SGA Releases CACS Advising Report
Image Courtesy of the Catholic University Student Government Association
By Anna Harvey
On Thursday, January 20, 2022, the Student Government Association of The Catholic University of America released a report entitled “A Report on the Student Government Advising Survey.” Just under 30 pages, the report summarizes data collected from Catholic University students over the course of the Fall 2021 semester. Through social media posts, email blasts, and face-to-face campaigning, the Student Government Association conducted a survey through Google Forms to collect student responses and feedback on the quality of their academic advising through the Center for Academic and Career Success (CACS).
“A statistically significant survey for the undergraduate population of Catholic University is approximately 400 responses, and we are proud to announce that our student advising survey received over 600 responses,” the report stated.
SGA President Abby Anger explained that SGA has already used the report to initiate dialogue with various departments within the University.
“We sent the Report to over 50 University Administrators, and in the past week since the report was released, SGA has held numerous meetings with Administrators from across our University, ranging from the Deans of Academic Schools including the Conway School of Nursing and School of Arts and Sciences, to the Center for Academic and Career Success, to the University’s President’s Office,” Anger said.
In the responses, graduation class was consistently represented, with each class making up nearly a quarter of the total survey responses. As many as 33% of respondents were enrolled in the University’s Honors Program, with only 67% not enrolled in the program. From the various academic schools, the School of Arts and Sciences had the largest number of respondents.
“This breakdown is representative of the school community, given that the School of Arts and Sciences is the largest academic school. Another significant portion of respondents was enrolled in the Busch School of Business at 18% of the total,” the report confirmed.
The report also gathered student opinion on the following statement: “I have always received clear guidance as to who I should be meeting within CACS.” From the survey responses, only 35% feel as though they receive adequate guidance from their CACS advisor, and 47% feel satisfied with their faculty advisor.
The report also suggests that a primary reason for the higher approval ratings of faculty over CACS advisors is due to the lack of turnover for faculty advisors since many of them are tenured and more likely to remain at the University long-term. In spite of the higher approval ratings for faculty advisors, however, many of the respondents identified low-quality advising for both CACS and faculty advisors.
“Considering that one of the primary goals of higher education is preparing its graduates for the job market, the reality that a substantial number of students do not feel supported by either of their advisors is highly alarming,” the report said.
The report also illustrated the growing disconnect between students and advisors, as more than half of respondents reported having three or more advisors by senior year. Consequently, as students gain more advisors over their academic careers, they are obligated to form new methods of trust and relationships with these advisors, which present challenges for academic and career guidance. CACS recently attempted a new structure of advising, which will allow students to remain with their long-term advisor, which will potentially undo the large turnover rate.
Of all the academic schools, the School of Architecture had the highest approval ratings of 83% for academic advising. About 61% of the Conway School of Nursing report below-average career advising, and 40% of the respondents from the School of Arts and Sciences reported above-average experiences.
One of the largest disparities that the report noted was the difference in advising quality between students enrolled in the Honors Program and those who are not.
“One of the most common complaints the Student Government Association has heard and experienced is that the quality of advising is much higher for students in the Honors program than for those outside of it,” the report noted.
From the survey results, the report noted that non-honors students were 18% more likely to have below-average academic advising. Non-honors students were also 21% less likely to have above-average advising than honors students.
The report, however, also explained the possibility that students simply are not making use of CACS resources.
“However, the blame for this lack of understanding cannot be laid only on CACS, because students can also be guilty of failing to take initiative with the resources they have available to them,” the report said. “However, in any case, these incredibly high percentages do indicate a larger disconnect between CACS and the student body that is very alarming.”
The report concluded with multiple suggestions for potential solutions that CACS might make to improve their services, such as promoting services in Learning Community courses, increased marketing of other CACS services and events, forging relationships between faculty and CACS advisors, and addressing the Honors and non-honors gap.
Anger reflected on how the Advising Report will allow the University the opportunity to make great academic strides on behalf of its students.
“The interest in the Report, spanning every part of our University, shows the commitment of the Administration to taking seriously the voices of students and the report’s findings and recommendations,” Anger said. “SGA and I look forward to continuing to advocate for the undergraduate students and working alongside our University Administration to make necessary improvements to the student advising experience.”
