FACULTY ADVISING: SYMMETRY VS. ASYMMETRY SAKILE K. CAMARA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION STUDIES, MIKE CURB COLLEGE OF ARTS, MEDIA AND COMMUNICATION

RQ1: What advising successes and failures do faculty experience? RQ2: What advising success and failures do staff experience? RQ3: What advising successes and failures do students experience? RQ4: How do these successes and failure vary as a result of advising structure/process? RQ5: What do students and faculty expect from the advising experience? Guiding Questions

Student persistence, retention and success all depend on advising consistency and good advising models. The more one’s professional obligations match advising availability the less the tension. However, the less one has professional obligations that does not match advising availability the greater the tension to advise. The total number of faculty for this study was (n=17) and staff (n=10). The total number of committees serve for each consecutively is 52 and 08. Huge service gap. Overview of Data

Findings Advance a model of advising symmetry-3 Cs Credibility, Comprehension and Connection Balance vs. Imbalanced Advising-The more one’s professional obligations match advising availability the less the tension. However, the less one has professional obligations that does not match advising availability the greater the tension to advise.

Increase the number of academic advisors in each department, Make advising mandatory for all students in all department, Advise students in Department earlier Provide a consistent advisor for each student in the major. Suggestions: Deeper analysis of data Submit papers to national and international conferences, Further explore each research questions including advising expectation gaps between faculty and students, Develop advising knowledge documents for the center and faculty Future Work Concluding thoughts