National Academic Advising Association's Technology in Advising Commission

Home | Overview | Reports | Projects | Listserv | Advising Links | Site Map | Search

Special Reports: Technology and Academic Advising by George Steele, Michael J. Leonard, Charles J. Haberle & Wesley Lipschultz Academic advisors are being confronted with a variety of opportunities, enhancements, problems, and choices as technology becomes more prevalent on our campuses. The phenomena brought about by technology will become increasingly challenging as technological innovations continue to impact our professional environments. With this in mind, we raise a number of critical questions for academic advisors and administrators to consider in the hopes that a path will begin to emerge from the complexity. 1. What are the possible uses of technology in academic advising? In 1995, Gary Kramer and Michael McCauley wrote of the advantages that the use of technology in academic advising would bring in an era of greater accountability and the need to provide better services to students. They summarized some of their key points as: relieve clerical burdens and enable people to be student centered, use machines to provide collections, storage, retrieval, distribution, and management of information, allow academic personnel to aid students beyond the routine, and provide time to focus on student development. Many of the cutting-edge technologies that they predicted would be embraced by advising in the immediate future have already come to pass: degree audits, automated student profiles, automated transfer articulation, course/grade simulation, electronic calendars, electronic communication, electronic notebooks, student academic information management, and touch-tone telephone registration. These technologies are helpful for both advisors and advisees in that they contribute to assisting in making better-informed decisions and improved services. 2. What applications of technology are currently available that are relevant to academic advising? Often there are many different software versions of the same technology available to us. Advisors who use e-mail, for instance, can choose between Eudora, Outlook, or Pegasus (to name a few). There are even many conceptual variants of the same basic idea: if you wish to talk to your advisees electronically, you can choose e-mail, chat, bulletin boards, and listservs. Knowing a bit about the range and variability of these applications is crucial if: you wish to make an informed decision about the use of technology in your advising center; you want to be able to argue persuasively for or against technology in specific instances with the powers that be at your institution; you would like to get some new ideas on how to use technology to benefit you and your advisees. 3. Why should academic advisors seek to get involved in their institution's technology decision-making processes? Even those advisors who are very knowledgeable about the scope of technology available to them are still at the mercy of those who make the purchasing and implementation decisions. This is dangerous because those with the power may not always be the experts on how these technologies should be evaluated for implementation and effectiveness in academic advising. Entering into this breach between power and knowledge, academic advisors can play a significant role. As NACADA has expressed in its Statement of Core Values, “Because of the nature of academic advising, advisors often develop a broad vision of the institution. Advisors can therefore play an important role with administrators, faculty members, and staff helping them further understand students' academic and personal development needs.” While some of the more detailed technical issues of various technologies may be beyond most advisors' expertise, advisors are well positioned to discuss desired outcomes for adopting technologies and to assist in the evaluation of their success and impact. Advisors should recognize technology as a tool to enhance the advising experience, not to replace it. Much of today's technology helps us to organize and use information or permits limited opportunities for communication that are extremely helpful, but in quality does not yet match one-on-one interactions. High tech will never supplant high touch, and vice-versa; each must work in concert with the other to provide the best advising services to students. This must be made eminently clear to administrators before new technologies are implemented, as well as during and after their implementation. 4. How aware are we as advisors about issues related to the uses of technology and to the advising process? In order to assist in the discussion, implementation, and evaluation of new technologies that impact the advising process, advisors need to be aware of the issues that technology raises. Several critical questions are: Can we state the advantages and disadvantages of the use of different types of technology in the advising process? When is the use of the Web, e-mail, telephone registration, or other forms of technology better than the use of printed materials and other less technical forms of communication? Can we identify these advantages and disadvantages in terms of working with different student populations? Can we identify where these technologies work best in an advising process? When is the use of any technology (for example, e-mail) beneficial for both the advisor and the advisee? Under what types of circumstances is it most likely to be beneficial? 5. What are some other critical issues in the use of technology in advising? What we have listed above is just a start, one grounded in our particular experiences with technology. Advisors may also want to reflect on some or all of the following questions as they consider the impact of technology both on their own campuses as well as on the academic advising profession: How do advisors receive training in the use of existing and emerging technologies? Who is responsible for technology education? Who provides continuing support to advisors and other users of technology? Are there minimum standards that institutions should meet in providing appropriate technological support (hardware, software, and education) to advisors? Are there minimum standards that advisors should be expected to meet in regard to their knowledge and use of technology? When is it professionally irresponsible to shun the use of available technology? What are the real limitations of the use of technology in advising? When is technology not the best answer? How do we deal with those who believe that technology is the only answer? What impact, both positive and negative, has the introduction of new technology already had on the advising process? How has the introduction of various technologies changed the way in which advisors do advising? How do students use technology in the educational and advising processes? What is the role of advisors, advising, and technology in distance education? How can technology be made more accessible to advisors and students with disabilities? Who should take the lead in discussing this issue and attempting to resolve it? Do advisors fear that new technologies will make their jobs obsolete? Is it a legitimate fear? Does technology keep students away from advisors? Do advisors do less advising after new advising technologies, such as telephone registration, are introduced, or do they just do advising differently? How can these past experiences be shared with advisors and administrators at other institutions? Summary As advisors, we need to continue asking more critical questions in regard to the use of technology in advising. The issues we have raised in this article are intended to facilitate a dialogue among advisors and with campus administrators; only through such a dialogue can we begin to forge a structure for the “smart” use of technology in academic advising. NACADA's Technology in Advising Commission hopes to play a significant role in addressing these important issues as our profession leaps into the new millenium. Advisors who wish to comment on or tackle some of the critical issues in advising technology may link to the Critical Issues page on the Technology in Advising Commission's web site at http://www.psu.edu/dus/ncta by clicking on either the “Reports” or “News” links from the site's menu bar. References Kramer, Gary L. and McCauley (1995) “High Tech and High Touch: Integrating Information Technology in the Advising Process,” Academic Advising as a Comprehensive Campus Process, NACADA Monograph Number 2. NACADA Statement of Core Values of Academic Advising, NACADA Journal, 15, 1, 5-7. Authors George Steele Coordinator of Advising, University College The Ohio State University Director, National Clearinghouse for Academic Advising steeleg@mgate.uvc.ohio-state.edu Michael J. Leonard Assistant Director, Division of Undergraduate Studies The Pennsylvania State University mjl3@psu.edu Charles J. Haberle Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies Providence College chaberle@providence.edu Wesley Lipschultz Advisor, Division of Undergraduate Studies The Pennsylvania State University wpl100@psu.edu This report was published in the June 1999 issue of the NACADA Academic Advising News newsletter as a "critical issues in advising" article. Revised June 17, 2004