1 / 8

APP ADVISING MANDATE

APP ADVISING MANDATE. RASHMI MALHOTRA. Assessment of Academic Advising Committee.

orlando-wolf
Download Presentation

APP ADVISING MANDATE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. APP ADVISING MANDATE RASHMI MALHOTRA

  2. Assessment of Academic Advising Committee • Reasons for Mandate: Plan 2010 calls for a comprehensive review of advising with the goal of expanding and strengthening the advising system for all students. The Middle States Review strangle suggested the need to assess current policies in this area. Strong academic advising is consistent with the Jesuit value of curapersonaliswhich is central to the Mission of the University. Anecdotal evidence indicates that the quality of advising is not consistently high across University programs. In addition, the advising load varies significantly across programs and faculty within programs. In order to implement best practices in advising, a thorough and extensive assessment of policies and practices is necessary.

  3. Assessment of Academic Advising Committee • Objective: To assess academic advising policies and practices and make recommendations for reasonable and realistic improvements in policies and practices. A comprehensive assessment should be guided by a committee of faculty representing all divisions of the University a swell as administrators who are involved in academic advising programs. Consideration should be given to the development of a University-wide instrument to assess advising on an ongoing basis.

  4. Subcommittee Members: • Anthony Berret • Benjamin Liebman • RashmiMalhotra • Eileen Sabbatino

  5. Proposed Models: • The Freshman Seminar • Saint Joseph’s Advising Center • Current Haub Advising Center Evaluation: • Advising Director • Haub and CA&S Advising Centers • Academic Advising and BlackBoard

  6. Saint Joseph’s Advising Center • 1. the advising approach will represent a centrally administered program  • (concept of one office to serve both HSB and CAS) • 2. the hiring of one director-level administrator to oversee this operation and  • to give this individual a three month window •  before reporting back to the Provost on operational and functional details that best serve both HSB and CAS. 

  7. Freshman Seminar model • Freshman Seminar classes (First-Year Seminars in the proposed GEP) with teachers as the advisors of the students in their classes. • Extend Freshman Orientation by group meetings during first year of freshmen with staff from the proposed advising center and with advisors. • Recommend that students in the upper years take at least one course from their departmental advisor.

  8. Proposals for BlackBoard Advising • Each advisor should have a “class” on BlackBoard that contains all of his advisees. • From the BlackBoard “class” site that contains each advisor’s list of advisees, it will be possible to ‘click on’ each advisee’s name to easily access the advisee’s registration pin, academic transcript, and curriculum worksheet. •  The advising center should coordinate with the IT staff and the registrar so that students and advisors will not only be aware of which academic requirements have not yet been met, but which classes can be taken in the next semester/year to fulfill those requirements.

More Related