Many higher education institutions have purchased comprehensive administrative software systems designed to help manage everything from business affairs to human resources to academic affairs functions. These software programs (e.g., PeopleSoft, SCT Banner, and Oracle) are popular because they allow institutions to deal with only one vendor, are cost-effective in the long run, and, for the most part, are Web-based so that faculty, staff, and students can conveniently access the information from all over the world. Many of these software packages include an academic advising module. When the University of Louisville purchased the PeopleSoft software package, it also purchased the academic advising module. Prior to implementing this module in 2001, the University of Louisville had no degree audit or automated student-tracking tool. This article will explore the benefits of utilizing such advising software and also the challenges that the University of Louisville has faced in implementing the academic advising module.
The Benefits
The University of Louisville implemented the PeopleSoft Academic Advisement Module because it was delivered with the PeopleSoft Student Administration Module and thus involved no additional investment for the university. It could be easily integrated with other PeopleSoft products, and the university community was impressed with its functionality. The advising module is designed to simplify the degree audit process, track degree requirements for all students, tailor academic plans for specific students, and generate a list of requirements a student has fulfilled.
Before the advising module was implemented, advisers used preprinted forms, pencils, and pens to track student academic progress and progress toward completion of graduation requirements. This manual tracking of academic requirements was very time-consuming, relegating advisers to “clerk” status and minimizing the professional role of advisers on campus.
One of the most important roles that advising software can play is freeing up advisers to perform “higher order” advising. O'Banion (1972/1994) found that “the process of academic advising includes the following dimensions: exploration of life goals, exploration of vocational goals, program choice, course choice, and scheduling courses” (p. 10). Oftentimes, due to time constraints and large advising loads, advisers only have enough time to take care of students' course choices and scheduling during their advising appointments. Advising software has the potential to help students take care of their course choices and scheduling of courses, therefore allowing academic advisers to spend advising appointments concentrating on exploring the students' life and career goals in the context of selecting a major.
To meet the needs and demands of today's diverse student population, an adviser must spend quality time with each student, getting to know each individual's hopes, fears, and dreams in order to assist the student in achieving a self-fulfilling life and career. According to Crookston (1972/1994), “It follows that developmental counseling or advising is concerned not only with a specific personal or vocational decision, but also with facilitating the students' rational processes, environmental and interpersonal interactions, behavioral awareness, and problem-solving, decision-making, and evaluation skills”( p. 5). Meeting these lofty goals takes a great deal of time because, in this paradigm, the adviser and student are essentially partners.
Another advantage of advising software packages is that they allow students to have a sense of ownership and control in their course choices. The degree audit at University of Louisville is now available in a client-server version and will be available over the Internet on Web browsers, enabling students to access their audits in a more user-friendly and interactive manner. By making advising software available on the Internet, students can actually view their progress toward graduation from anywhere. Students are more comfortable when they understand what they must accomplish and what their relative progress is toward achieving their academic goals.
The Challenges
Anyone who has dealt with implementing new software packages on campus knows how difficult it can be to successfully launch such products. As a PeopleSoft consultant and a functional analyst set up the degree audit system, they discovered that there were many disagreements between faculty and advisers on advising matters related to course requirements. The advisers did not agree with the information that the faculty had given the Registrar's Office, and so we had to work out a compromise. As we embarked upon the testing phase of the implementation, the advisers requested inclusion of items that were neither in the catalog nor in the faculty roadmap. So when we finally implemented the degree audit, the advisers felt that it was inaccurate. They did not want to use the software because they felt that it would require more of their time to analyze the degree audit reports and thus would not be an effective advising tool. These concerns are still being discussed.
An ongoing implementation challenge is the unwillingness of some faculty members making transfer equivalency decisions to turn over this responsibility to the Transfer Credit Office. Therefore, equivalency decisions are not being made in a timely manner and cannot be used within the degree audit system. There is still discussion as to who will make equivalency decisions on general education courses. Since these decisions have not yet been made, advisers do not want to use the advising software.
Advisers are concerned about a number of other issues related to the advising software: the random errors on the degree audit reports, corrections not being made in a timely fashion, and students not having access to the degree audit function (there is no clear plan for training them to utilize the software). The University of Louisville is attempting to address these issues by setting up a subcommittee to study these concerns and devise creative solutions. This subcommittee will report to the Provost's Office. In addition, the Registrar's Office has met monthly with academic advising unit representatives to discuss the advising software and to encourage advisers to use it and provide feedback.
In conclusion, advising software can be an important tool for advisers because it can significantly reduce the clerical burden associated with academic advising. Manual recording of progress toward a degree—including course enrollments, grades, credit hours, and calculations of grade-point averages in a major, minor, or specialization area—have long been time-consuming chores for advisers. The degree audit software virtually eliminates these responsibilities and allows the advisers to focus their attention on dealing with complex student issues and to collaborate with students to design a roadmap for life and career success.
However, the change must be “sold” to advisers so that they trust the software. In retrospect, advisers at the University of Louisville may have been more receptive to utilizing the software had they been involved far earlier in the process as the software was being tweaked on campus. However, the Provost's Office, the Registrar's Office, and the advisers are now working together to make sure that advisers' concerns are addressed. Although the time demands on advisers during these initial stages are proving to be quite heavy, we are confident that once the software is fully implemented it will save time.