1. Advising Learning Outcomes:
A Multi-institutional Study
Region 8 NACADA Conference
Pre-Conference Workshop
March 18, 2012
Cathleen L. Smith Professor Emerita of Psychology
Portland State University
smithc@pdx.edu
Janine M. Allen Professor Emerita of Education
Portland State University
allenj@pdx.edu

2. Agenda
q Describe the advising curriculum and what
we would expect students to learn from
advising encounters
q Summarize research on how community
colleges and universities differ
q Present a study that examines advising
learning in community college and university
students
q Discuss future directions for advising learning
research and assessment

3. Advising Learning:
A New Emphasis
q New emphasis: What students should
learn in academic advising encounters
q NACADA Concept of Academic
Advising:
– Advising is “integral to fulfilling the teaching
and learning mission of higher education”
– And, as such, has its own curriculum,
pedagogy, and student learning outcomes
(NACADA, 2006)

4. Learning-Centered Advising:
State of the Literature
More conceptual than empirical
Focused on:
qIdentifying the advising curriculum (e.g., Hemwall &
Trachte; Lowenstein) and learning outcomes advising
should produce in students
qDistinguishing between learning-centered
advising and more traditional approaches (i.e.,
prescriptive and developmental advising)

5. Learning-Centered Advising:
State of the Literature
Focused on:
qSpeculating about the mechanisms by which
learning takes place in advising encounters
qDifferentiating learning outcomes from other
aspects of advising (e.g., student
responsibilities)
qAdvocating for the adoption and use of a
learning-centered advising paradigm

6. Learning-Centered Advising:
State of the Literature
q A logical next step in the evolution of
this new advising paradigm is to gather
empirical data on the learning outcomes
that are thought to arise from
participation in advising encounters

7. Deriving our Advising Learning
Outcomes
In formulating our learning outcomes, we
began with our conception of quality
academic advising as a multi-dimensional
process encompassing five domains
– Integration
– Referral
– Information
– Individuation
– Shared responsibility

8. Deriving our Advising Learning
Outcomes
q Integration of the student’s academic, career,
and life goals with each other and with
aspects of the curriculum and co-curriculum
q Referral to campus resources for academic
and non-academic problems
q Provision of information about degree
requirements and how the university works
with regard to policies and procedures

9. Deriving our Advising Learning
Outcomes
q Individuation, or consideration of students’
individual characteristics, interests, and skills
q Shared responsibility, or encouraging
students to assume responsibility for their
education by providing them with
opportunities to develop and practice
planning, problem-solving, and decision-
making skills

10. Advising Curriculum
q Integration, Referral, Information:
Advising Content
q Individuation, Shared Responsibility:
Advising Pedagogy

11. Advising Content: Integration
q Connected learning: one of the primary
goals of liberal education
q Connected learning: central to
developmental advising
q Connected learning: considered by
students as especially influential

12. Integration: Learning Outcome
Understands Connections
q “I understand how my academic choices
at name of institution connect to my
career and life goals”
q How does learning on this outcome
facilitate student success?
– Students who are purposeful in their
educational decisions are more likely to
succeed

13. Advising Content: Referral
q Advising is conduit through which the
student becomes aware of resources at
the institution that assist with
– Academic problems (e.g., writing, test
anxiety, tutoring)
– Non-academic problems (e.g., child care,
financial, physical and mental health)

14. Referral: Learning Outcome
Knows Resources
q “When I have a problem, I know where at
name of institution I can go to get help”
q How does learning on this outcome
facilitate student success?
– Students who use support services available
to them tend to perform better in college

15. Advising Content: Information
q Our past research has shown the
primary importance to students of the
information domain; thus it was
represented by two learning outcomes

16. Advising Content: Information
q First, advising should assist students in
understanding the multitude of requirements
they face in order to successfully complete
their program of study
q Second, advising involves helping students
navigate their complex institution by assisting
them in understanding how things work with
regard to its timelines, policies and
procedures

17. Information: 1st Learning Outcome
Knows Requirements
q Community college students: “I know what
requirements (e.g., prerequisites, general
education, transfer requirements) I must fulfill at
name of community college in order to meet my
educational goals”
or
q University students: “I know what requirements
(e.g., major, general education, other university
requirements) I must fulfill in order to earn my
degree”

18. Information: 1st Learning Outcome
Knows Requirements
How does learning on this outcome facilitate
student success?
– Knowledge of degree requirements is the
sine qua non for student success (the
essential condition without which students
cannot obtain a degree).

19. Information: 2nd Learning Outcome
Understands How Things Work
q “I understand how things work at name of
institution (timelines, policies, and procedures
with regard to registration, financial aid, grading,
graduation, petition and appeals, etc.)”
q How does learning on this outcome facilitate
student success?
– Students must develop a cognitive map of the
bureaucratic geography of their institution in
order to successfully navigate it

20. Advising Learning Outcomes =
Retention Predictors
qHaving a plan to achieve one’s
educational goals
qHaving a significant relationship with
faculty or staff on campus

21. Retention-Related Learning Outcome:
Has Educational Plan
q “I have a plan to achieve my educational goals”
q How does learning on this outcome facilitate
student success?
– Having a plan to achieve one’s educational
goals is a measure of goal commitment
– Students without plans may take longer to
graduate and are at risk of dropping out of
college

22. Retention-Related Learning Outcome:
Has Significant Relationship
q “I have had at least one relationship with a faculty or staff
member at name of institution that has had a significant
and positive influence on me”
q How does learning on this outcome facilitate student
success?
– Students who can identify mentors on campus have
developed significant relationships with faculty or staff
members
– Research has shown that students with these
relationships are likely to persist

23. Affective Learning Outcomes
q We wanted to measure not only what students
know and can do, but also what they might
appreciate or value, as a result of participation in
advising
q We wanted outcomes that might reflect that
students had received quality academic
advising, benefited from it, and thought others
might too

24. Affective Learning Outcomes
q Values Advisor/Advisee Relationship
– “It is important to develop an advisor-advisee
relationship with someone on campus”
q Supports Mandatory Advising
– “There should be mandatory academic advising for
students”
q How does learning on these affective outcomes
facilitate student success?
– No evidence yet

25. What are These Advising Learning
Outcomes Measuring?
q All 8 learning outcomes are measures
of students’ meta-cognition
q Meta-cognition: What students know
about their own knowledge and values

26. Need for Empirical Study of Advising
Learning Outcomes
q Present a study that used these
measures of advising learning
q To examine differences between two-
and four-year institutions

27. Differences in Community College &
University Environments
q Academic Environment
q Social Environment
q Physical Environment
q Support Environment

28. Differences in Advising at
Community Colleges & Universities
q Our own research showed that there
are differences in students’ advising
experiences
q Students at community colleges
– are more satisfied
– have more sources of advising and support
– experience closer relationships with
advisors

29. Differences in Advising Learning at
Community Colleges & Universities?
q Community colleges and universities
provide students with different advising
environments
q Are there also differences in advising
learning at these two types of educational
environments

30. Research Questions
q Given the differences in students’
advising experiences at community
colleges and universities, do students at
the two types of institutions :
– differ on our eight advising learning
outcomes?
– agree or disagree on the parts of the
advising curriculum that are more
difficult?

31. Multi-Institutional Study:
Nine study institutions in Oregon
q Community Colleges
– Chemeketa Community College
– Portland Community College
q Private Universities
– Concordia University
– University of Portland
q Public Universities
– Eastern Oregon University
– Oregon State University
– Portland State University
– University of Oregon
– Western Oregon University

32. Method
q Online administration of the Inventory of
Academic Advising Functions – Student
Version
q Administered in 2010 or 2011
q Students invited to participate:
– Universities: All fully admitted students
– Community colleges: All students enrolled in
credit-bearing classes

33. Method
q To ensure that all students in the study had
similar educational goals
– We selected students at the two
community colleges who indicated that
their main reason for attending the college
was to earn credit toward a bachelor’s (4-
year) degree

34. Research Sample
Number of
Institution Participants
Participation Rate
Community Colleges 7172
Chemeketa Community College 1159 33.7
Portland Community College 6013 21.1
Four-Year Institutions 15156
Private Universities
Concordia University 437 43.1
University of Portland 1599 52.5
Public Universities
Eastern Oregon University 1206 38.3
Oregon State University 4026 22.1
Portland State University 2746 15.5
University of Oregon 3647 21.1
Western Oregon University 1495 32.7

35. Method
q To ensure that all students in the study
were at a similar educational level
– We selected only lower division
students at the universities (freshmen
and sophomores)
q Reducing the sample to 12,003 students
– 4831 university students
– 7172 community college students

36. Respondent Demographics
Gender and Age
Gender Community University Total
College Students Students n (%)*
n (%)* n (%)*
Female 4552 (64.2%) 3129 (64.8%) 7681 (64.4%)
Male 2543 (35.8%) 1700 (35.2%) 4243 (35.6%)
Unknown 77 2 79
Mean Age 27.9 years 20.6 years
* Percent of those with known gender

37. Respondent Demographics
Ethnicity
Ethnicity Community University Total
College Students n (%)*
Students n (%)*
Asian American 533 (n9.1%)
(%)* 442 ( 10.1%) 975 ( 9.6%)
African American 367 ( 6.3%) 60 ( 1.4%) 427 ( 4.2%)
Hispanic 640 (11.0%) 330 ( 7.6%) 970 (9.5%)
Native American 102 ( 1.7%) 52 ( 1.2%) 154 ( 1.5%)
White 4048 (69.4%) 3340 (76.7%) 7388 (72.5%)
Multi-Ethnic 124 ( 2.1%) 95 ( 2.2%) 219 ( 2.1%)
Pacific Islander 23 ( 0.3%) 36 ( 0.8%) 59 ( 0.6%)
Unknown 1333 476 1809
* Percent of those with known ethnicity

38. Measures of Advising Learning
Outcomes
q8 advising learning outcomes,
each measured by a 6 point
Likert-type scale
q 1 = Strongly Disagree
q 6 = Strongly Agree

39. First Research Question
Do students at community colleges and
universities differ on the eight advising
learning outcomes?
– ANCOVA
– Controlling for age

40. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students Students
n = 7170 n = 4831
I understand how my 5.10 (1.09)*** 4.81 (1.14)
academic choices at name of
institution connect to my
career and life goals

41. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students Students
n = 7170 n = 4831
When I have a problem, I know 4.44 (1.48)*** 4.27 (1.37)
where at name of institution I
can go to get help

42. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students
Students n = 4831
n = 7170
I know what requirements I 4.81 (1.32) 4.76 (1.21)
must fulfill in order to meet my
educational goals / earn my
degree

43. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students
Students n = 4831
n = 7170
I understand how things work 4.65 (1.29)*** 4.28 (1.24)
at name of institution

44. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students
Students n = 4831
n = 7170
I have a plan to achieve my 5.43 (0.93)*** 5.29 (0.95)
educational goals

45. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students
Students n = 4831
I have had at least one n = 7170
4.30 (1.67)*** 4.10 (1.54)
relationship with a faculty or
staff member at name of
institution that has had a
significant and positive
influence on me

46. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students
Students n = 4831
It is important to develop an n = 7170
4.84 (1.26) 5.07 (1.05)***
advisor-advisee relationship
with someone on campus
There should be mandatory 4.16 (1.64) 4.43 (1.44)***
academic advising for students

47. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students
Students n = 4831
It is important to develop an n = 7170
4.84 (1.26) 5.07 (1.05)***
advisor-advisee relationship
with someone on campus
There should be mandatory 4.16 (1.64) 4.43 (1.44)***
academic advising for students
I have had at least one 4.30 (1.67) 4.10 (1.54)
relationship with a faculty or
staff member . . .

48. Mean Ratings on Advising Learning
Outcomes (Standard Deviations in Parentheses)
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
***p<.001
Advising Learning Outcome Community University
College Students Students
n = 7170 n = 4831
Understands Connections 5.10 (1.09)*** 4.81 (1.14)
Knows Resources 4.44 (1.48)*** 4.27 (1.37)
Knows Requirements 4.81 (1.32) 4.76 (1.21)
Understands How Things Work 4.65 (1.29)*** 4.28 (1.24)
5.43 (0.93)*** 5.29 (0.95)
Has Educational Plan
4.30 (1.67) 4.10 (1.54)
Has Significant Relationship
4.84 (1.26) 5.07 (1.05)***
Values Advisor-Advisee
Relationship
4.16 (1.64) 4.43 (1.44)***
Supports Mandatory Advising

49. Second Research Question
Do students at community colleges and
universities agree or disagree on the parts
of the advising curriculum that are more
difficult?
– Within subjects ANOVA
– Compared the results of the two groups

50. Do Students Report More Learning on Some
Outcomes than Others?
1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree
Advising Learning Outcome Community College University
Students Students
n = 7170 n = 4831
Understands Connections 5.10b 4.81c
Knows Resources 4.44e 4.27e
Knows Requirements 4.81c 4.76c
Understands How Things Work 4.64d 4.28e
5.43a 5.29a
Has Educational Plan
4.30f 4.10f
Has Significant Relationship
4.84c 5.07b
Values Advisor-Advisee
Relationship
4.16g 4.43d
Supports Mandatory Advising

51. Summary of Findings
q Students at both types of institutions
report extensive advising learning
q But student learning varies as a
function of educational environment

52. Summary of Findings
q Community college students are more
likely to
– Understand connections
– Know resources
– Understand how things work
– Have an educational plan

53. Summary of Findings
q University students are more likely to
– Value the advisor/advisee relationship
– Support mandatory advising

54. Summary of Findings
q Some aspects of the advising
curriculum are easier for students to
master, evidenced by higher scores on
these outcomes
q Other aspects are more difficult
q For the most part, these patterns were
the same for the two groups of
students

55. Summary of Findings
q Community college and university
students
– Most likely to report they had an
educational plan
– Least likely to report they had a
significant relationship
q Only exception: Supports mandatory
advising

56. Implications for Practice
q Universities need to strengthen their
delivery of the advising curriculum

57. Implications for Practice
q Both types of institutions need to make
concerted efforts to ensure that
– Students know where to go to get help with
problems
– Students are hooked up to a caring and
helpful person at the institution
– Students know how things work at their
institution with regard to timelines, policies,
and procedures

58. Next Steps:
Research on Advising Learning
q Is advising learning associated with
whether and how often students receive
advising?
q Is advising learning associated with where
students get their information about
classes to take to meet requirements?
q Does advising learning predict retention?

59. Next Steps:
Assessment of Advising Learning
q Electronic advising portfolio
– Facilitated by the advisor
– Maintained by the student
q Reflection scaffolding: Shared responsibility in
action
q Chronicles advising history
q Evolves as the student learns and develops

60. Assessment of Advising Learning:
Advising e-Portfolio
q Includes exercises and activities
– designed by the advisor
– completed by the student
– aided by embedded links to resources and
tools
q Promotes advising learning
q Provides opportunities for students to
document their learning

61. Assessment of Advising Learning:
Advising e-Portfolio
Advising learning involves
qSelf-assessment
qIdentifying and connecting academic,
career, and life goals
qDeveloping plans to achieve goals

62. Assessment of Advising Learning:
Advising e-Portfolio
Challenges to implementation and use
qTime
– Students
– Advisors
qWho assesses the portfolio?
qHow is it assessed?

63. Discussion
Questions
Comments
Implications