Lack of Communication between Advisors and Students - Essay Example

Lack of Communication between Advisors and When Choosing Education Paths Introduction Certainly, in any educational system, communication is very important. While there are significant differences in the way counseling and advising are being carried out with respect to the different levels of study i.e. undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate among others, yet the importance of constant and systematic communication proves to be a very important factor in the determination of whether a student would be able to complete a degree or not. The problem is not that advising and counseling do not exist; they exist, and we find this factual in most academic institutions, particularly in the Wayne State University; nevertheless, the manner in which this communication is pushed through and implemented has some issues that raise concerns. First, students are not assigned to ‘individual advisors’; in other words, they keep on changing advisors as the course of their study progresses; hence, the problem crops up as a result of inconsistent communication. For sure, there are differences in advising strategies from one advisor to another so once a student is not being assigned to his or her individual advisor throughout the entire duration of the study, it only blurs the approaches that students will have to implement in their studies. Second is record keeping: the downside of having to be assigned to various teachers is the lack of constant communication and the disarray of record-keeping. As aforementioned, each advisor has varying counseling and advising strategies; and this only cause nothing but potential confusion on the part of the student. Because they are not assigned to a single advisor, chances are they are not going to develop a singular approach towards their study or research. And that is aside from the fact that they do not get to meet their advisor on a permanent basis. Lastly, the issues on policies whether to employ individual advising or one on one advising or not only exacerbate the situation: academic institutions should be able to address this concern once and for all. Lack of communication between students and advisors is a result of inconsistency of meetings between students and advisors. If we can get the students assigned to a single advisor throughout the entire duration of their study, then there is a greater chance that they will be able to complete their degrees; but again, the decision entirely depends on the policies of the schools. The above argument proves that each student should be given a separate student and not a horde of people who just care to get done with their work without much caring about the probable outcomes of their research. Coming to our main issue, dealing with the biased attitude towards students that are not assigned to individual advisors. Coming to other questions which state that since this is such a small proportion of people so why such big enforcements are needed? The answer is that they are citizens too and thence it is their right to have everything that is destined for them. Though, this is agreed that there are laws for the disabled but how many people respect them? And how many universities; both private and state universities, follow the instructions laid down by the ADA act? So the duty falls upon the fellow students to minimize their biases and help push the implementation of policies that encourage assignment to individual advisors. Contentions on Policy Changes One particular reason as to why assigning students to individual advisors cannot be carried out is that the student to teacher ratio suggests it cannot be done. Well, that is if the intention is to assign one student per advisor and that is it. However, assignment of students to individual advisors should not be defined by claiming the entire exclusivity of the advisor for the students advising needs for the entire duration of the study. The point is that students needs to have “consistency” in advising, which can only be achieved if students are get to be assigned on the same advisor until he or she completes the degree. Unfortunately, for most colleges and universities, this does not happen probably because of the differences in the way core curriculums are designed. For instance, Brown University has a comparatively lenient and open policy in its undergraduate curriculum: students have the ability to choose their subjects and teachers. In this case, assigning students to individual advisors may become difficult depending on how concentrated the course selection is towards the completion of the degree. Some students choose subjects that are highly diversified and it is just so difficult to get them assigned to a single advisor if the subjects included in their personally designed curriculum require varying inputs from different professors teaching different fields of study. The second point is that some core curriculums are comprised with subjects that are utterly diversified and are heavily based on liberal arts. Hence, there is no sense of concentration in so far as their chosen majors are concerned. This presents a problem in that, for instance, a Psychology major student does not necessarily take on subjects related to psychology all throughout: humanities subjects are most likely included and that is apart from the fact that some schools are encouraging the inclusion of STEM courses. So, looking at the standpoint of these kinds of curriculum models, assigning students to individual advisors is very difficult. Nevertheless, the answer only comes from the way policies are made suitable for this kind of academic arrangement. Schools should implement policies that employ the assignment of students to individual advisors throughout the rest of their study. But this cannot be achieved if core curriculums are not made focused towards the completion of the chosen majors of the students. If this kind of arrangement is not realized, lack of communication between students and advisors may just intensity considering that diversified curriculum requires different inputs from different faculty members. Hence, aside from lack of communication, the quality of research and education as a whole is also affected. Conclusion As mentioned earlier, the problem of lack of communication between students and advisors can be summarized in three points: (1) Students are not assigned to individual advisors. If this kind of academic arrangement is not achieved, communication problem would still exist because students do not get the consistency that they need; consistency in a sense that they get the same instruction from the same instruction until they complete the degree. Moreover, this paradigm may not be feasible unless policies are made to implement them; that is, policies that would encourage the designing of a concentrated core curriculum; (2) the second concern roots from the same problem, that is, if we cannot assign the students to individual advisors throughout the rest of the duration of their study, record keeping is affected. How? The differences in the teaching or advising styles of the advisors create nothing but confusion on the part of the students. Also, because they change or they have many advisors in a single school year or within the whole duration of their study, they may not be able to connect the knowledge that advisors inculcated to them because, of course, one advisor is different from another. Hence, there is not continuity; and that is aside from the fact that the meeting time is direly hampered. Students do not get the chance to meet their advisors most of the time; (3) lastly, and as aforementioned, policies are the most important factor in getting rid of the lack of communication between students and advisors. Advisors are not teachers in some sense in that advisors go beyond simply teaching; they also assist or advise students in their research. So, if consistency and continuity cannot be established because policies on the designing of curriculums do not simply allow the assignment of students to individual advisors, chances are students may not get anything but incompetency; and they may not be able to complete their major in the first place. Work Cited Fichten, C.S., Asuncion, J.V., Barile, M., Genereux, C., Fossey, M., Judd, D., Robillard, C., De Simone, C. &Wells, D. (2001). Technology integration for students with disabilities: Empirically basedrecommendations for faculty. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(2), 185-221 Forgrave, K. E. (2002). Assistive technology: Empowering students with disabilties. The Clearing House, 75(3),122-126 Repak Nick. 2012. Professor/Grad Relationships: Maximizing the Mentoring Potential. http://www.gradresources.org/articles/prof_grad.shtml. Web Rabinowitz Phil. 2013. Ensuring Access for People with Disabilities. University of Kansas. http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/implement/phsyical-social-environment/housing-accessibility-disabilities/main. Web. Read More