Program Development Plan
DRAFT
Program:
Advising (ADV)
DRAFT
Department: Office of Senior Associate for
Academic Affairs
Date: TBD
Strengths: The ADV program …
 has aligned advising with institutional mission and QEP by contextualizing advising as part of teaching/learning mission
 has a close relationship with the academic departments they serve
 has a cohesive staff committed to their mission
 supports best practices in advising and retention/student progress initiatives through advising initiatives and by housing the
students success courses
 staff collaborate and partner across divisions and units on student programming and advising initiatives
Recommendations
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Date of
Review
Vision and Mission Statement, Goals, and Outcomes recommendations
1. Formulate a clear mission along with
goals, objectives, and outcomes that
represent WCU’s undergraduate
advising program across units. Ensure
goals of advising are separate from
mission statement.
(p. 12, ¶ 1; p. 4, ¶ 3; p. 4, ¶ 4)
2. Fully implement the use of an
advising syllabus in the Advising
Center and with advising
liaisons/departmental advising.
(p. 12, ¶ 2)
Redraft mission
statement for AC,
determine goals and
SLO’s. (reference
Task Force mission
statement)
?across units?
C
David Goss, AC
staff
Revise syllabus as
appropriate for AC.
Work with UAC and
AC liaisons to develop
campus wide syllabus
C
David Goss,
UAC, AC staff
Advising Policies and Processes recommendations
Advising
1
Acadmic Affairs
DRAFT
Recommendations
3. Fully utilize Advisory Council, as
outlined in charge, and the Student
Advising Council (regular meetings 23/term; use agenda with sub-groups
that produce actionable items that
impact campus advising programs and
processes, including policy
recommendations).
(p. 12, ¶ 3)
4. Be proactive about sharing benchmarks
and program initiatives (strategic
representation by Director; intentional
communications plan; improve
communication and collaboration with
two-year colleges, early colleges, and
other major “feeder” schools).
Program Development Plan
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
Implement UAC
recommendation as
stated, revisit
representation.
Establish SAC; seek
assistance from UAC,
AC advisors and
Orientation staff on
candidates to serve
C
Have DUA
represented on
appropriate
committee’s/council’s
to facilitate
communication.
C
See #4
C
DRAFT
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Date of
Review
David Goss
(p. 12, ¶ 4)
Organization and Delivery recommendations
5. Improve relationship/communication
with Deans and position for collegecentered advising model for declared
majors (consider multiple models;
assess impact of CEAP model; consider
institutional “home” for advising such
as Undergraduate Studies).
(p. 12, ¶ 5)
Advising
2
Acadmic Affairs
DRAFT
Recommendations
Program Development Plan
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
DRAFT
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Date of
Review
6. Improve outreach with Student Affairs
and be more visible outside 8a-5p office
day with students.
(p. 12, ¶ 6)
7. Conduct detailed budget analysis,
including benchmarking with peer and
aspirant institutions.
Perform analysis and
benchmarking
C
David Goss
Compare salaries with
peer and aspirant
institutions
C
David Goss
(p. 10, ¶ 6)
a. Develop complete program budget
controlled by Director.
(p. 12, ¶ 7)
b. Evaluate equity of staff
compensation.
(p. 12, ¶ 7)
c. Administration should consider a
revised salary schedule for
professional advisors (see item
#16).
(p. 8, ¶ 3)
Advising
3
Acadmic Affairs
DRAFT
Recommendations
Program Development Plan
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
DRAFT
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Date of
Review
8. Strengthen IT support that impacts
efficiency and effectiveness in
implementing advising processes (e.g.,
major assignments, transfer
evaluations) and utilizing advising tools
(e.g., Catwalk, Early Alert), possibly
either on staff in the Advising Center or
in the form of a designated consultant
from a campus-based IT unit.
(p. 12, ¶ 7; p. 8, ¶ 4; p. 10, ¶ 5)
Roles and Responsibilities recommendations
9. Strengthen and systematize procedures
for performance evaluation of staff (see
item #16).
(p. 13, ¶ 1; p. 15, ¶ 2)
10. Clearly define the professional
advisors’ role in the context of teaching
and learning (see items #9, 16)
(p. 13, ¶ 1; p. 15, ¶ 2)
DUA work with AC
staff on goals and
outcomes to use as
performance measures
C
David Goss, AC
staff
Tie to mission
statement, revise AC
web page to clarify
teaching and learning
model
C
David Goss
11. Fully support faculty advisor role and
reward as outlined in Faculty
Handbook.
(p. 13, ¶ 1)
Advisor Training/Development Tools recommendations
Advising
4
Acadmic Affairs
DRAFT
Recommendations
12. Develop and implement an intentional
faculty advisor development program
based on specific learning outcomes
(e.g., the difference between advising
and registration, building and advising
syllabus for assigned advisees).
(p. 13, ¶ 2)
13. Work with Department Heads and
Deans to support and encourage faculty
attendance at the sessions (what
sessions?).
(p. 13, ¶ 2)
14. Develop a user-friendly, on-line Faculty
Advisor Handbook that provides the
Departments/Colleges the opportunity
to add specific information for advisors.
(p. 13, ¶ 2)
Program Development Plan
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
DRAFT
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Work with UAC and
AC staff to develop
faculty advisor
development program
to build on Advising
for Liberal Studies
sessions and liaison
role
C
David Goss,
UAC, AC staff
Tie participation in
faculty advising
development
workshops to #11
C
David Goss
Work with UAC and
web services to
develop on line
Faculty Advisor
Handbook
C
David Goss,
UAC
Date of
Review
15. Increase opportunity, options, and
funding for professional development for
advising staff.
(p. 13, ¶ 2; p. 9, ¶ 2)
Advising
5
Acadmic Affairs
DRAFT
Program Development Plan
Recommendations
16. Strengthen and systematize procedures
for promotion of staff; i.e., establish a
“career ladder” for advisors, with
“levels” such as Associate Advisor,
Advisor, and Master Advisor, that
would provide more opportunity for
promotion and greater differentiation
of staff assignments which is based on
specific criteria with associated pay
increases.
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
Work with AC staff to
develop career ladder
framework.
C
DRAFT
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Date of
Review
David Goss, AC
staff
This should not be
done if resources are
not available to
implement salary
adjustments
(p. 13, ¶ 2; p. 8, ¶ 2)
Program and Advisor Assessment recommendations
17. Implement a comprehensive and
intentional assessment plan. Consider
utilizing NACADA consulting support or
sending staff to NACADA Assessment
Institute.
(p. 13, ¶ 3; p. 6, ¶ 6)
Advising
6
Acadmic Affairs
DRAFT
Recommendations
18. Collect more complete assessment data
to determine if the students’ advising
needs are being met and if students are
learning from their experience of
advising in both the Advising Center
and in their major departments,
including institutional student
demo/bio data, satisfaction surveys,
focus groups of all stakeholders, and
selected archived data such as NSSE
and other institutional sources.
Program Development Plan
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
DRAFT
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Date of
Review
Work with OIPE to
collect data from
existing sources.
(p. 13, ¶ 3; p. 5, ¶ 4)
19. Identify key benchmark, operational
indicators related to institutional goals
(student population served, new
students declared by census/Advising
Day, end-of-term probation and
suspension stats, appeals outcomes,
etc.).
Compile data as
outlined, analyze
trends, and make
AC/campus advising
program changes as
appropriate.
C
(p. 13, ¶ 4)
Other recommendations
20. Assess current university advising
model – at both the Advising Center
level and in the colleges/departments
(need assessment plan/data to inform
decision-making – see item #17).
(pp. 14-15, ¶ 2,3)
Advising
Work with UAC and
OIPE to implement
campus assessment
when assessment plan
defined
7
Acadmic Affairs
DRAFT
Recommendations
Program Development Plan
Resources needed
C = current
R = reallocation
N = new
Strategic Action
DRAFT
Costs
Person(s)
Responsible
Date of
Review
21. Consider tighter connection to studentathlete advising.
(p. 5, ¶ 3)
22. Clearly define “University Service,” which
could serve as criteria for assessment
within a career ladder structure or
evaluation process.
(p. 9, ¶ 4)
Advising
DUA work with AC
staff to define
“University Service”
C
8
David Goss, AC
staff
Acadmic Affairs