NACADA:
Professional
advisors vs. faculty advisors.
With increasingly tight
budgets, many institutions that have traditionally used professional advisors
are moving toward faculty-based advising delivery systems, because they are
less expensive. I have always advocated for advising models that use a
combination of delivery systems because each brings different strengths.
Professional advisors have student development backgrounds, advising is their
priority, they are typically housed in a central location with easy
accessibility, they are trained to advise across all
program areas, and they are trained to work with students who are exploratory
or developmental. Faculty bring the valuable expertise
related to program and courses, and if they teach in a career oriented program
they may also bring expertise related to the job market. Consequently, advising
models that view advising as a shared responsibility and that use a combination
of delivery systems, build on the strengths of each. Given the complexity of
our programs and the increasing diversity of our students, it is unrealistic to
expect one group to be able to do it all. Also, it is critical that
institutions moving to a greater use of faculty advisors have faculty buy-in.
If they do not, students will not be well served.