I have had a lot of conversations this term about academic regret that nagging and pervasive feeling that you should have, could have, would have done your coursework at Dartmouth differently if you had known more. The thought that you could have had a different major, avoided that uninteresting introductory class, written (or not written) that thesis or taken more classes in other departments is widespread among students in their junior and senior years.
It is easy to dismiss this regret as part of the college learning process, of becoming more independent and solidifying your values. While this internal development is the main driver of our academic regret, Dartmouth's academic advising system should be improved to intervene more effectively in areas where students often experience this feeling major choice, lack of interdisciplinary coursework and difficulty taking advantage of opportunities in departments beyond the major.
While the Dean of the Faculty's website currently espouses a student-driven philosophy in which the advising system is "decentralized by design" and students are expected to "[understand] the questions they have and [take] the initiative to seek the advice they need," students I spoke with felt that Dartmouth struggles to provide a cohesive and consistent academic advising system. While the College provides plenty of general advising resources, academic advising consists of an assigned freshman year advisor and self-initiated advising relationships after this. Though this system creates flexibility for students and faculty alike, for too many, academic advising consists exclusively of brief conversations regarding major, minor and distributive requirements.
The structure of the existing system is particularly challenging for three types of students. First, we have the pre-major student, who is likely a freshman and interested in a discipline, but hesitant to reach out to faculty because he or she lacks the established resources and coursework to begin an advising relationship. Second, we have the non-major student, a junior or senior looking to expand studies outside the major. Finally, we have the interdisciplinary student, whose academic interests extend beyond a single department and who searches for complimentary courses in other disciplines. Though each should, in theory, initiate their own advising within the existing advising model, too often they fail to get the academic advising they need. For Dartmouth to continue under this model, the school needs to make academic advising readily accessible, easy to navigate and empowering for students.
To move the emphasis of academic advising away from requirements and toward a student's larger academic interests, Dartmouth should consider adding lead advising professors in each department. These professors would have an expressed interest in facilitating advising programs and would be given the time and training they need to support students who are majoring or interested in the department. In addition to being familiar with crafting a cohesive course of study within a department, this faculty member should be willing and excited to work with students as they navigate their broader Dartmouth courses. One of the key shortfalls of current advising programs is that even departments who are consistently successful with major and minor advising rarely recommend courses outside of their own. For students to become genuine interdisciplinary thinkers, we need advisors who are aware of opportunities and courses in other departments.
To encourage students to take advantage of this new advising approach, each advisor could offer consistent office hours, removing the pre-major or non-major's barrier of approaching a random professor for academic advice. Additionally, these lead professors could collaborate with other lead departmental advisors to identify frequent areas of student interest and propose courses lists and interdisciplinary study around these disciplines. While this lead academic advisor could serve as the point person for advising within a department, one of their responsibilities could include pointing pre-major and non-major students to faculty members whose interests correspond to the students. Ultimately, the idea of a centralized source of advice in each department would not interrupt existing departmental differences in advising, nor would it dismiss Dartmouth's policy of student-lead advice seeking. Instead, it would simply improve access to advising resources for students seeking advice before or beyond the traditional in-department, major advising process.
