Post on 20-Jan-2020
Prescriptive vs.
Developmental:
The Advising Match of Three Historically Black
Colleges and Universities in South Carolina
Presenter: Twaina Harris, Ed.D., LPC
Claflin University
Presentation Outline/Agenda
Define and HBCUs
Define Prescriptive and Developmental
Advising
Advising at an HBCU/Case Studies
Student Perceptions/Research Study
Future Work
References
Questions
Historically Black Colleges &
Universities
Definition: Nationally accredited institutions of
higher education established before 1964 for the
purpose of educating blacks while being open to
all.
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. (2010). The educational effectiveness of Historically Black
Colleges and Universities. Briefing Report. Retrieved from
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/HBCU_webversion2.pdf
Academic Advising
“Academic advising takes place in "situations in which
an institutional representative gives insight or direction to
a college student about an academic, social, or personal
matter. The nature of this direction might be to inform,
suggest, counsel, discipline, coach, mentor, or even
teach" (p. 3).
Kuhn, T. (2008). Historical Foundations of Academic Advising. In Gordon, Habley and Grites. Academic Advising: A Comprehensive
Campus Process. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. - See more at: http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-
Articles/Definitions-of-academic-advising.aspx#sthash.MwgcvMyA.dpuf
Prescriptive & Developmental
Prescriptive advising involves limiting advising
sessions to academic matters such as course
selection, the process of registration, explaining
degree curricula, etc. (Drake, 2011).
Developmental advising that assesses the skills of
students in order to provide assistance with the
student’s overall development (e.g. cognitive, social,
academic, etc.) (Williams, 2007)
Advising at One HBCU
Deans and Department Chairs advise first
year students – faculty advisors;
Initial advising session – group setting;
Registration is an open process;
Advisors approval required before account
billing;
Advisor training is limited;
Primarily, prescriptive advising
Case Studies
Three case scenarios of actual advising
situations that occur at one HBCU
consistently.
Individual responses (5 minutes)
Small Group discussions (5 minutes)
Session Discussion (10 minutes)
Research Study
PURPOSE: To identify the most prevalent
academic advising approach used by HBCUs in
South Carolina.
QUESTION: Between the prescriptive and
developmental approaches, which academic
advising approach is mostly experienced by first
year students attending HBCUs in South
Carolina?
Instrumentation
Electronic version (Survey Monkey) of Academic Advising Inventory (AAI)
Approximately 10 minutes for completion
(Winston & Sandor, 1984)
Sample
4-Year HBCUs in South
Carolina
Percent of
Total
Responses
Number of
Responses
HBCU 1 5.7% 5
HBCU 2 90.8% 77
HBCU 3 3.4% 3
Total 85
Prescriptive vs. Developmental Advising Types Number of
Responses (N)
Mean Standard
Deviation
Prescriptive 26 25.81 (P)
16.23 (D)
8.68 (P)
7.32 (D)
Developmental 56 15.59 (P)
34.96 (D)
7.50 (P)
10.08 (D)
Unidentified 3 17.33 (P)
17.33 (D)
8.08 (P)
8.08 (D)
One-Way ANOVA
Prescriptive
Advising SS df MS F Sig.
Between 1860.49 2 930.25 14.93 .000
Within 5110.26 82 62.32
Total 6970.75 84
Developmental
Advising SS df MS F Sig.
Between 6626.98 2 3313.49 38.48 .000
Within 7061.21 82 86.11
Total 13688.19 84
Analysis for Predominately Prescriptive Advising (M = 25.81)
Analysis for Predominately Developmental Advising (M = 34.96)
α < .05
Student Satisfaction
Statement of Satisfaction PA Mean
(N) PA SD
DA
Mean
(N) DA SD
UNID
Mean
(N)
UNID
SD
1. I am satisfied in general with the
academic advising I received. 2.31
(19) 1.00
3.50
(46) .69
2.00
(2) 1.41
2. I have received accurate
information about courses,
programs, and
requirements through academic
advising.
2.57 1.07 3.40 .54 2.50 2.12
3. Sufficient prior notice has been
provided abut deadlines related
to institutional policies and
procedures.
2.63 1.01 3.30 .60 2.00 1.41
4. Advising has been available
when I needed it. 2.63 .83 3.58 .65 2.50 2.12
5. Sufficient time has been
available during advising
sessions.
2.57 .96 3.47 .65 2.50 2.12
Student Advising Preferences Advising Types Number of
Responses (N)
Mean Standard
Deviation
Prescriptive 21 25.71 (P)
18.95 (D)
6.15 (P)
4.85 (D)
Developmental 59 12.64 (P)
38.38 (D)
10.19 (P)
12.15 (D)
Unidentified 5 24.60 (P)
24.60 (D)
3.28 (P)
3.28 (D)
Similar Findings • Academic Advising Inventory (AAI) administered to 198 students at
a 4-year public Predominately White Institution in the southeast.
• Results showed that advisors used the developmental advising
approach and the students were satisfied with this approach.
• Davis & Cooper, 2001
Similar Findings • 429 students at a mid-south doctoral university completed the AAI.
• 360 of these students preferred developmental advising and 17
preferred prescriptive advising.
• Students who experienced and preferred developmental advising
were more satisfied than students who experienced and preferred
prescriptive advising.
Hale, Graham, & Johnson, 2009
Future Work
Repeat study with more HBCUs from other
states.
Other approaches should be added to the AAI.
References Barbuto, J.E., Story, J.S., Fritz, S. M., & Schinstock, J.L. (2011). Full range advising:
Transforming the advisor-advisee experience. Journal of College Student
Development, 52(6), 656-670. doi: 10.1353/csd.2011.0079.
Bigger, J.J. (2005). Improving the odds for freshman success. Retrieved from
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/tabid/3318/articleType/Articl eView/articleId/135/article.aspx
Bland, H. W., Melton, B. F., Welle, P., & Bigham, L. (2012). Stress tolerance: New
challenges for millennial college students. College Student Journal, 46(2), 362-375.
Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research. (4th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Davis, J., & Cooper, D. L. (2001). Assessing advising style: Student perceptions of academic advisors.
College Student Affairs Journal, 20(2), 53.
Drake, J. K. (2011). The role of academic advising in student retention and persistence. About
Campus, 16(3), 8-12. doi:10.1002/abc.20062
Earl, W.R. (1987). Intrusive advising for freshmen. Academic Advising News, 9(3), 1-2.
Retrieved from https://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-
Articles/Intrusive-Advising-for-Freshmen.aspx
Fowler, P. R., & Boylan, H. R. (2010). Increasing student success and retention: A
multidimensional approach. Journal Of Developmental Education, 34(2), 2-10.
References Hale, M. D., Graham, D. L., & Johnson, D. M. (2009). Are students more satisfied with academic
advising when there is congruence between current and preferred advising styles?. College
Student Journal, 43(2), 313-324.
Lund, A. & Lund, M. (2013). One-way ANOVA in SPSS. Laerd Statistics. Retrieved from
https://statistics.laerd.com/spss-tutorials/one-way-anova-using-spss-statistics.php
Metzner, B.S. (1989). Perceived quality of academic advising: The effect on freshman attrition.
American Educational Research Journal, 26(3), p. 422-442. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1162981
Williams, S. (2007). From theory to practice: The application of theories of development to academic
advising philosophy and practice. Retrieved from
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/tabid/3318/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/181/article.aspx
Winston, R. B. & Sandor, J.A. (1984). Evaluating academic advising: Manual for the academic
advising inventory. Retrieved from
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Portals/0/Clearinghouse/links/documents/AAI-Manual-02.pdf