The following research was supported by a NACADA Research Grant.

University officials at many institutions of higher learning have initiated enrollment control programs (ECPs) in over-subscribed majors. Although the qualifying academic barriers determining program admission associated with these ECPs establish hardships for some students, the gewal intention of such programs is to prepare students for a particular curriculum as well as to select individuals deemed most qualified when limited enrollment opportunities exist. At universities where collegiate admission is a selection process, these ECPs fit into the framework of normal operation. At institutions (such as Youngstown State University) where “open admission” to the university is the policy, however, the establishment of ECPs has caused inadvertent conflicts for academic advisors.

The College of Education at Kent State University has recently implemented a computer-controlled advising system for use by undergraduate education students. This computer program provides information in a variety of different areas including descriptions of various education programs, deadlines and applications, student teaching, and other topics that may be helpful to these students. Preliminary evaluation shows that the system is easy to use and effectively able to answer the questions often asked by undergraduate students in the College.

Student priority ratings for personal developmental advising activities are compared with instructive prescriptive advising activities. Results indicate that students prefer prescriptive advising activities to developmental advising activities. However, review of the ratings for each advising activity reveals that students prefer a combination of these two advising roles, and it further suggests that there are limits to the degree f personal involvement desired. While student ratings do support the dual role of advising, i.e., offering academic guidance within an individualized/personal relationship, advisors who are attracted to the developmental model of advising are cautioned to consider carefully how much personal counseling a student may desire. Suggestions for further research are also offered to determine which students prefer which type of advising relationship at what point in their academic development.

This study discusses the impact of the presence of “a centralized student advising service which practices intrusive advising” on the “persistence of entering students” and suggests that this strategy could be useful to other institutions.

This article demonstrates than an examination of demographic and performance variables revealed few differences among entering student groups in terms of whether or not they declared a major field of study. The authors state that “the major contribution of this study is to call into question the impression . . . that undecidedness represents a problem for the student. . .”

With a required one-credit freshman seminar in place since 1977, California Lutheran University has a relatively long history of involvement with this kind of course. Using classification schemes from the literature on freshman seminars as a context, this article examines how California Lutheran's seminar has changed over the years as it has been integrated more directly into the University's retention program. The authors also discuss some of the persistent issues involved in maintaining such a course.

In this article, the author discusses the value of including professional advisors in an overall advising program. He makes comparisons among faculty, peer, and professional advisors, discussing the contribution of each type within a system.

Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs offers a perspective on the motivation of college students and provides a rationale for retention programming in institutions of higher learning. The interventions of student affairs staff and faculty members which address the safety needs of students and engage students' sense of purpose tend to reinforce persistence. The result is improved rates of retention. The possible role faculty might play in a “mentor program” is discussed as a model of cooperative endeavor between the teaching faculty and the student affairs staff.

In this article, the author describes how a collaborative effort among advisors produced some very useful self-help materials for students who are in the process of deciding on a major. The author states that the advising staff of the College of Arts and Sciences at The University of Pennsylvania offers its “Choosing a Major: Factors to Consider” checklist to NACADA members, who may adapt it for their own students. The advising staff invite recommendations for improving the material.

The authors state that “the thesis of this paper is that a life-planning approach is the epitome of comprehensive advising and results in education which is both liberating and holistic.” Following is a description of how one school attempted to achieve this comprehensive approach to advising.

Here, you'll find some marketing strategies that you should consider if you are looking for ways to make your advising center more appealing to students.

The following message is actually a request for help in confronting “the tough issues of standards and measurements” in academic advising. The author welcomes “comments or criticisms” regarding her inquiry.