Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • DEB/LAURAWelcome everyone, introduce US – name, job titleWe’re highlighting one creative example of grass-roots collaborationFirst tell you a little bit about our University so you get the lay of the landWe’re going to tell you our story – what we are and what we do.Then Highlight some benefits & challenges as well as some tips Present some questions to help you consider your home institution structure and how you might develop or start a similar group if you don’t have one already. We are going to have questions at the end, but if you have one in the meantime, please feel free to raise your hand.
  • DEBHow our geography makes us unique.Juneau (2,416) 59.5% (flagship) Ketchikan (633) 15.6% Sitka (1,013) 24.9%UA systemUA System: UAS, UAA, UAF, Statewide
  • DEBWe are a public, open enrollment institution. Although we are 4-year liberal arts institution, we have function as a community college for SE AK, by offering associates, certificates and occupational endorsement programs. We serve a large number of students in and outside of AK with E-learning (DE).We also welcome community members seeking continuing education/personal enrichment. In addition to a great deal of diversity in our student body, we have a semi decentralized advising model. This slide illustrates how students can access advising from many different points. Some challenges are:Our student body is not traditional, our avg student age is 31.5, 12% of our students are AK NativeWe have a vast number of underprepared studentsStudents don’t come to us in a linear manner…they drop in at any point. There are a lot of transitions and referrals (pre-major – major, undecided-dec)Advisors throughout UAS has a variety of different roles for ex: faculty support, vs. notWe all wear many hatsTo summarize, we were silo’d and didn’t know what the student experience was on other campuses or even in other offices.
  • LAURABasically, a giant case for collaboration, at least to improve communication.This is not rocket science, we knew we needed to talk to each other.Things that we knew could be addressed through collaboration:Who the players arewhat everyone’s jobs were What are the Student paths – what are the black holesHow can we have consistent information regardless of where students connectIn retrospect, we put the cart before the horse - It’s nice to see there is research to confirm we were on the right track
  • DEBSix years ago, we had the groundbreaking idea for a teleconference with other advisors, including regionally. This idea quickly grew into what we then called a “summitt”. We cobbled together funding to bring people from Ketchikan and Sitka, and even feed them, for what ended up being a two-day work retreat. NOW, 6 years later, we are a regional peer to peer working group
  • DEB/LAURAHighlight beginning,go year by yearAccomplishments/Challenges and unique attributes (crazy agenda)In the beginning, we packed it in, our agenda was ridiculously filled with huge tasks only relegated 15 min each. We did come out with a manual, but the biggest outcome was a commitment to meet regularly.Initially, there was no basis to trust that we would be productive. Now that we know one another, we are comfortable allocating several hours to one topic, because we know we will be productive because our goals are now aligned. Initially our meetings were an hour, monthly via teleconference. We still have that model but have allowed ourselves two hours monthly or even longer for training meetings. We also kept going with the yearly two day work retreat – very productive and worthwhile to be in the same room, out of our daily roles.
  • Here’s another quote that reinforces what we are doing is a good idea. In addition to appreciating all our productivity that results from our group, it is important to recognize what it does for our ultimate goal: student success and retention. Where did our journey take us?
  • DEB : I want to take some time to address some benefits of having this kind of collaboration. THESEARE THE first level or SURFACE “EASY” BENEFITS. Can be easily achieved even through short-lived formal collaboration. This first tier characterizes the kind of benefits we were hoping for when we began in 2007.NOTE: address each piece clockwiseReferrals – know where you’re sending someone, prepare themExamples interspersed:Policy changes in Registrar’s or Finaid – Deb emails group Elizabeth using space at SRC for shared resources)Always bringing it around to better services for students.Collaboration:
  • DEB: Second tier of benefits is a direct result of us continuing to function as a group. Our group has become effective on an even deeper level than the surface benefits we just mentioned. Throughout this phase or process, we have utilized NACADA resources a great deal as a resource and guide for our development. Examples of ALIGNMENT : Philosophy alignment: Mission, Student Learning Outcomes, Common Data Point gathering, Staff positions:Training opportunities, learning from one anotherStudent positions: A&S and SRC cross training, standardizationPerception: Accepted more and more as a resource, participation in Strategic Planning, Advising Manual targeted to new faculty advisorsOne important note on alignment: this all really helped with buy in: both from group members as well as outsiders {administration}
  • DEB:Thesewere the outcomes we could not have predicted at our first meeting. EXAMPLES: Policy changes: mandatory advising and earlier admissions deadlineNew programs: Early AlertInstitutional Support: Budget for retreat and travelAssessment: CAS, Student Surveys, Data Collection
  • LAURA:Shockingly, not everyone everywhere always thinks without question that our group is fabulous. There are a couple of different ways to look at it. We address the lack of familiarity (of who are group is) by frequently keeping our supervisors apprised of what we’re doing/accomplishing. And we strive for collection of diverse viewpoints, which is a strength of our group.
  • DEB:Lack of synergy: like Laura mentioned, acceptance of diverse viewpoints are not always embedded in the institutional culture a PC way of saying “we can’t all play nice together” (Jim Everett example – interim provost “How is this a good use of your time?” This was AFTER we had produced a widely distributed Advising Manual)Reporting lines: Deans, etcLack of embedded inst: Lack of money and/or timeAddtl. Workload: we create more work for ourselves which is what it isLeadership: here’s the one element we can control, and will address.
  • DEB: Itwas awkward for me to step forward into this role. I was much newer at UAS than many of the others, but my particular position lent itself to being a central conduit for information sharing.A light hand, but a hand none-the-less.Laura is MY buddy! I have at least 3 people I can turn to in a pinch to step into the leadership role: communication or meeting facilitation, etc.It does increase your workload: someone has to absorb this into their position. It does NOT necessarily need to be the person who has advised the longest or been at your U forever. Make sure it makes sense for both the position and the personality.
  • LAURASo these are some things we are currently working on and will go into the future.Is this sustainable?The things that don’t change are our challenges in terms of student preparedness, our geography, and generally not enough time in the day.Our model is specific to our circumstances, yours might look different.Think about what piece of this might be relevant to you.
  • Question for audience: How many people have a formal or informal group for collaboration in advising?Of those that have those groups, how many include people outside your own immediate department?Of those, how many include people who are not primary advisors?How many of you with groups meet on a regular basis?
  • GregoireHoseyNACADA-Region8-2012

    1. 1. NETWORKING FOR THE COMMON GOOD –GRASSROOTS COLLABORATION IN ADVISING Presented by Deb Gregoire & Laura Hosey of University of Alaska Southeast NACADA Region 8 Meeting , Portland, Oregon – March 2012
    2. 2. WELCOME!Deb Gregoire, Corrdinator of Advising Laura Hosey, Advising Coordinator Student Resource, UASCenter School of Arts & Sciences
    3. 3. WHERE WE’RE FROM
    4. 4. A LITTLE MORE ABOUT US Student Schools: Services: Arts & Sciences; Education; Student Career Resource Education; Center Management Student Campuses: Demographics: Juneau (59%), 53% degree skg Ketchikan (15%) 24% full time & Sitka (25%) 3500 total
    5. 5. Collaboration: a long quote about it To be a healthy functioning campus of inter- connected teams, colleagues should regularly converse with each other. If making the rounds of these suggested academic and student service areas feels daunting, advisors might create a representative advisory council to accomplish the task. Such an advisory council may also have the indirect benefit of creating a high functioning, interconnected student services network that crosses both academic and student affairs boundaries. (Olive-Taylor, 2010)
    6. 6. UAS REGIONAL ADVISING GROUPWHAT? A peer to peer working group spanning three regional campuses.WHO? Advisors; pre-advising staff; some faculty; relevant support servicesWHY? Communication; alignment; strategy. Advising activists!
    7. 7. Here’s our story in a timeline
    8. 8. Research shows: It’s a good thing.“Institutions that have cross-unit collaborationbuilt into the culture are likely to present a moreunified image of institutional culture.” (Creamer,2003) ““Administrative constraints or particularinstitutional histories can complicate efforts tokeep good company across campus, but giventime and perseverance coalition efforts createchange “(Whiteside, 2001).
    12. 12. Why can’t we all just get along?“Conflict can arise from lack of familiarity of the players, or just simply differing philosophies. To maintain collaborative relationships, the acceptance of diverse viewpoints must be embedded in the administrative culture.” Creamer (2003)
    13. 13. CHALLENGES Lack of synergy Multiple reporting lines Lack of embedded institutional support Additional workload Leadership
    14. 14. ONE CHALLENGE ADDRESSED: Leadership Know/learn how to facilitate meetings Delegate! Polish your public speaking skills Know when to ask for help Identify your buddy Thought: Directness and Diplomacy are not the same thing
    15. 15. WHAT DOES OUR FUTURE HOLD? New advisor training Advising syllabus: under construction! Advising blog and podcasting: under construction- welcome to the 21st century! Advising information management tool: agreement to adopt the same system for continued seamlessness Continued dialogue; monthly audio meetings and yearly work retreats Assessment. Assessment. Assessment…..
    16. 16. QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF  Do advisors understand the structure and their role withinQuestions to the larger system? If the structure is decentralized, is thereask an advising resource and training center?yourself…  If the structure is decentralized or shared, does the structure promote communication and cooperation among advisors in all units?  Is the structure conducive to sharing information and collaborating with other academic and student service units to create and implement policies that promote student development and success? The last question points to the fact that academic advising does not operate in a vacuum. For a discussion on establishing an advising structure that takes into account organizational principles and strategies to foster cross-unit collaboration, see Creamer, Creamer, and Brown (2003). Pardee, C. F. (2004). Organizational structures for advising. Retrieved from the NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising Resources Web site:
    17. 17. CITATIONS Whiteside, R. (2001). Models for Successful Change. In. J. Black (Ed.), The Strategic Enrollment Management Revolution (97-108). Washington, DC: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers. Olive-Taylor, Becky. (2010) We Are Known by the Company We Keep. Academic Advising .33.4 : Web. 1 Mar. 2012. Creamer, E. G., Creamer, D. G., & Brown, K. S. (2003). Applying Quality Educational Principles to Academic Advising. In G. L. Kramer & Associates (Eds.), Student Academic Services: An Integrated Approach (pp. 205-222). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    18. 18. Contact Us!Deb GregoireCoordinator of Academic AdvisingStudent Resource CenterUniversity of Alaska Southeastdagregoire@uas.alaska.edu907-796-6439Laura HoseyAdvising CoordinatorSchool of Arts & SciencesUniversity of Alaska Southeastljhosey@uas.alaska.edu907-796-6090