent time making edits to my post. I also shadowed another advisor in her advising appointments. I wanted to shadow at this time of the year because I guessed that some of the questions students are asking are a little different than what they were asking during express advising. I thought they might be asking about summer classes, current classes, and very random questions rather than asking to course plan for next semester. One of the students that the advisor met with was one of my students for express advising so I was happy that he made a follow-up appointment for an important decision he was making. Another student was on probation and so the advisor and I did some debriefing after the appointment so that I could see how the advisor filled out the form. From that appointment, I realized how important it would be for any probation student to meet with their advisor more than any other advisor because that advisor knows best what the student is going through and what the issues are. Some of those issues can be personal or embarrassing so the student may not want to tell multiple advisors. I also looked over two petitions and made my decisions about those. Finally, I went to the staff meeting on Friday.
I read "Assessing the Effectiveness of a College Freshman Seminar Using Propensity Score Adjustments" by Clark and Cundiff (2011). This article affirmed my questions about freshman seminars. I have never been convinced that they are useful. From personal experience, I don't even remember what material was covered in my freshman seminar. I have a very small recollection about anything in that class. However, I taught GS 101 to large lectures and all DGS students must take it once. As I was putting together my presentation on registration, I kept thinking that the students will not retain any of this information but they also won't ask any questions about it either. I questioned the purpose of GS 101. This article studied the effects of a freshman seminar class on GPA and retention rates. They found that the students who took the freshman seminar and those that didn't were not different a year later on GPA or retention rates. This is a concerning finding considering that freshman seminars take up resources and students have to pay tuition towards the credit. While the freshman seminar sounds like a good idea in theory, this study seriously questions the seminar's importance. Being that University of Illinois is a research institution, I would hope that it took the time to research the effectiveness and importance (or lack thereof) of freshman seminar classes before implementing them.
I also read "The Development, Implementation, and Assessment of a Systematic Academic Advising Program for Exploratory First-Year Students". I liked this article because it gave an overview of the effectiveness of the undeclared program at Penn State. The students who completed certain guides to help them discover a major were more prepared in their advising appointment to register for classes and think about a major choice compared to students who simply read the guides but did not complete them. The goal of these guides was to increase the amount that the student contributed to their own educational path. Thus, they found the guides to be helpful, if the student did them, because the student was active in the exploration process. I really enjoyed learning about the program at Penn State and it was exciting to see that it has been successful. I think a program like this could be helpful for DGS because throughout my internship, I would read petitions where they would be accepted and sometimes part of the reason was because they were freshmen so they just didn't know the information. In my opinion, this is a poor excuse in most cases and it seems like the program at Penn State could help eliminate the lack of information students know.
I spent about 3.5 hours shadowing and debriefing about appointments, 45 minutes reviewing petitions, 1.5 hours editing my blog post and reading past DGS posts, and 45 minutes in the staff meeting. I also met with the Director and spoke with her about my career and being a reference for me as I start to apply to jobs. I had another advisor review my resume and give me feedback. I spent about 45 minutes working on these career plans. I also read materials for 30 minutes on autism that the advisors received when they had a guest speaker come in on a day that I am not at DGS. I blogged and read for about 2 hours.
I read "Assessing the Effectiveness of a College Freshman Seminar Using Propensity Score Adjustments" by Clark and Cundiff (2011). This article affirmed my questions about freshman seminars. I have never been convinced that they are useful. From personal experience, I don't even remember what material was covered in my freshman seminar. I have a very small recollection about anything in that class. However, I taught GS 101 to large lectures and all DGS students must take it once. As I was putting together my presentation on registration, I kept thinking that the students will not retain any of this information but they also won't ask any questions about it either. I questioned the purpose of GS 101. This article studied the effects of a freshman seminar class on GPA and retention rates. They found that the students who took the freshman seminar and those that didn't were not different a year later on GPA or retention rates. This is a concerning finding considering that freshman seminars take up resources and students have to pay tuition towards the credit. While the freshman seminar sounds like a good idea in theory, this study seriously questions the seminar's importance. Being that University of Illinois is a research institution, I would hope that it took the time to research the effectiveness and importance (or lack thereof) of freshman seminar classes before implementing them.
I also read "The Development, Implementation, and Assessment of a Systematic Academic Advising Program for Exploratory First-Year Students". I liked this article because it gave an overview of the effectiveness of the undeclared program at Penn State. The students who completed certain guides to help them discover a major were more prepared in their advising appointment to register for classes and think about a major choice compared to students who simply read the guides but did not complete them. The goal of these guides was to increase the amount that the student contributed to their own educational path. Thus, they found the guides to be helpful, if the student did them, because the student was active in the exploration process. I really enjoyed learning about the program at Penn State and it was exciting to see that it has been successful. I think a program like this could be helpful for DGS because throughout my internship, I would read petitions where they would be accepted and sometimes part of the reason was because they were freshmen so they just didn't know the information. In my opinion, this is a poor excuse in most cases and it seems like the program at Penn State could help eliminate the lack of information students know.
I spent about 3.5 hours shadowing and debriefing about appointments, 45 minutes reviewing petitions, 1.5 hours editing my blog post and reading past DGS posts, and 45 minutes in the staff meeting. I also met with the Director and spoke with her about my career and being a reference for me as I start to apply to jobs. I had another advisor review my resume and give me feedback. I spent about 45 minutes working on these career plans. I also read materials for 30 minutes on autism that the advisors received when they had a guest speaker come in on a day that I am not at DGS. I blogged and read for about 2 hours.
Clark, M. H. & Cundiff, N. L. (2011). Assessing the
effectiveness of a college freshman seminar using propensity score adjustments.
Research in Higher Education, 52,
616-639. doi: 10.1007/s11162-010-9208-x
Sams, W. P., Brown, L. S., Hussey, R. B., Leonard, M. J. (2003). The development,
implementation, and assessment of a systematic academic advising program for
exploratory first-year students. NACADA
Journal, 23(1&2), 75-84.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Nov 26-30
This week at DGS I wrote a blog post for the Illinois Admissions page. Recently, DGS was asked to provide blog posts for the Admissions webpage. I brainstormed some ideas this week and one of my topics was approved. I wrote my post and sent it in for edits. I also attempted to shadow an academic advisor but all of her students did not show up for her appointments. I think that no-shows are one downfall to an advising office that only does appointments. I know other offices only do drop-ins. When DGS has busy times (right before registration, around midterms, around the add deadline), they will do drop ins but when they are busy but don't have drop-ins then it makes the advisors more frustrated when students do not show up for their appointment. One of the main reasons why it is frustrating is because the no-show took the appointment slot that another student could have had. During busy periods, students are having to make appointments that are three weeks away while other students are not showing up to their appointments. On another day, I was able to shadow another advisor.
I also talked with the supervisor of the CARE Committee to ask if there were any upcoming plans. She asked that I brainstorm some ideas for a one hour retreat someday in December. I brainstormed ideas for that. The goal of the retreat is to provide a relaxing atmosphere for the advisors.
I also reviewed two student petitions this week and determined my vote to deny or approve those petitions. I think that these petitions can become very subjective, so it is hard to remain objective. I went through different academic programs and their requirements.
This week, I read "Academic Advising as a Multisystem, Collaborative Enterprise"by Tukey (1996). This article focused on academic advising as a system that is open to other units on campus and that is open to the institutional mission of the college or university. For example, students may look at academic advising as a system because of the various ways that they get information like from financial aid offices, the registrar's office, faculty, their peers, parents, orientations, and more. Tukey claims that advising must be collaborative, it must be supported campus wide by faculty, staff, students, upper level administration, and it must be open to outside influences. This article seems very idealistic. While all of these suggestions are great, I have realized that at the UIUC, communication and collaboration across a large campus can be difficult. On the other hand, I have also realized that DGS must work with others, with admissions, with orientation staff, with financial aid, with other academic departments, so that we can appropriately advise our students. However, I still feel like I do not have all of the information necessary. I still send students over to the financial aid office because I don't know how many credit hours students must maintain to keep their financial aid. Also, some departments do not want to meet with DGS students because they are so focused on their own students. This makes our job more difficult. I can see why upper administration and faculty would need to help push this collaboration to help with these difficulties.
Tukey, D. D. (1996). Academic advising as a multisystem, collaborative enterprise. NACADA Journal, 16(1), 6-13.
I also read "The Advanced Undecided College Student: A Qualitative Study" by Hagstrom, Skovholt, and Rovers (1997). This article gave great insight into the minds of undecided students and the feelings that being undecided elicits. The researchers found that students felt frustrated, anxious, hopeless, were fearful of commitment, were fearful of being judged, they had low self-esteem and self-doubt, they felt lost without goals, they felt pressure from family, they were hesitant to meet with their academic advisor, and they wanted a meaningful relationship with their advisor whereby the advisor truly understood what the student was going through. These characteristics of undecided students does not surprise me. I think these feelings are very real for students. Once this semester, an advisor told me that they had recently seen students who cried in their office because they just felt lost and could not pick a major. Thus far this semester, I cannot recall a time that I met with a student who openly expressed these feelings other than pressure from family. Many of the students I met with had a good idea of what they wanted to major in. However, I think because the students I met with this semester were freshman, they may not have been as concerned with being undecided as students who are sophomores or juniors, the population of students in this study.
Hagstrom, S. J., Skovholt, T. M., Rivers, D. A. (1997). The advanced undecided college students: A qualitative study. NACADA Journal, 17(2), 23-30.
In total, I spent 1.5 hours reading and blogging
3 hours brainstorming about blogs and writing the blog for the admissions page
45 minutes brainstorming for the CARE Committee
45 minutes at a staff meeting
45 minutes reviewing student petitions and providing my vote
15 minutes shadowing an advisor during their appointment
1 hour reviewing academic programs
I also talked with the supervisor of the CARE Committee to ask if there were any upcoming plans. She asked that I brainstorm some ideas for a one hour retreat someday in December. I brainstormed ideas for that. The goal of the retreat is to provide a relaxing atmosphere for the advisors.
I also reviewed two student petitions this week and determined my vote to deny or approve those petitions. I think that these petitions can become very subjective, so it is hard to remain objective. I went through different academic programs and their requirements.
This week, I read "Academic Advising as a Multisystem, Collaborative Enterprise"by Tukey (1996). This article focused on academic advising as a system that is open to other units on campus and that is open to the institutional mission of the college or university. For example, students may look at academic advising as a system because of the various ways that they get information like from financial aid offices, the registrar's office, faculty, their peers, parents, orientations, and more. Tukey claims that advising must be collaborative, it must be supported campus wide by faculty, staff, students, upper level administration, and it must be open to outside influences. This article seems very idealistic. While all of these suggestions are great, I have realized that at the UIUC, communication and collaboration across a large campus can be difficult. On the other hand, I have also realized that DGS must work with others, with admissions, with orientation staff, with financial aid, with other academic departments, so that we can appropriately advise our students. However, I still feel like I do not have all of the information necessary. I still send students over to the financial aid office because I don't know how many credit hours students must maintain to keep their financial aid. Also, some departments do not want to meet with DGS students because they are so focused on their own students. This makes our job more difficult. I can see why upper administration and faculty would need to help push this collaboration to help with these difficulties.
Tukey, D. D. (1996). Academic advising as a multisystem, collaborative enterprise. NACADA Journal, 16(1), 6-13.
I also read "The Advanced Undecided College Student: A Qualitative Study" by Hagstrom, Skovholt, and Rovers (1997). This article gave great insight into the minds of undecided students and the feelings that being undecided elicits. The researchers found that students felt frustrated, anxious, hopeless, were fearful of commitment, were fearful of being judged, they had low self-esteem and self-doubt, they felt lost without goals, they felt pressure from family, they were hesitant to meet with their academic advisor, and they wanted a meaningful relationship with their advisor whereby the advisor truly understood what the student was going through. These characteristics of undecided students does not surprise me. I think these feelings are very real for students. Once this semester, an advisor told me that they had recently seen students who cried in their office because they just felt lost and could not pick a major. Thus far this semester, I cannot recall a time that I met with a student who openly expressed these feelings other than pressure from family. Many of the students I met with had a good idea of what they wanted to major in. However, I think because the students I met with this semester were freshman, they may not have been as concerned with being undecided as students who are sophomores or juniors, the population of students in this study.
Hagstrom, S. J., Skovholt, T. M., Rivers, D. A. (1997). The advanced undecided college students: A qualitative study. NACADA Journal, 17(2), 23-30.
In total, I spent 1.5 hours reading and blogging
3 hours brainstorming about blogs and writing the blog for the admissions page
45 minutes brainstorming for the CARE Committee
45 minutes at a staff meeting
45 minutes reviewing student petitions and providing my vote
15 minutes shadowing an advisor during their appointment
1 hour reviewing academic programs
Friday, November 16, 2012
Nov. 12-16
This week at DGS, most of my time was dedicated to Express Advising. Students come to DGS on a drop-in basis only to ask quick questions about registering, their schedules, or anything else. Some of the students I met with had questions that took longer to figure out. For example, some students came in wanting to plan their courses for next semester. Usually that takes longer than a 10-15 minute drop-in. Overall, I had a good mix of questions I couldn't answer and had to ask another advisor, and questions that I could answer. Generally, I like express advising, especially for my internship because that means I get to meet with students. One big thing that I don't like is that I don't really have time to plan ahead, meaning I don't get to study the student, see what they have taken, see their test scores, past advising notes, etc. before meeting with the student. It is a bit uncomfortable calling a student back to my office without knowing much about them at all. However, I think that is why express advising is beneficial for me. It challenges me to recall information quickly and accurately. Thankfully, most students are patient with me if I have to ask another advisor a question or look something up for them.
Express advising also opened my eyes a bit more to the difficult job that our receptionist does. At one point, the entire lobby was full of students and there was a line out the door of students waiting to check in. She is in charge of getting all of those students checked in and letting all of the advisors know who is checked in and whether they are willing to see any advisor or their own specifically. She "sparks" the advisors to let us know who is waiting in the lobby. Spark is an instant messaging system. If I were the receptionist, I would probably get overwhelmed and frustrated.
I also continued to work on the DGS website. I have almost all of the bios for the advisors for the new website.
This week, I read "Academic Advising: A Cornerstone of Student Retention" (1978) which basically outlines a successful advising program. Crockett defines academic advising and then goes on to explain that the keys to a good advising program. Institutional commitment to advising, a clear institutional goal for advising, rewards for good advising, a quality process for hiring academic advisors, training for advisors, an advising handbook, knowledge about the students that the advisor will work with, development of relationships between students and advisors, an appropriate ratio of number of students to number of advisors, a system for making referrals for students to other resources, student satisfaction of advising, evaluation of the advising, and the appropriate structure of advising are all key components to a good academic advising program. I am unsure if many of these components are present at DGS. For example, I do not know if there is an advising handbook for Illinois advisors or if there is evaluation of services. I do know that advisors form relationships with students; however, I have not been able to do that because I do not have my own roster of students that I see. I was a part of the hiring of one of the advisors and the hiring committee has changed the process of hiring to be more comprehensive to truly find out if the applicant is genuine about helping students. Also, due to technology, I am able to pull up student files electronically, which proved to be helpful during express advising so that I can learn some information about the student while I was talking with them. Further, although I did not receive an award for advising, I did receive a thank you card from the director of DGS for helping at the Majors and Minors Fair. From experience, it is nice when somebody acknowledges hardwork. Overall, I agree with Crockett (1978), but I wonder if an updated version of this article would include professional development and advisors, so that they remain knowledgeable about the field.
This week, I spent approximately 30 minutes working on the website and 10 hours doing express advising and following up with students I met with during express.
I also spent about 45 minutes blogging and reading.
Crockett, D. S. (1978). Academic advising: A cornerstone of student retention. New Directions for Student Issues, 1978(3), 29-35. doi: 10.1002/ss.37119780306
Express advising also opened my eyes a bit more to the difficult job that our receptionist does. At one point, the entire lobby was full of students and there was a line out the door of students waiting to check in. She is in charge of getting all of those students checked in and letting all of the advisors know who is checked in and whether they are willing to see any advisor or their own specifically. She "sparks" the advisors to let us know who is waiting in the lobby. Spark is an instant messaging system. If I were the receptionist, I would probably get overwhelmed and frustrated.
I also continued to work on the DGS website. I have almost all of the bios for the advisors for the new website.
This week, I read "Academic Advising: A Cornerstone of Student Retention" (1978) which basically outlines a successful advising program. Crockett defines academic advising and then goes on to explain that the keys to a good advising program. Institutional commitment to advising, a clear institutional goal for advising, rewards for good advising, a quality process for hiring academic advisors, training for advisors, an advising handbook, knowledge about the students that the advisor will work with, development of relationships between students and advisors, an appropriate ratio of number of students to number of advisors, a system for making referrals for students to other resources, student satisfaction of advising, evaluation of the advising, and the appropriate structure of advising are all key components to a good academic advising program. I am unsure if many of these components are present at DGS. For example, I do not know if there is an advising handbook for Illinois advisors or if there is evaluation of services. I do know that advisors form relationships with students; however, I have not been able to do that because I do not have my own roster of students that I see. I was a part of the hiring of one of the advisors and the hiring committee has changed the process of hiring to be more comprehensive to truly find out if the applicant is genuine about helping students. Also, due to technology, I am able to pull up student files electronically, which proved to be helpful during express advising so that I can learn some information about the student while I was talking with them. Further, although I did not receive an award for advising, I did receive a thank you card from the director of DGS for helping at the Majors and Minors Fair. From experience, it is nice when somebody acknowledges hardwork. Overall, I agree with Crockett (1978), but I wonder if an updated version of this article would include professional development and advisors, so that they remain knowledgeable about the field.
This week, I spent approximately 30 minutes working on the website and 10 hours doing express advising and following up with students I met with during express.
I also spent about 45 minutes blogging and reading.
Crockett, D. S. (1978). Academic advising: A cornerstone of student retention. New Directions for Student Issues, 1978(3), 29-35. doi: 10.1002/ss.37119780306
Friday, November 9, 2012
Nov 5-Nov 9
This week, I took it upon myself to try to educate myself a bit more on several things. I spent a chunk of time reviewing some of the majors on campus and their requirements. I realized that with express advising coming up, it would be good to brush up on some of the majors and what those majors are about. There are over 150 majors on campus and the advisors at DGS consider themselves to be "general specialists" but I know that I can't even call myself that because I do not know enough about each major. I only know surface level information.
I also spent some time going back to student files from the students I worked with over the summer. I looked them up in a database to look up how they are doing in the classes I suggested and if they had chosen a different path. I also read up on the "advisor notes" or the notes that advisors write -up after they have met with a student, that were written for the students I had over the summer. I did this for around half of the students I worked with this summer. My main reason for doing this was to examine and grade how well I advised over the summer. Advisors talk about patterns in students a lot. For example, advisors don't usually suggest a first semester freshman take Calc 1, Chem 102/103 and IB 150. They suggest this because it is usually too difficult. However, there are some students who can handle all three of those classes. I want to know more of these patterns to know what combinations of classes are appropriate or inappropriate. The only way to know these patterns is to experience them with students. After going over some of my summer students, I think I did a good job. I ran across some students whose schedule was too hard. These are the types of things that I want to take notice of.
I worked on the DGS website this week. I compiled advisor bio. information and tried to track down advisors so that I could get their information from them. I put their information in a consistent format so that soon, it will be ready to be sent to the people who are making the new website.
I spent some time reviewing old petitions again because I wanted to review petitions where the advisors all denied a petition but then the director accepted the petition (which trumps the advisor's decision) or vise versa where the advisors accepted the petition and the director denied the petition. I talked with the advisor about this and she said that the advisors do get mad when these situations come up.I also reviewed another student petition this week as a non-voting member of one of the petition committees. I am still waiting to hear if my decision to deny or accept the petition matches what the advisors decided.
Finally, I went to the staff meeting and took time after the meeting to reflect on the information from the meeting. We had the advisors from Chemical/Biomolecular Eng, Specialized Chemistry, and the Chemistry Major in Science and Letters come in to talk to us about the requirements for these programs. The same two advisors work for all three programs. These programs have very specific and unique details that are difficult to sort through and remember when working with students, which is why I had to digest some of this information after the meeting. One take-away from the staff meetings would be that every new advisor should get time each week to review majors and their requirements because there is so much to know! No wonder students get confused!
This week, I read "Solution-Focused Advising with the Undecided Student." The article was about using solution-focused therapy mixed with advising to help undecided students through the major selection process. The goal of solution-focused advising is to help students identify strengths, abilities, and interests. The authors discuss 5 different ways of utilizing solution-focused therapy in advising undecided students. They said scaling questions could be used. This is where a student places an activity on a scale from 1 to 10 in terms of enjoyment and then the advisor asks how the student could make the activity higher on the scale. Also, a miracle question can be asked, and a miracle question is one that suggests the problem is solved. The advisor can ask presuppositional questions which are questions that are somewhat open-ended and does not allow for a yes/no answer while assuming part of the answer in the presuppositional question. Advisors can be cheerleaders where they highlight students' strengths. Finally, advisors can give the student homework or tasks to do to reach their goal.
These 5 techniques seem small but could be very effective for a student because they seem to help the student reframe their "problem" of not having a major. These also seem like techniques that should be practiced. I think these techniques are used in advising appointments when advisors have enough time to get at the meat of why a student is at DGS. When a student comes in to choose classes, an advisor does not always have enough time to talk with a student about majors. From this article, I think a take-away is that to implement these techniques, I would need to make a conscious effort to ask some important and helpful questions. Perhaps I can write some down to use as a cheat sheet for future students.
Overall, I spent 1.5 hours reviewing some majors, 15 minutes reviewing one student's petition, 1.5 hours working on the website, 3 hours reviewing summer student files, 1 hour reviewing old petitions, 1 hour and 45 minutes in the staff meeting, 20 minutes reviewing material from the staff meeting and 1 hours blogging and reading.
Mayhall, J. & Burg, J. E. (2002). Solution-Focused advising with the undecided student. NACADA Journal, 22(1), 76-82.
I also spent some time going back to student files from the students I worked with over the summer. I looked them up in a database to look up how they are doing in the classes I suggested and if they had chosen a different path. I also read up on the "advisor notes" or the notes that advisors write -up after they have met with a student, that were written for the students I had over the summer. I did this for around half of the students I worked with this summer. My main reason for doing this was to examine and grade how well I advised over the summer. Advisors talk about patterns in students a lot. For example, advisors don't usually suggest a first semester freshman take Calc 1, Chem 102/103 and IB 150. They suggest this because it is usually too difficult. However, there are some students who can handle all three of those classes. I want to know more of these patterns to know what combinations of classes are appropriate or inappropriate. The only way to know these patterns is to experience them with students. After going over some of my summer students, I think I did a good job. I ran across some students whose schedule was too hard. These are the types of things that I want to take notice of.
I worked on the DGS website this week. I compiled advisor bio. information and tried to track down advisors so that I could get their information from them. I put their information in a consistent format so that soon, it will be ready to be sent to the people who are making the new website.
I spent some time reviewing old petitions again because I wanted to review petitions where the advisors all denied a petition but then the director accepted the petition (which trumps the advisor's decision) or vise versa where the advisors accepted the petition and the director denied the petition. I talked with the advisor about this and she said that the advisors do get mad when these situations come up.I also reviewed another student petition this week as a non-voting member of one of the petition committees. I am still waiting to hear if my decision to deny or accept the petition matches what the advisors decided.
Finally, I went to the staff meeting and took time after the meeting to reflect on the information from the meeting. We had the advisors from Chemical/Biomolecular Eng, Specialized Chemistry, and the Chemistry Major in Science and Letters come in to talk to us about the requirements for these programs. The same two advisors work for all three programs. These programs have very specific and unique details that are difficult to sort through and remember when working with students, which is why I had to digest some of this information after the meeting. One take-away from the staff meetings would be that every new advisor should get time each week to review majors and their requirements because there is so much to know! No wonder students get confused!
This week, I read "Solution-Focused Advising with the Undecided Student." The article was about using solution-focused therapy mixed with advising to help undecided students through the major selection process. The goal of solution-focused advising is to help students identify strengths, abilities, and interests. The authors discuss 5 different ways of utilizing solution-focused therapy in advising undecided students. They said scaling questions could be used. This is where a student places an activity on a scale from 1 to 10 in terms of enjoyment and then the advisor asks how the student could make the activity higher on the scale. Also, a miracle question can be asked, and a miracle question is one that suggests the problem is solved. The advisor can ask presuppositional questions which are questions that are somewhat open-ended and does not allow for a yes/no answer while assuming part of the answer in the presuppositional question. Advisors can be cheerleaders where they highlight students' strengths. Finally, advisors can give the student homework or tasks to do to reach their goal.
These 5 techniques seem small but could be very effective for a student because they seem to help the student reframe their "problem" of not having a major. These also seem like techniques that should be practiced. I think these techniques are used in advising appointments when advisors have enough time to get at the meat of why a student is at DGS. When a student comes in to choose classes, an advisor does not always have enough time to talk with a student about majors. From this article, I think a take-away is that to implement these techniques, I would need to make a conscious effort to ask some important and helpful questions. Perhaps I can write some down to use as a cheat sheet for future students.
Overall, I spent 1.5 hours reviewing some majors, 15 minutes reviewing one student's petition, 1.5 hours working on the website, 3 hours reviewing summer student files, 1 hour reviewing old petitions, 1 hour and 45 minutes in the staff meeting, 20 minutes reviewing material from the staff meeting and 1 hours blogging and reading.
Mayhall, J. & Burg, J. E. (2002). Solution-Focused advising with the undecided student. NACADA Journal, 22(1), 76-82.
Friday, November 2, 2012
Oct. 29-Nov. 2
This week at DGS I was lucky enough to have some new experience. I was one of the interviewers for the new advisor position. It was interesting seeing how the candidate came to wanting to apply to DGS. It also was nice hearing the questions that we asked. That way, I know the types of questions that will be asked when I interview for jobs. I also reviewed many student petitions this week. These petitions are mostly for withdrawal from a class. A student fills out a petition and gathers information for it before they turn in the completed petition. The purpose of the petition is to give student's the opportunity to explain why they want to drop a class after the drop deadline. Usually, petitions are completed in the semester after the student took the class. In the petitions there are narratives about students' extenuating circumstances, doctor's notes, psychologist notes, obituaries, syllabi, grades, messages from the instructor and anything else that is pertinent to the student's story. Once the petition is complete, there are petition committees made up of advisors who decide if they accept, accept with advising agreement, accept as one-time-only or deny. Then, either the director of DGS or the executive director of the whole office makes the final decision. A student can appeal the decision. I read through many petitions to try to develop my skills and ability to hold the petition process to what it is meant for. I also had to learn to comprehend a lot of information to put it together to form a timeline and picture of events. I also was able to read what each advisor's decision was and what the final decision was. It was a subject process but I could tell the advisors try to make it objective.
Finally, I read a lot about the probation program at DGS. The program is called PASS and I read through the PASS manual and the activities that advisors use in the program. I also read the student handbook on probation rules.
Working with Undecided Students: A Hands-on Strategy discusses a three step process to helping students discover a major that would work for that student. In step one, the students complete personal profiles to brainstorm what the students are good at and they develop a sense of what different skills they want to have and what concepts they want to know. In step 2, the advisor and student create a list of courses the student could take related to the outcomes of step 1 and they make a list of extra things they could do related to their interests, like volunteering somewhere. Finally, in step 3, the student chooses a major related to step one and two. I think this is a good strategy that advisors in DGS do take, it just is not as deliberate as this strategy. For example, they talk with students about interests, abilities, skills, and concepts but for the most part, they do not write them down. They also talk with students about exploring different majors by taking classes in different areas and getting out-of-class experience but again they do no create a list with the student. For the most part, the advisors also do not necessarily do step 1 during the first meeting and step 2 during a second meeting with the student. However, the advisors are more deliberate when they work with PASS students. With pass students, advisors have worksheets that they fill out with students about goals. I think deliberately going through the process suggested in the article would give the student a tangible piece of paper to reflect on and refer to.
Unfortunately, I currently have food poisening so I had to cut my hours at DGS down this week. I spent about 1 hours in the advisor interview, 2 hours and 45 minutes reviewing student petitions and 1 hour and 15 minutes reading about PASS. I spent 1 hour reading and blogging.
Schein, H. K.. & Laff, N.S. (1997). Working with undecided students: A hands-on strategy. NACADA Journal, 17(1), 42-48.
Finally, I read a lot about the probation program at DGS. The program is called PASS and I read through the PASS manual and the activities that advisors use in the program. I also read the student handbook on probation rules.
Working with Undecided Students: A Hands-on Strategy discusses a three step process to helping students discover a major that would work for that student. In step one, the students complete personal profiles to brainstorm what the students are good at and they develop a sense of what different skills they want to have and what concepts they want to know. In step 2, the advisor and student create a list of courses the student could take related to the outcomes of step 1 and they make a list of extra things they could do related to their interests, like volunteering somewhere. Finally, in step 3, the student chooses a major related to step one and two. I think this is a good strategy that advisors in DGS do take, it just is not as deliberate as this strategy. For example, they talk with students about interests, abilities, skills, and concepts but for the most part, they do not write them down. They also talk with students about exploring different majors by taking classes in different areas and getting out-of-class experience but again they do no create a list with the student. For the most part, the advisors also do not necessarily do step 1 during the first meeting and step 2 during a second meeting with the student. However, the advisors are more deliberate when they work with PASS students. With pass students, advisors have worksheets that they fill out with students about goals. I think deliberately going through the process suggested in the article would give the student a tangible piece of paper to reflect on and refer to.
Unfortunately, I currently have food poisening so I had to cut my hours at DGS down this week. I spent about 1 hours in the advisor interview, 2 hours and 45 minutes reviewing student petitions and 1 hour and 15 minutes reading about PASS. I spent 1 hour reading and blogging.
Schein, H. K.. & Laff, N.S. (1997). Working with undecided students: A hands-on strategy. NACADA Journal, 17(1), 42-48.
Friday, October 26, 2012
October 22-26
This week was a slow week in the office. However, I went to a meeting with the people who are recreating the DGS website. This meeting went really well and they are currently coming up with what the site is going to look like. We clarified what we think the current site is missing. There was a lot of discussion about improvements and what they need from us to move forward. I was surprised throughout the meeting when the people who are putting together the website understood students pretty well. They understood DGS students and what they are about and what the office is about. They also understood students. This impressed me, but I once I thought about it, it made sense that the people who are creating a website need to know their audience. I put together the suggestions I came up with and sent them to one of the people in charge of the new site and I am responsible for compiling advisor bios for the new site. Overall, this week was slow
This week, I read The Irrational Nature of Choice: A New Model for Advising Undecided Students? This article discusses how Americans go through a rational decision-making process and that this process is usually used in academic advising. The rational decision-making process is like a prescription that is made up of facts and evidenced by proof and logic. Instead of using this process, the author suggests that academic advisors focus on the means rather than the ends. He suggests focusing on what students can do to decide a major rather than what major should be decided. He also suggests asking questions and digging for information so find the reason behind what the student says and asks, and to think about the context of the question. Finally, he suggests that advisors try to increase the time that they spend with students to develop a better relationship, especially in informal settings. He calls these suggestions irrational because we usually wouldn't see this as the logical way to approach advising. It must be noted that this article was published in 1996 so it is a bit dated. For example, he talks about the new invention of the internet and how that has changed people's thinking processes. I think that DGS advisors are doing a good job at following this irrational decision-making process to help students. They constantly question what students have done/are doing to explore majors. DGS advisors ask a lot of questions to dig deeper into why the student might be asking a question or stating something. However, I think there is room for improvement, especially as a new advisor. I think these suggestions could benefit my student. As I get more comfortable with advising, I think I will be better at remembering to ask the student more questions and to more fully think about why the student is asking me certain things. His suggestions, to me, are conscious things that I will need to remember to do as I advise more students.
This week, I spent:
2 hours and 30 minutes on the website
45 minutes reading and journaling
20 minutes organizing my desk/new information and resources from campus offices
1 hour 15 minutes at a staff meeting (getting updates on DGS)
Bertram, R. M. The irrational nature of choice: A new model for advising undecided students? NACADA Journal, 16(2), 19-24.
This week, I read The Irrational Nature of Choice: A New Model for Advising Undecided Students? This article discusses how Americans go through a rational decision-making process and that this process is usually used in academic advising. The rational decision-making process is like a prescription that is made up of facts and evidenced by proof and logic. Instead of using this process, the author suggests that academic advisors focus on the means rather than the ends. He suggests focusing on what students can do to decide a major rather than what major should be decided. He also suggests asking questions and digging for information so find the reason behind what the student says and asks, and to think about the context of the question. Finally, he suggests that advisors try to increase the time that they spend with students to develop a better relationship, especially in informal settings. He calls these suggestions irrational because we usually wouldn't see this as the logical way to approach advising. It must be noted that this article was published in 1996 so it is a bit dated. For example, he talks about the new invention of the internet and how that has changed people's thinking processes. I think that DGS advisors are doing a good job at following this irrational decision-making process to help students. They constantly question what students have done/are doing to explore majors. DGS advisors ask a lot of questions to dig deeper into why the student might be asking a question or stating something. However, I think there is room for improvement, especially as a new advisor. I think these suggestions could benefit my student. As I get more comfortable with advising, I think I will be better at remembering to ask the student more questions and to more fully think about why the student is asking me certain things. His suggestions, to me, are conscious things that I will need to remember to do as I advise more students.
This week, I spent:
2 hours and 30 minutes on the website
45 minutes reading and journaling
20 minutes organizing my desk/new information and resources from campus offices
1 hour 15 minutes at a staff meeting (getting updates on DGS)
Bertram, R. M. The irrational nature of choice: A new model for advising undecided students? NACADA Journal, 16(2), 19-24.
Bert
Friday, October 19, 2012
October 15-19
This week at DGS has been fairly busy. I started the week off by doing further research for the DGS website and coming up with some ideas on how to improve the site. Next week, I am meeting with some DGS staff and professionals who are updating the website. I met with the Admissions Director of DGS to talk with her about my suggestions. She responded really well to them and thought my suggestions better captured the personality of the office and what we are trying to accomplish. I also met with the first student of the semester (YAY!) She dropped in to meet with any advisor so it made sense with her to meet with me since I didn't have any appointments. I didn't feel prepared to meet with her because of the nature of her questions. I nailed down how to help students plan a schedule but I have not had any experience talking with students about Credit/No Credit, Grade Replacement, or Drop options. She left the appointment and I felt a bit discouraged but she ended up making a decision and her email to me afterwards was very kind. DGS is having Express Advising today because this is the last day to drop a class, elect credit/no credit, or do a grade replacement. So far, I have seen one student and felt a lot better after meeting with him.
As addressed in our last class period, I had not seen any students yet this semester so I told the director that I could take any student who walks in to see someone, students of an advisor who is out sick (so we don't have to cancel those appointments), and students whose advisor is booked 3 weeks out and cannot get in for awhile. This plan made the most sense. If I continue with DGS next semester, I hope that we can formulate a better plan.
This week, I read What's the Point? An Exploration of Student's Motivation to Learn in a First-Year Seminar by Jody E. Jessup-Anger. This article focused on a freshman seminar class and what motivates a student to learn in this class. Jessup-Anger found that students did not take the seminar seriously at first because it was pass/fail and because it was only 1 credit hour. They did not expect the class to require a lot of work. The instructor too thought that not having a grade scale of A-F was an explanation for why their performance on early assignments was not satisfactory. However, this research also showed that instructor feedback on assignments, critical thinking during class, and "personal connection"(p. 109) to the material in class improved motivation in the class. The researcher suggests that future research needs to be done on different kinds of first-year seminars. I agree with that suggestion because it seemed like the set-up of the course studied is different from General Studies 101. I have become more interested in the value of freshman-seminars since teaching GS 101. I think to myself, "Are students getting anything out of this? I can sense they are bored and this is a waste of their time." Although General Studies 101 and the course that was researched in this study are different, I think the findings can be applicable to GS 101. For example, GS 101 is a 1 credit hour course but still requires homework outside of class. Students in GS 101 might not be motivated to go to class and do well in it because it is only 1 credit hour. However, GS 101 is taken for a letter grade, which might improve their motivation to do well in the class. Also, GS 101 is, most often, not taught by an advisor with a PhD, so they might not have the knowledge on how to provide valuable feedback on assignments or connect the material to each student personally. Still, after shadowing some of the advisors who teach GS 101, I think they provide assignments that are meant to help the student discover what their strengths, interests, and passions are which could contribute to their motivation.
This week I spent about 3 hours working on the DGS website, 4.5 hours meeting with students, 3 total hours reading, blogging, and preparing my academic plan, and 1 hours refreshing my memory on academic policies in DGS.
As addressed in our last class period, I had not seen any students yet this semester so I told the director that I could take any student who walks in to see someone, students of an advisor who is out sick (so we don't have to cancel those appointments), and students whose advisor is booked 3 weeks out and cannot get in for awhile. This plan made the most sense. If I continue with DGS next semester, I hope that we can formulate a better plan.
This week, I read What's the Point? An Exploration of Student's Motivation to Learn in a First-Year Seminar by Jody E. Jessup-Anger. This article focused on a freshman seminar class and what motivates a student to learn in this class. Jessup-Anger found that students did not take the seminar seriously at first because it was pass/fail and because it was only 1 credit hour. They did not expect the class to require a lot of work. The instructor too thought that not having a grade scale of A-F was an explanation for why their performance on early assignments was not satisfactory. However, this research also showed that instructor feedback on assignments, critical thinking during class, and "personal connection"(p. 109) to the material in class improved motivation in the class. The researcher suggests that future research needs to be done on different kinds of first-year seminars. I agree with that suggestion because it seemed like the set-up of the course studied is different from General Studies 101. I have become more interested in the value of freshman-seminars since teaching GS 101. I think to myself, "Are students getting anything out of this? I can sense they are bored and this is a waste of their time." Although General Studies 101 and the course that was researched in this study are different, I think the findings can be applicable to GS 101. For example, GS 101 is a 1 credit hour course but still requires homework outside of class. Students in GS 101 might not be motivated to go to class and do well in it because it is only 1 credit hour. However, GS 101 is taken for a letter grade, which might improve their motivation to do well in the class. Also, GS 101 is, most often, not taught by an advisor with a PhD, so they might not have the knowledge on how to provide valuable feedback on assignments or connect the material to each student personally. Still, after shadowing some of the advisors who teach GS 101, I think they provide assignments that are meant to help the student discover what their strengths, interests, and passions are which could contribute to their motivation.
This week I spent about 3 hours working on the DGS website, 4.5 hours meeting with students, 3 total hours reading, blogging, and preparing my academic plan, and 1 hours refreshing my memory on academic policies in DGS.
Friday, October 12, 2012
October 8-12
This week at DGS brought out many firsts for me. I taught DGS students about how to prepare for registration. I had created a PowerPoint and spent time on Monday fixing up the presentation and practicing. I taught about 100 students on Wednesday and 100 students on Thursday. I enjoy instructing class and I would welcome the opportunity to teach if that is part of my future job(s). I also went to a Mock Admissions session. I have learned throughout my time at DGS that advisors do not fully understand how students get into Illinois. Over the summer, I frequently heard "How did this student get into Illinois if they got an 18 on their ACT and tested into remedial Math" or something like this statement. To open our eyes to the admissions process, many of the advisors and I learned about the process of admitting students. We were given four students, had to review their application based on different criteria, and then make a decision about their status of admission. Given the current debate about affirmative action at University of Texas, it helped to see how holistic the process is though I think the process is not a perfect one. It makes me think that admissions will never be "pure" because humans are in charge of the process. We are biased and emotional and there may be tiny details that attract one admissions reviewer to a particular student. I left the session wanting to know and learn more but overall the session was insightful. My final "first" this week was assisting with Majors/Minors Fair. I helped pass out bags and maps to the students who were attending. At this event, almost every major and minor on campus is represented by students in that major or advisors for that major. Any student can attend the event and gather information about different majors and minors on campus.
Further, last Friday (after I wrote my first blog post), I attended Orange and Blue Days. Prospective DGS students and their families learned about DGS, the benefits of DGS, what DGS does, etc. I was quickly impressed by our admissions director not just because she knew so much information and articulated it well, but because I realized that she probably gets the most skeptical of parents of all the different colleges. I have no research to back this up and my evidence is anecdotal. I overheard many of the admissions directors' conversations with parents and their questions were not about whether their child should attend Illinois over another school. Their questions were about the myths of "potential severity" of starting in DGS (being academically behind other incoming students, not graduating in 4 years), the potential financial loss of starting in DGS rather than at a community college, and others. Therefore, she is dealing with not only selling the university, but selling to parents and students that those students who are exploring majors are the exact students we want, we will make them successful, regardless of the scare factor of spending thousands of dollars on a program that doesn't seem secure.
I spent approximately:
2 hours teaching GS 101
1.5 hours in a staff meeting
3 hours preparing for GS 101
1.5 hours at the Mock Admissions session
2 hours researching websites and brainstorming ideas for the new DGS website
2 hours reading and journaling.
I read Using Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Research to Look at Undeclared Students this week and it discussed using different methods to study if a new class for undeclared students was going to improve persistence rates. The research studied one religiously affiliated university and the university class called Life Calling, Work, and Leadership. This class was optional for the exploring students. They found that compared to students who did not take the class, students who took the class were more likely to graduate in 4 years, and students who took the class but did not graduate in 4 years were more likely to remain taking classes compared to students who did not take the class. Students reported that the class helped them feel supported, helped them discover a path, and clarified that it wasn't a bad thing to be undeclared.Although this study only looked at one university, the evidence supports DGS's General Studies 101 course. Many students may think "what's the point of this freshman seminar?" but this evidence suggests that some curriculum for freshman seminars can have impact in a positive way. This is encouraging news that Illinois is doing a great thing by having freshman seminars for every major.
Reference:
Reynolds, P. J., Gross, J. P. K., Millard, B., & Pattengale, J. (2010). Using longitudinal mixed-methods research to look at undeclared students. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010, 53-66.
Further, last Friday (after I wrote my first blog post), I attended Orange and Blue Days. Prospective DGS students and their families learned about DGS, the benefits of DGS, what DGS does, etc. I was quickly impressed by our admissions director not just because she knew so much information and articulated it well, but because I realized that she probably gets the most skeptical of parents of all the different colleges. I have no research to back this up and my evidence is anecdotal. I overheard many of the admissions directors' conversations with parents and their questions were not about whether their child should attend Illinois over another school. Their questions were about the myths of "potential severity" of starting in DGS (being academically behind other incoming students, not graduating in 4 years), the potential financial loss of starting in DGS rather than at a community college, and others. Therefore, she is dealing with not only selling the university, but selling to parents and students that those students who are exploring majors are the exact students we want, we will make them successful, regardless of the scare factor of spending thousands of dollars on a program that doesn't seem secure.
I spent approximately:
2 hours teaching GS 101
1.5 hours in a staff meeting
3 hours preparing for GS 101
1.5 hours at the Mock Admissions session
2 hours researching websites and brainstorming ideas for the new DGS website
2 hours reading and journaling.
I read Using Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Research to Look at Undeclared Students this week and it discussed using different methods to study if a new class for undeclared students was going to improve persistence rates. The research studied one religiously affiliated university and the university class called Life Calling, Work, and Leadership. This class was optional for the exploring students. They found that compared to students who did not take the class, students who took the class were more likely to graduate in 4 years, and students who took the class but did not graduate in 4 years were more likely to remain taking classes compared to students who did not take the class. Students reported that the class helped them feel supported, helped them discover a path, and clarified that it wasn't a bad thing to be undeclared.Although this study only looked at one university, the evidence supports DGS's General Studies 101 course. Many students may think "what's the point of this freshman seminar?" but this evidence suggests that some curriculum for freshman seminars can have impact in a positive way. This is encouraging news that Illinois is doing a great thing by having freshman seminars for every major.
Reference:
Reynolds, P. J., Gross, J. P. K., Millard, B., & Pattengale, J. (2010). Using longitudinal mixed-methods research to look at undeclared students. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010, 53-66.
Friday, October 5, 2012
First Month at DGS
First Month at DGS:
I started at DGS around the third week of class. Thus far, I have shadowed 3 different academic advisors while they taught General Studies 101. It was important to me to see different approaches to instructing this class and that is what I saw. One advisor, who had a smaller class (40 students), engaged the class in a lot of discussion and group work. Another advisor had a mix of engagement with the students and lecture. The last advisor mainly lectured with some engagement; however, this advisor also had a large class of about 100 students. I am currently in the process of creating a lecture on Registration and Intercollegiate Transfer processes to teach General Studies 101 students. I will be teaching this class next week to two different sections of the class, each with approximately 100 students.
I will also be shadowing the Admissions Director at DGS at the Orange and Blue Day today to learn more about what parents and students are asking. Since I have been at DGS, it has always seemed like the admissions process into DGS is somewhat removed from the everyday tasks of DGS as an office, but the admissions director lives it daily, so I wanted to see what that was like. I think shadowing her will also give me some ideas of how to better the DGS website (more to come on the website below)
I also have been at the staff meetings learning more about many of the logistics that go into running an office like DGS. It has also been a great opportunity to learn more about the different majors to better my knowledge when helping students. The staff meetings, I have found, are pretty critical to being able to keep up with what is going on in the office and how DGS is actively trying to improve services. For example, DGS is currently partnering with the Study Abroad office to create a short spring break trip abroad to give DGS freshman the opportunity to go abroad. DGS students and freshman are an underrepresented population of study abroad students. A class will be paired with the trip that students will take before they go abroad so that they are prepared.
Additionally, I have worked on some marketing materials for the office. I created a flyer that advisors can give to their students to let them know when they can meet with the Stress and Wellness Health Educator, who is housed in McKinley, but has hours at DGS (my supervisor for my GA position :)) I have updated the slideshow that rolls on the TV Screen in the lobby though I don't think it has been put up yet. Finally, I am currently doing research on other general studies programs and their websites in hopes of making the DGS website more user friendly and useful for all of the stakeholders of DGS.
I also joined the C.A.R.E. Committee at DGS. C.A.R.E. stands for Creating A Restorative Environment. The purpose of the committee is to promote wellness in the workplace since advisors are helping students all day. The committee was started last school year after advisors around campus were encouraging departments to focus on their wellness. I think the CARE Committee is a great hybrid of my GA position in stress and wellness and my work at DGS. I am excited to see some of my ideas brought to fruition.
This week, I also worked on the Academic Plan and gathered many journal articles that will give me further incite into advising and undecided students. However, what I have gathered thus far is that academic advising is incredibly decentralized at U of I and the issues with that bring to mind many discussions in the Student Affairs Administration class. Because the university is so decentralized, at almost every staff meeting, we invite advisors from different offices to come talk with us about majors, updates on requirements, and other things. Without this explicit effort to meet with advisors, we would not be able to advise students appropriately and the quality of our service would go way down. Communication is even more important for an office like DGS because it serves students with all future interests in different majors. Also, I found reflecting on institutional and departmental missions in Student Affairs Administration very helpful because it has made me reflect on the purposes of DGS and why we are here. DGS does have a mission or a statement about their beliefs that they strive for daily; however, it is the decentralized campus that can get in the way of the DGS office's ability to achieve that mission. For example, there are some majors that have a rigid curriculum and if the student is exploring different majors, with only one of them being rigid, then the student can be severely limited on their ability to explore those majors.
Overall, I have logged 10 hours per week with my time being split amongst these various projects. This week, I spent 4 hours preparing for GS 101, 1.5 hours at a staff meeting, 1.5 hours at the Orange and Blue day admissions event, 45 minutes reflecting and journal writing, and around 2 hours researching different general studies departments. I also spent time working on the academic plan.
I started at DGS around the third week of class. Thus far, I have shadowed 3 different academic advisors while they taught General Studies 101. It was important to me to see different approaches to instructing this class and that is what I saw. One advisor, who had a smaller class (40 students), engaged the class in a lot of discussion and group work. Another advisor had a mix of engagement with the students and lecture. The last advisor mainly lectured with some engagement; however, this advisor also had a large class of about 100 students. I am currently in the process of creating a lecture on Registration and Intercollegiate Transfer processes to teach General Studies 101 students. I will be teaching this class next week to two different sections of the class, each with approximately 100 students.
I will also be shadowing the Admissions Director at DGS at the Orange and Blue Day today to learn more about what parents and students are asking. Since I have been at DGS, it has always seemed like the admissions process into DGS is somewhat removed from the everyday tasks of DGS as an office, but the admissions director lives it daily, so I wanted to see what that was like. I think shadowing her will also give me some ideas of how to better the DGS website (more to come on the website below)
I also have been at the staff meetings learning more about many of the logistics that go into running an office like DGS. It has also been a great opportunity to learn more about the different majors to better my knowledge when helping students. The staff meetings, I have found, are pretty critical to being able to keep up with what is going on in the office and how DGS is actively trying to improve services. For example, DGS is currently partnering with the Study Abroad office to create a short spring break trip abroad to give DGS freshman the opportunity to go abroad. DGS students and freshman are an underrepresented population of study abroad students. A class will be paired with the trip that students will take before they go abroad so that they are prepared.
Additionally, I have worked on some marketing materials for the office. I created a flyer that advisors can give to their students to let them know when they can meet with the Stress and Wellness Health Educator, who is housed in McKinley, but has hours at DGS (my supervisor for my GA position :)) I have updated the slideshow that rolls on the TV Screen in the lobby though I don't think it has been put up yet. Finally, I am currently doing research on other general studies programs and their websites in hopes of making the DGS website more user friendly and useful for all of the stakeholders of DGS.
I also joined the C.A.R.E. Committee at DGS. C.A.R.E. stands for Creating A Restorative Environment. The purpose of the committee is to promote wellness in the workplace since advisors are helping students all day. The committee was started last school year after advisors around campus were encouraging departments to focus on their wellness. I think the CARE Committee is a great hybrid of my GA position in stress and wellness and my work at DGS. I am excited to see some of my ideas brought to fruition.
This week, I also worked on the Academic Plan and gathered many journal articles that will give me further incite into advising and undecided students. However, what I have gathered thus far is that academic advising is incredibly decentralized at U of I and the issues with that bring to mind many discussions in the Student Affairs Administration class. Because the university is so decentralized, at almost every staff meeting, we invite advisors from different offices to come talk with us about majors, updates on requirements, and other things. Without this explicit effort to meet with advisors, we would not be able to advise students appropriately and the quality of our service would go way down. Communication is even more important for an office like DGS because it serves students with all future interests in different majors. Also, I found reflecting on institutional and departmental missions in Student Affairs Administration very helpful because it has made me reflect on the purposes of DGS and why we are here. DGS does have a mission or a statement about their beliefs that they strive for daily; however, it is the decentralized campus that can get in the way of the DGS office's ability to achieve that mission. For example, there are some majors that have a rigid curriculum and if the student is exploring different majors, with only one of them being rigid, then the student can be severely limited on their ability to explore those majors.
Overall, I have logged 10 hours per week with my time being split amongst these various projects. This week, I spent 4 hours preparing for GS 101, 1.5 hours at a staff meeting, 1.5 hours at the Orange and Blue day admissions event, 45 minutes reflecting and journal writing, and around 2 hours researching different general studies departments. I also spent time working on the academic plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)