Abstract:

Background:
Proper academic advisors can increase students’ self-efficacy, study skills and perceived support from the university [1] and quality academic advising encourages students’ engagement and help them to identify their personal strengths and interests relating to their future educational and career goals.[2] Effective implementation of academic advising is strategic to students’ success in higher education [3]. At the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), Level 1 advisors meet with students at least once a year to provide general advice on issues such as course selection. Level 2 advisors are responsible for supporting academically marginal students.

Methodology:
The current study aimed to evaluate the 5 aspects of academic advising including (1) Arrangement, (2) Barriers, (3) Content, (4) Definition, and (5) Evaluation and to identify ways to foster academic advising in the university. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected from March 2020 to November 2021. Online survey was adopted to reach out to academic staff and students from whom opinions were collected. In addition, students and teachers were invited an in-depth interview. Semi-structured interview was used to collect the stakeholders’ reflections, experiences, and recommendations for the improvement of the present advisory system. Thematic analysis was adopted in analysing the findings from the open-ended questions and interviews.

Findings:
A total of 1,203 students and 62 teachers completed the questionnaires, and 36 undergraduates and 8 teachers attended an interview. The usage rate for the advisory system was 64.3% (773 students), whereas 35.7% (430 students) had never met with their academic advisors. A total of 1009 students (83.9%) knew their advisors, whereas 16.1% (194 students) did not know their academic advisors. Furthermore, 34.1% students completed their advisory meetings in less than 15 minutes; and 67.7% of the teachers had experiences in providing advisory services to students. Majority of teachers are advising 11-50 students. Majority (79%) of the teachers were not being trained in academic counselling. Both students and teachers suggested ways to foster academic advising:
(1) regular promotion of academic advising by faculty or department to alert students;
(2) focusing on identifying and accomplishing life goals acquiring skills and attitudes that promote intellectual and personal growth and sharing concerns for the academic community;
(3) training of advisors on providing career guidance to students;
(4) providing clear guidelines for the scope of work required of an advisor;
(5) providing regular consultation meetings for the SEN students to share their needs.

Conclusion:
This project evaluated the different aspects of the academic advising system from the students' and teachers' perspectives. Limitations and implications were highlighted as an important reference for other Asian universities for further research in this area.

References:
[1] Dollinger M, Vanderlelie J, Eaton R, Sealey S. Academic Advisors in Australian Higher Education: Perceptions, Role Identities, and Recommendations. NACADA Journal. 2021;41(2):68-79.
[2] Young‐Jones AD, Burt TD, Dixon S, Hawthorne MJ. Academic advising: does it really impact student success? Quality Assurance in Education. 2013 Jan 25.
[3] Schulenberg JK, Lindhorst MJ. Advising is advising: Toward defining the practice and scholarship of academic advising. NACADA Journal. 2008;28(1):43-53.

Keywords:

Academic Advising, University Education, Inclusion and Diversity.