As new Dean of the College Charlotte Johnson spends her first few weeks familiarizing herself with Dartmouth and assessing student needs, we hope she focuses particular attention on reforming the advisory system, which, in its current form, fails to meet the needs of the student body.
The College has already indicated that it intends to reform the advising system. This past February, College President Jim Yong Kim explicitly stated that he wants a more centralized advising system in a discussion with students at Cutter-Shabazz, anticipating concrete ideas within six months ("Kim reacts to student criticism of diversity," Feb. 8). Kim then said in March that amendments to the advising system would be settled on by Fall 2011 ("Kim announces plans for Diversity Council," Mar. 3). Although this deadline has not yet passed, Kim has also not shown any indication of progress towards meeting his goal since his statements last Winter term. With other major initiatives, we have seen regular updates, student panels and other opportunities for student feedback. We hope this absence of feedback is not an indication of the absence of progress.
Despite the diverse array of administrative and faculty advising options available to Dartmouth students, the general sentiment regarding the advisory system is frustration. It is the system's variety itself that contributes to our discontent. Students are forced to look in different places for advice on off-terms, careers, freshman courses, majors and financial concerns and must independently negotiate factors that are fundamentally linked. Another root of the frustration is the lack of depth and personal connection between students and advisors few students have any sort of meaningful relationship with their first-year faculty advisors beyond the obligatory first meeting. While selecting an advisor within one's major department provides an opportunity for students to receive academic guidance and develop a relationship with a professor with whom they connect, many students say their advisor was merely the person who happened to be around when they needed their major card signed.
While students themselves bear some responsibility for taking initiative in developing meaningful relationships with professors and seeking out their guidance, the College has a responsibility for creating a baseline system that both students and advisors can manage. The D-Plan presents particular challenges that the school needs to take into account when designing its advising system. Students often feel like they must select an advisor who may not be their first choice because of conflicting schedules. The lack of guidance early on for students regarding the process of declaring a major prevents them from knowing how to manage the challenges the D-Plan poses.
We envision an advising system that is centralized both conceptually and physically, where a student can go with any question and be directed to the appropriate advisor. This central location will also be the center of pre-major advising, to replace the current defunct system of first-year advising. Advising at the end of freshman year and the beginning of sophomore year need greater attention, so that students do not rush through the major declaration process without sufficient planning during their sophomore Winter.
In addition, students would each have a professor they select as a major advisor, who will take a holistic approach to working with the student, taking into account inter-related considerations such as employment, off-terms and academic interests.
The longer the College flounders and fails to provide a centralized framework for student advising, the more students pass through Dartmouth unassisted in their efforts to take advantage of its many opportunities.
