Needs
Assessment
Resources for Needs Assessment
Get
the Horse Before the Cart: Conducting Assessment of Advisor Development
Needs
Terry
Musser
DUS Programs Coordinator
College
of Agricultural Sciences
Penn State University
Tracy
Hoover
Department Head
Agricultural and Extension Education
Penn
State
University
Marcos
Fernandez
Associate Dean
College of Agricultural Sciences
Penn
State University
A
needs assessment is a systematic way of determining the current
state of an organization before developing solutions or programming.
Needs assessment conducted to obtain baseline data on the service
needs of a particular population can save an organization money
and time. When organizations decide to save time by skipping this
important task, money and human resources can be wasted on implementing
solutions that did not hit the targeted population where it could
be of the most benefit. A needs assessment can be proactive or
reactive. For example, if yield or retention numbers are decreasing,
a needs assessment could be used to determine the cause or possible
solutions. On the other hand, a needs assessment can be conducted
before there are any negative indicators or identified problems
simply to identify future programming needs.
A
comprehensive advising needs assessment can provide valuable information
such as:
There
are well-defined steps to take to design an effective needs
assessment.
-
Determine the purpose of the needs
assessment. What are the objectives for conducting the assessment?
-
Identify the necessary resources.
What resources are currently available for conducting this assessment?
Is there assistance with survey development and implementation
at your institution? Do you have/need help with the distribution,
collection, and analysis of the assessment?
-
Decide who will be responsible for
designing, implementing and analyzing the assessment.
-
Determine what research questions
must be included in the assessment.
-
Decide on the methodologies for
distributing, collecting and analyzing the assessment.
-
Establish a workable timeline for
accomplishing each task.
There
are many data gathering methodologies available and appropriate
for administering a needs assessment. In most cases, the research
questions and the purpose of the needs assessment will drive the
identification of methods that will be most effective. For example,
if the goal is to ask one or two questions and allow group discussion
to steer the final results, then a focus group interview could
work. If a standard set of questions to ask of a specific population
has been identified, then a survey might work best. Individual
interviews, or, on the opposite end of that spectrum, town-hall-meetings,
could be useful depending on your purpose and the resources you
have available. One important step of any needs assessment is
to determine what data already exist so you aren’t reinventing
the wheel and are pushing beyond what is already known. Therefore,
a mining of existing data is always crucial in terms of best resource
management.
Of
course, one always needs to keep in mind the final outcome, the
final report, when planning a needs assessment. Who is the audience
for the final report and how can that audience be persuaded of
the importance of the needs assessment results? What do you want
to have happen as a result of this assessment? This final step
must be carefully planned to achieve the desired results.
A
Case Study: An Advising Needs Assessment
(Reprinted with permission
from The Pennsylvania State University College of Agricultural
Sciences)
Context
The
College of Agricultural Sciences ( CAS
) at Penn
State
University
uses a faculty advising model
as its primary advising delivery mechanism. Several departments
within CAS
also employ a professional advisor to work with students and with
faculty advisors within the department, though not all departments
have this resource. One department employs a staff assistant to
conduct undergraduate advising activities. As the advising coordinator
for the College
of Agricultural Sciences ,
the author is responsible for providing updates and training for
all advisors in the College. The Associate Dean for Undergraduate
Education, the Advising Coordinator, and the Department Head for
Agricultural and Extension Education worked together to develop
and implement a needs assessment in August of 2008.
This
needs assessment was not conducted for the purpose of determining
what might be causing a problem or because there were complaints
about advising in the College. This needs assessment was conducted
solely to help determine advisor professional development programs
that would hit their mark in reaching the needs of the population.
Recruitment and retention figures already told the story of positive
results for the College. The undergraduate student population
for the College is up 8% over 2007 and the average retention rate
at Penn State
is well above 80%. This needs
assessment was considered to be more proactive than reactive in
nature.
Penn
State has developed an online advising system called “eLion” that
offers students the ability to schedule their own courses, run
degree audits for any major, check their grades or tuition bills,
predict their grade-point-average and many other academic tools.
This system also has a unique set of tools for academic advisors,
including electronic advising notes. Other online advising resources
include the University Bulletin or catalog, a comprehensive Undergraduate
Advising Handbook and advising handbooks specific to each college
and/or department. The College of Agricultural Sciences ( CAS
) Advising Handbook includes
semester-by-semester course scheduling recommendations or “Recommended
Academic Plans”.
Methodology
The
purpose of this needs assessment was to determine the advisor
training needs of the 124 faculty and professional advisors within
the College
of Agricultural Sciences
who have at least one undergraduate student assigned to their
advising roster. Although advising workshops had been offered
within departments and for the entire College in the past, there
was no formal advisor training model in place and training was
spotty at best. The needs assessment team discussed strategies
and determined that an online survey instrument was the easiest,
quickest and most effective method for gathering the needed data.
Faculty in the Department of Agricultural and Extension Education
had achieved good results conducting surveys using Survey Monkey
(www.surveymonkey.com), an online commercial survey product that
is easy to use and inexpensive. The team designed the online survey
using the free trial version of Survey Monkey which limits the
number of questions that can be asked to ten and the various types
of tests and analyses that can be conducted. It was determined
that these restrictions would not compromise the goals of the
survey. The final instrument, then, was a simple ten-item survey
that required minimal time on the part of the participant. The
team went through an expedited human subjects approval process
for publishing purposes through the University’s Office for Research
Protections.
In
mid-August, the instrument was piloted with four professional
advisors in the College. Three of the four responded and made
suggestions for improvement and clarity of the survey. On August
22, 2008 , an email invitation
was sent to all 124 academic advisors in the College to participate
in the study. Consent information was delivered through the email
and the survey url was provided. No deadline for completing the
survey was given, however a reminder email was sent to all 124
advisors again on September 5 and the survey was closed on September
22. A total of 54 responded to the initial or reminder invitation
to participate for a 43.5% response rate.
Results
Ten
questions were asked via the anonymous online survey: three demographic
questions, four perception/attitude/likert-scale questions, and
three open-ended questions. The results for each of the demographic
and perception questions are presented below.
1.
Number of years you have been advising at Penn State
Years
Advising |
<1
|
1-2
|
3-5
|
6-10
|
11-15
|
More
than 15 |
Response
Count |
Responses
|
5.6%
(3)
|
13.0%
(7)
|
33.3%
(18) |
18.5%
(10) |
7.4%
(4)
|
22.2%
(12) |
54
|
2.
Number of students you presently advise.
Number
|
1-10
|
11-20
|
21-30
|
31-40
|
More
than 40 |
Response
Count |
Responses
|
24.5%
(13) |
43.4%
(23) |
13.2%
(7)
|
3.8%
(2)
|
15.1%
(8)
|
53
|
3.
I am a:
Type
of Advisor |
Response
Count |
Percent
|
Faculty
Advisor |
45
|
83.3
|
Professional
Advisor |
6
|
11.1
|
Other
|
3
|
5.6
|
Other:
Staff but not professional advisor (1)
Recruiter
who volunteers to advise (1)
Staff
that volunteers to advise (1)
4.
Which one of the following best characterizes your attitude toward
advising?
Advisor
Attitude |
Response
Count |
Percent
|
I
find advising pleasant and rewarding. |
43
|
79.6
|
I
have neither very positive nor very negative feelings toward
advising. |
9
|
16.7
|
I
find advising unpleasant. |
2
|
3.7
|
When
asked the reasons for their attitude toward advising, most respondents
commented about the personal rewards they gained from developing
relationships with their students. Those who offered reasons for
negative feelings about advising highlighted that the few students
who come unprepared and don’t follow through with suggestions
from the advisor can make the job frustrating.
5.
Which one of the following best captures your perception of student
attitudes toward the advising process?
Student
Attitude |
Response
Count |
Percent
|
Students
find the advising process pleasant and rewarding. |
30
|
56.6
|
Students
have neither very positive nor very negative feelings toward
the advising process. |
20
|
37.7
|
Students
find the advising process unpleasant and frustrating. |
3
|
5.7
|
When
asked to justify their perception of student attitudes toward
advising, many respondents said that their advisees who take advantage
of the advising process probably receive a lot of benefit from
the relationship with their advisor. However, because advising
is not mandatory at Penn State, there are those students who can
either appropriately self-advise or who simply don’t attend to
their academic needs and never meet with an advisor. Several respondents
commented that they heard students make negative statements about
other advisors they had encountered.
6.
What advising activities do you engage in the most (Check all
that apply)?
Advising
activity |
Response
Count |
Percent
|
Course
selection |
51
|
94.4
|
Mentoring
|
40
|
74.1
|
Career/profession/graduate
school considerations |
41
|
75.9
|
Decision
making, including choice of major |
33
|
61.1
|
Academic
procedures (i.e. late drop, withdrawal, Faculty Senate petitions,
change of major) |
41
|
75.9
|
Other
|
10
|
18.5
|
When
asked to expand on the “other” category of advising activities,
several respondents included working with prospective and transferring
students as well as students enrolled at other Penn
State
campuses. The advising activity
for these students would entail discussions about what courses
to take before coming to the University
Park campus and evaluations
of student transcripts. Several respondents also identified personal
or “life” issues as a common advising activity.
7.
What is your comfort level when using the following advising resources?
Check the box that best describes your comfort level.
|
Very
Comfortable |
Somewhat
Comfortable |
Neither
Comfortable nor Uncomfortable |
Somewhat
Uncomfortable |
Very
Uncomfortable |
Have
Never Used This Resource |
eLion
|
64.8%
(35) |
27.8%
(15) |
3.7%
(2) |
3.7%
(2) |
0.0%
(0) |
0.0%
(0)
|
Online
Degree
Programs
Bulletin |
38.9%
(21) |
24.1%
(13) |
14.8%
(8) |
7.4%
(4) |
0.0%
(0) |
14.8%
(8) |
Degree
Audit |
69.8%
(37) |
20.8%
(11) |
3.8%
(2) |
3.8%
(2) |
1.9%
(1) |
0.0%
(0)
|
Electronic
Advising Notes |
11.1%
(6) |
20.4%
(11) |
16.7%
(9) |
5.6%
(3) |
3.7%
(2) |
42.6%
(23) |
Schedule
of
Courses |
72.2%
(39) |
20.4%
(11) |
5.6%
(3) |
1.9%
(1) |
0.0%
(0) |
0.0%
(0) |
eLion
Transcripts |
44.2%
(24) |
25.9%
(14) |
7.4%
(4) |
3.7%
(2) |
1.9%
(1) |
16.7%
(9) |
CAS
Advising
Handbook |
14.8%
(8) |
14.8%
(8) |
35.2%
(19) |
1.9%
(1) |
0.0%
(0) |
35.2%
(19) |
University
Undergraduate
Advising
Handbook |
13.0%
(7) |
16.7%
(9) |
33.3%
(18) |
5.6%
(3) |
0.0%
(0) |
31.5%
(17) |
Department
Student
Handbook |
50.0%
(27) |
27.8%
(15) |
11.1%
(6) |
0.0%
(0) |
0.0%
(0) |
11.1%
(6) |
Recommended
Academic
Plans for Major
|
59.3%
(32) |
27.8%
(15) |
5.6%
(3) |
0.0%
(0) |
0.0%
(0) |
7.4%
(4) |
The
last three (3) questions were open-ended. The first of these questions
asked participants what they find most rewarding about the advising
experience. Fifty-one (51) responses were received and virtually
all respondents indicated that the most rewarding aspect of advising
was helping students and seeing them grow, make progress and succeed.
When asked what they find to be most frustrating or dissatisfying,
twenty-six or 51% of the fifty-one respondents indicated that
students who either don’t take advantage of their advisor’s expertise
or don’t follow the advice of their advisor are the most frustrating
aspects of advising. Twelve (23%) expressed their frustration
with the complex procedures involved and the lack of accurate
information or knowledge about these processes. Six (12%) mentioned
poor student attitudes as an issue, such as thinking that advisors
should give them the answers and not make them think or that the
advisor should respond to their questions immediately.
The
last open-ended question asked advisors what types of personal
or institutional support would make the advising process more
effective or satisfying. Forty-one (41) responded to this last
question with the following results:
More
training (9)
Nothing
is needed (7)
Rewards
for advising (5)
Better
departmental advising system (more professional advisors, more
faculty engaged in advising, advising mentors within the department)
(5)
Better
online advising tools (degree audit, one location, streamlining
of processes) (5)
Train
the students about their role in advising (5)
Don’t
know (2)
Data
on what techniques work with students (1)
A
question center for advisors to get help (online) (1)
Discussion
So
what did we learn by conducting this needs assessment? From the
demographic information, we learned that more than 50% of our
advisors have been engaged in advising for five (5) or fewer years
and that the majority of the advisors have between eleven (11)
and twenty (20) advisees. We also learned that we have a fairly
large number (12) of very experienced advisors who could potentially
be a resource for other newer advisors. We were a bit surprised
to find that ten (10) advisors advise more than thirty (30) students,
which could be high depending on the advisors’ other responsibilities.
Nearly 80% of the respondents have a positive attitude toward
advising but less than 60% indicated that students probably have
a positive attitude about advising. These figures signify the
need to collect more data from the students that may dispel the
notion that students don’t appreciate the advising relationship.
By
asking about their advising activities (question #6), it was apparent
most advisors do have a fairly accurate and standard view of appropriate
advising responsibilities. It was clear that schedule planning
was not the only activity our advisors engage students in and
that mentoring students is also seen as a common and important
activity. Helping advisors understand the type of questioning/advising
necessary to allow students to confirm or reject their choice
of major is an issue the team may need to discuss to determine
if this is something important for faculty advisors to engage
students in.
Question
#7 concerning respondents’ comfort levels using various online
advising resources gave the team a great deal of information related
to training needs. Many subjects were comfortable using a variety
of resources, but more than 50% still do not use the University
electronic advising notes system or are uncomfortable using it.
About 1/3 are not familiar with the various advising handbooks.
This information along with the number of respondents who admitted
they need more advisor training confirms a plan for future professional
advisor development.
Conclusion
Based
on the results of this needs assessment, several initiatives have
been developed to address advisor needs:
- A series of hands-on workshops,
in computer labs, targeting advisors at various levels of experience
and need have been developed. The workshops have been titled
“Advising 101, 201 and 301” and are designed to be open to the
needs of those who attend any particular workshop. Each of these
workshops is offered three different times during the fall semester
and will be repeated in the spring. Twenty (20) advisors have
already enrolled in one or more of these workshops.
- The team has also determined that
additional data is needed to help advisors self-assess their
advising performance and to provide them with data from student
perceptions of their advising effectiveness. Assessment instruments
are currently being developed for both purposes.
- A Web site was developed that
included links to the ten (10) most valuable and important online
resources for academic advisors. This Web site is linked from
the “Faculty and Staff Resources” page of the College’s homepage.
A brief description of what is included in each resource is
written in the link to assist advisors in finding the resources
they are looking for.
- The College is now developing
a competency-based “master advisor” program that will provide
rewards and recognition for advisors who demonstrate mastery
of required advising skills.
Needs
assessments are valuable tools to help us direct and target our
programming to achieve the best results. Diving right into a solution
to a problem or the development of a program without conducting
the needs assessment can be a costly mistake with mixed results.
The
assessment can be simple or complex based on the purpose and available
resources. Partnering with other campus representatives who have
assessment training and experience can help anyone who is struggling
with how to get started. It is a worthwhile endeavor that sends
a message to the participants and to those who will receive the
results that someone cares about the issues at hand enough to
ask for ideas and suggestions. There will be more support and
buy-in from the stakeholders if they know their input was solicited
before the solution was developed.
|