As early as 1974-75, an Advising Task Force
proposed that "some system should be provided by which advising
effectiveness can be emphasized, recognized, evaluated and rewarded on the UMM
campus" [UMM 1975]. Three areas were identified in which advising should
be emphasized: in hiring; making decisions to retain, promote or grant tenure;
and in making salary adjustments. There was a consensus in both focus groups
that "on this campus, we don't really value advising" and "there
are no institutional rewards." Support for advising is characterized as
"capricious." One adviser pointed out that advising "never comes
up in evaluation or promotion." Others described support for advising as
"a lot of rhetoric." "Advising is not something we assess...at
the same level as the other two areas [teaching and research]." When
efforts are made to survey advisees in one division, "the return rates are
abysmal."
Advisers' recollections of whether they knew when
they were hired that they would advise varied. One felt that "historically,
the message has been clear that advising is an important part of
teaching." Two said advising was mentioned in the interview process, but
another adviser reported "a controversy between two members of my
interview committee whether advising was service or teaching.
" An adviser from the Professional Staff said that it "was not
part of his job description." An adviser who had taught elsewhere
"just assumed that that's what faculty do."
The division chairmen, who are given the responsibility to inform prospective
faculty about their advising responsibilities, stated that they emphasize that
"advising is part of their regular teaching responsibilities." One
noted that "I think it usually gets very little attention," perhaps
because "our tradition of not assigning any advisees to new faculty, which
I still believe is prudent, unfortunately reduces the impetus for discussion of
advising with most candidates."