A Comparison of Intrusive and Prescriptive Advising of Psychology Majors at an Urban Comprehensive University
To investigate whether intrusive advising is effective for nontraditional students at an urban comprehensive university, we compared it with prescriptive advising in a 3-year trial of randomly selected psychology undergraduates (N = 126). We hypothesized that advisees in the intrusive track would feel more satisfied, more connected to the department, and be more academically successful than those in the prescriptive track. Secondary questions concerned the relationship of advising preferences and demographic characteristics. Students receiving intrusive advising reported greater satisfaction with advising, felt more connected to the department, but were not more academically successful than those in the prescriptive track.
Contributor Notes
Michelle Poynter Jeschke was the Director of Student Development in the Department of Psychology at IUPUI from 1996 to 2000. She currently is at the University of Wisconsin Colleges.
Kathy Johnson is an Associate Professor of Psychology at IUPUI. She received her Ph.D. in Cognition and Development from Emory University in 1992. E-mail: kjohno@iupui.edu
Jane Williams is an Associate Professor of Psychology at IUPUI. She received her Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from the University of Akron in 1995.
This research was supported by NACADA grant # 54340 awarded to Mikki Poynter Jeschke. We are very grateful to Lori Losee, Chantal Koch, Larita Jarvis, D. W. Rajecki, and Scott Comer for their assistance. We also thank the Department of Psychology for providing matching resources, and the faculty and peer advisors who have made numerous contributions to academic advising.
