Navigating Challenges within Academic Advising: A Tempered Radicals Approach

Abstract

Academic Advising values and approaches can often conflict with the culture, norms, and practices within an institution. The purpose of this study is to explore the values that academic advisors bring to their work, how those values might conflict with the practices of their universities, and how advisors navigate conflicting values and advocate for change. Interviews with twenty academic advisors at one large, public, research university revealed that advisors experience tensions in their everyday work. These tensions arise when advisors strive to work with students holistically and equitably, yet institutional practices focus on revenue generation, efficiency and bureaucracy, and narrowly defined definitions of merit and student success. Despite tensions, interviews revealed that many advisors resist conforming to institutional culture in many ways through acts of tempered radicalism (Meyerson, 2001). Although often small and incremental, these actions allow advisors to hold onto their values and work within the system, rather than confronting the system in outright or aggressive ways. Findings also discuss the factors that support and hinder advisor agency, such as supportive supervisors and time spent within the advising role. Finally, this study provides many implications for advising practice, advising administration, and institutions. Advisors and institutions must recognize advising professionals as change agents who can harness both individual and collective actions for change and problematize systemically inequitable issues within education. To foster tempered radicalism within the advising profession, institutions must also redress advisor burnout and attrition. A final implication is that advisors must acknowledge the impact that siloed and disconnected advocacy efforts can have for different students within a university.