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.