Developmental Advising: The Elusive Ideal

Although developmental advising grew out of the works of many theorists prior to 1972 (Erikson, 1968; Heath, 1964; Neugarten, 1971; Perry, 1970; Super, Starishevsky, Matlin, & Jordaan, 1963), Burns Crookston was responsible for integrating these concepts into our conscious thinking about academic advising. Although his landmark article* grew out of his concern for students of the late 1960s and early 1970s, the needs of those students parallel the needs of students today. A developmental approach to advising—focusing on the individual student’s concerns, needs, and aspirations—is accepted as an ideal by many writers and practitioners in this field. Student-centeredness has been a hallmark of higher learning for many years with varying degrees of emphasis. The development of a student’s character was a concern of America’s earliest colleges during the colonial period. During those formative years academic advising played an important role in facilitating students’ development because faculty or administrative mentors were directly involved in students’ well-being (Gordon, 1992). Although many advisors have practiced their personal versions of developmental advising since then, Crookston, in his classic article, reminded us of the importance of emphasizing the student’s role and responsibility in the advising relationship. The development of the whole student—intellectually, personally, and socially—had been a stated goal of higher education long before Crookston so aptly pointed out its relationship to advising. Advising continues to be one of the best vehicles for accomplishing this goal (Crockett, 1985; Gordon, 1988; Ender, Winston & Miller, 1982). Much has been written about developmental advising and its benefits; definitions and suggestions for practice abound (Abel, 1988; BeasleyFielstein, 1986; Chickering & Reiser, 1993; Ender, Winston, & Miller, 1982; Frost, 1990; Gordon, 1988; McIntire et al., 1992; Winston, Miller, Ender, Grites, & Associates, 1984). Some evidence shows, however, that little progress has been made in implementing developmental advising consistently across campuses (Habley & Crockett, 1988). If a developmental approach is so desirable, why has progress been so slow? Many complex reasons exist, but 10 possible explanations are listed below. These explanations are coupled with some suggestions for ways to overcome barriers to implementing advising in a developmental mode.