attempt to do it well (Carstensen & Silberhorn, 1979 as cited in Flanagan et al., 1998,“The Scholarship” 3). As McKeachie concluded:The result of all this is that though many catalogues will carry ambitiousstatements about faculty [educational] counseling, conjuring up an imageof the wise, genial, pipe-smoking academician in leisurely discussion withthe eager, respectful student who avidly gathers up the words of wisdomthat are dropped in the course of this conversation, the stark reality of therelationship is too often that of a meeting between a rebelliously impatientstudent and a harried and disgruntled faculty member. (1994, p. 177)Advising clearly has benefits for student retention, growth, and development as wellas higher graduation rates. Titley and Titley (1982) quoted from D.S. Crockett’s work,noting that “academic advising properly delivered can be a powerful influence onstudent growth and development” while also enhancing and enriching “the educationaldevelopment of any college or university” (p. 46). Titley and Titley also cited Noel’sconclusion that competent, compassionate advisors were the key to student retention:“How an institution’s academic advising measures up to students’ needs is the majordeterminant of whether or not the institution has a ‘staying’ environment” (p. 47).Petress (2000), a communication professor at the University of Maine, echoedCrockett’s and Noel’s assertions. Petress believes that effective advising not only helpsstudents academically but also emotionally, and it “assists institutions by reducing manyavoidable problems” (2000, p. 598). There’s even a community college in Texas that isso committed to quality academic advising as a method to retain students that it selects20 professors to serve as advisors and pays them $25 an hour to do so above theirstandard pay (Lords, 2000).Literature on academic advising encourages faculty members to meet with eachadvisee multiple times throughout the semester (Light, 2001), separate the registrationfunction of academic advising from career counseling (Titley & Titley, 1982), be surenot to limit the time given to a student for advising (Petress, 2000), and to makeadvising required or strongly encouraged (Flanagan et al., 1998). Many researchersrealize, however, that academic advising does not always look like this model. In fact,Habley (1988) said that advising can occur in one of seven models:• Faculty only—a faculty member in the department is assigned to a certain numberof students as advisees,• Supplementary advising—faculty are advisors but the actual advising takes placein a central office during a specified time with support staff to assist with schedulingappointments,• Split advising model—a central office of advisors deals with some students (likeentering freshmen) while faculty deal with the remainder,• Dual advising model—faculty only advise on major courses while a central officetakes care of students’ other questions and concerns,8Feedback April 2003 (Vol. 44, No. 2)
• Total intake model—all students begin with a central advisor and move to afaculty member in the department only after completing a certain number of hoursor a status like junior-ranking,• Satellite model—academic centers are set up within departments but faculty donot advise, and• Self-contained model—all advising takes place in a central office with noassistance from faculty.Habley (1988) noted that the most common model used on campuses is the“faculty-only model,” which is inappropriate if the faculty/student ratio is clearlyunreasonable.Kennesaw State’s Communication Advising CenterThis was the scenario at my institution when I joined the faculty in fall of 2000, and itremains so today. The reality of our department is defined by the following data: over500 declared majors who choose one of three tracks (media studies, public relations, ororganizational communication), three tenured Associate Professors, three tenure-trackAssistant Professors, two tenure-track Instructors, and one Department Chair. Whilewe utilize temporary full-time instructors and adjunct instructors, neither category iseligible to assist with academic advising. Thus, we have a departmental student-tofacultyratio of 56:1.Prior to Fall of 2001, advising in the department was done according to the “dualadvising model” as described by Habley (1988). Students were designated a facultyadvisor upon declaring their major, but they could choose to receive academic advisingfrom whomever’s door was open—or they could visit the College of Humanities andSocial Sciences professional advisor. Advising took place at the convenience of thestudent, who had the availability to receive advising as many times during a semester ashe/she chose. Advising was typically done during the faculty member’s office hours,although students felt quite comfortable “dropping in” to ask questions or go overscheduling issues. The department thought of “advising” as an all-encompassing word,meaning that students could receive academic advice, career counseling, and personalcounseling during the same visit.While students were not required to receive advising prior to registration,communication majors took advantage of the option. As the student populationincreased, faculty began to feel overwhelmed by the advising workload, and there wasno way to equitably share the load because of the external factors of (1) day versusnight students, (2) availability of faculty, (3) students’ preference for certain professors,and (4) recommendations from others on campus as to whom the student should seefor advising. The result was a tremendous amount of time being spent to advisestudents without any decrease in teaching, scholarship, or service obligations. Tofurther the advising woes, the college’s professional advisor resigned in August of 2000and was not replaced.The department voted in early 2001 to institute an Advising Center, modeled afterthe successful Psychology Advising Center at Kennesaw State, that would meet Habley’sBEA—Educating tomorrow’s electronic media professionals 9
- Page 1 and 2: Educating tomorrow’selectronic me
- Page 3 and 4: CONTENTSESSAYTransitionsRalph J. Be
- Page 5 and 6: ESSAYTRANSITIONSBy Ralph J. Begleit
- Page 7 and 8: party. It was a fabulous experience
- Page 9 and 10: een accustomed to leaving my “whe
- Page 11: ADVISING:THE LITTLE SECRET HIDDEN I
- Page 15 and 16: Response to the survey has never re
- Page 17 and 18: assessment of the Center in conclus
- Page 19 and 20: SENSE-MAKING AND THE PERSONALVIDEO
- Page 21 and 22: database. A limited implementation
- Page 23 and 24: RESEARCHTHE PARTICIPATION OF WOMENI
- Page 25 and 26: Local newsroom employmentIn July 20
- Page 27 and 28: the referral source of each person
- Page 30 and 31: Discussion and ConclusionsOur analy
- Page 32 and 33: Lind, R. A., & Braun, M. J. (1996,
- Page 34 and 35: downloading services. www.schoolsuc
- Page 36 and 37: major professional selling points i
- Page 38 and 39: COURSE GRADINGElement Percent of Du
- Page 40 and 41: REVIEWHyde, Stuart (2003). Idea to
- Page 42 and 43: The primary purpose of this study i
- Page 44 and 45: detailing the number of phone numbe
- Page 46 and 47: these newscasts that “primary”
- Page 48 and 49: As Table 1.3 shows, comparing only
- Page 50 and 51: RESEARCHACCURACY IN LOCAL TELEVISIO
- Page 52 and 53: anked 26 to 50. After eliminating n
- Page 54 and 55: 2. How often do news sources compla
- Page 56 and 57: Participants were asked which one m
- Page 58 and 59: These stations still archive script
- Page 60 and 61: TABLE 12002 BEA News Division stude
- Page 62 and 63:
Eiles at WCHS-TV, Portland, Maine.
- Page 64 and 65:
ESSAYWHAT’S OLD IS NEW AGAIN:THE
- Page 66 and 67:
are. If the news agency editor or r
- Page 68 and 69:
said Sagan, just as broadcast chann
- Page 70 and 71:
“We’re perfectly positioned to
- Page 72 and 73:
John Miller, News Director of KTVT-
- Page 74 and 75:
CLASSROOMGUEST SPEAKERS IN BROADCAS
- Page 76 and 77:
students just starting out, their m
- Page 78 and 79:
professionals, often with varied jo
- Page 80 and 81:
District NewsTo the members of Dist
- Page 82 and 83:
several held on college campuses. I
- Page 84 and 85:
2ND PLACE: Jillian Oppegard, Colora
- Page 86 and 87:
Faculty News CompetitionC.A. Tuggle
- Page 88 and 89:
AWARD OF EXCELLENCE: Kevin Hager, W
- Page 90 and 91:
BEA PRESIDENT’S MESSAGEGOALS AND
- Page 92:
THANK YOU to the following individu