I have been an academic adviser for the past 12 years at a variety of institutions, public and private, two-year and four-year. Academic advising on those campuses varied greatly in practice and protocol, but they all shared one primary challenge: time. There was never enough of it, especially during peak advising times, to meet the needs of all students seeking guidance.
In my first advising job, I was one of two full-time academic advisers for approximately 5,000 students. In my second job, I was one of six for roughly 18,000 students. And now, I am one of eight academic advisers for about 14,000 students.
There are many ways to offer academic advising, and many different models. I’m focusing here on in-person advising—by appointment, or on a walk-in basis. (Other models include by phone, email, or instant messaging, and in some cases, texting. Those present their own set of benefits and drawbacks.)
Lately, though, I’ve been extolling a third, alternative model: speed advising. It’s akin to speed dating (which I’ve never actually done), an organized event where you quickly meet a large number of new people via a series of short “dates,” usually lasting from three to eight minutes each.
Before I get to the benefits of this approach when applied to academic advising, let’s review the two more traditional models.
- Appointment advising. The benefits of this model are tenfold and obvious, but it has a key drawback, too. Appointments allow advisers and students more time to review academic history and student performance, and to discuss goals and draft an academic plan. However, the crucial drawback to appointments is you can only fit so many in a day, a week, or a month. When demand for advising is high—such as preceding and during registration for a new semester—there are not enough appointments, nor hours in the day, to meet the need.
- Walk-in advising. The allure of being able to walk in anytime to get academic guidance is reassuring to students—that is, until they have to wait an hour or two to actually meet with an adviser. To make matters worse, occasionally, after such a long wait, an advisee discovers that he could have resolved the issue remotely, or that she has to visit a different office (for example, financial aid). Also, walk-in advising sessions are infused with a sense of haste that can be disconcerting to students when they aren’t expecting to be rushed.
As for academic advisers, we tend to dread walk-in sessions. As the late-evening adviser for much of my career, I spent countless hours beyond closing time trying to meet with all of the students who had shown up. If our office hours indicated we were open until 7 p.m., the door would close at 7 p.m., yes, but there would be a room full of students still waiting for help.
At one college where I worked, I met students only by appointment, which meant many of them did not have access to timely advising. In another job, I met students only on a walk-in basis (I began seeking employment elsewhere almost immediately). Finally, luckily, I landed on a campus that combined appointment days with walk-in days, striking a nice balance. Still, the walk-in days seemed more and more a disservice to both students and advisers. Students’ agitation from the long waiting periods was palpable.
Then in the spring of 2014, my colleague, Michael Lo Porto, proposed that we try “express session” advising, the model for which was very similar to speed dating. Instead of walk-ins, this model split the advising day into 15-minute time slots. Students are required to sign up for a 15-minute slot in person, the day of. Essentially, they are booking a 15-minute, “express” appointment or “session,” for that day and that day only. That eliminates any waiting time. Students can attend class or run errands and return at their appointed time. It also clearly communicates to students that they have a 15-minute appointment. Knowing that upfront makes for a better prepared advisee and a more productive session over all.
The success of this program became wonderfully obvious after a couple weeks, and students have embraced it without pause. Our office has since eliminated all walk-in advising while still maintaining a mix of traditional appointments (30-minute sessions that can be booked in advance via email or phone).
No system is perfect, of course, and speed advising has two main drawbacks. First, evening students who arrive to the office late often find that there are no more time slots available for that day. We tried resolving that problem by waiting until 4 or 5 p.m. to allow students to sign up for 15-minute meetings that evening. Still, invariably, some students who stopped by later in the day would find no available slots.
So we began to offer those students express sessions for the following evening (or the next available appointment). Gradually, over time, we were able to meet with all the evening students. That may not seem like an ideal resolution, and it’s not. But it works because it’s based on the notion that demand will recede after the peak advising period.
The other drawback: What do we do with students, and their 15 minutes, when they don’t show up for their sessions?
It’s frustrating when my time is wasted and another student’s opportunity to meet is forfeited. I’m not sure there is a real resolution or protection against that problem. My response, when students show up late, has been to prorate the time I give them for the appointment. If a student shows up eight minutes late, we meet for the remaining seven minutes. It’s important to note that 95 percent of students show up for their 15-minute sessions, and “mostly” on time.
If your office is still offering walk-in advising, I would highly recommend exploring the express model. It works best when coupled with a traditional appointment system, but speed advising can be particularly helpful during your busiest advising seasons at the beginning of a semester.
