Abstract:
This qualitative study explores the perceptions of NACADA leaders regarding institutional and structural sources, obstacles, and opportunities related to learning and professional development (PD) for primary-role academic advisors. Through semi-structured interviews with 17 NACADA leaders, the study identifies three key themes: the critical role of professional associations in supporting learning and growth, substantial financial and structural barriers to PD, and the essential need for institutional recognition and support. The findings highlight the complexities academic advisors face in enhancing their skills and professional standing, emphasizes the importance of professional communities, and identifies the challenges posed by current institutional frameworks. Implications for fostering a supportive environment for advisor learning and PD are discussed, along with recommendations for future research.
Academic advising promotes student success and persistence (Troxel, 2019). Increasingly, advisors are tasked with guiding and supporting students from diverse backgrounds; therefore, professional development (PD) is pivotal (Dochy et al., 2021; McGill, 2015). PD allows advisors to keep pace with emerging theories, innovative strategies, and evolving practices in academic advising (Archambault & Hapes, 2022).
Training and PD, although often used interchangeably, serve distinct purposes in career and organizational growth. Training is typically short-term, with clear objectives and measurable outcomes, often delivered through workshops or seminars. Conversely, PD focuses on an individual's overall career growth and advancement. It is an ongoing, self-directed journey that includes education, networking, and research—specifically, research focused on new technologies, methodologies, and industry changes. PD is primarily concerned with long-term career progression and adaptability, often with qualitative benefits that enhance professional identity and job satisfaction (van Loo & Rocco, 2006).
Despite its importance, financial constraints often limit PD initiatives (McGill, Heikkila, et al., 2020; Noe, 2017). So do time constraints, as the combined responsibilities of compliance, record keeping, and student-interaction leave little time for PD. Luckily, institutional support can go beyond financial assistance to encompass resource access, streamlined processes, or recognition and rewards. On the other hand, a lack of institutional support in these areas will hinder PD (Eddy & VanDerLinden, 2006; McGill, Heikkila, et al., 2020).
Although scholarship on PD in academic advising has grown (Archambault & Hapes, 2022; Givans Voller, 2016; Mann, 2018; McGill, Heikkila, et al., 2020; Pasquini & Eaton, 2019), few studies focus on perceptions of NACADA leaders about advisor PD. The purpose of this study is to gain insights into the perceptions of NACADA leaders regarding institutional and structural sources, obstacles, and opportunities related to learning and PD for primary-role academic advisors. The study aims to explore these perceptions from two distinct lenses: a) the lens of NACADA leaders in their roles as representatives of the professional association; and b) in their roles as advising leaders on their respective campuses. By examining these dual perspectives, the study seeks to understand how professional associations (e.g., NACADA), can influence and support advisor PD. The study will be guided by the following research questions:
What are NACADA leaders’ perceptions as representatives of the professional association regarding NACADA’s role in supporting advisor PD and learning?
What are NACADA leaders’ perceptions as advising leaders on their campuses regarding institutional sources and structures that help or hinder advisor PD and learning?
How do NACADA leaders believe the professional association can further influence and support advisor PD and learning?
NACADA leadership’s insights on PD in academic advising highlight both successes and challenges. Although NACADA provides crucial PD opportunities, its influence on institutional fund allocation remains limited; therefore, the findings suggest collaborative strategies for NACADA to enhance support for advisor PD and learning.
Literature Review
Academic advisors recognize the need for ongoing professional development (Archambault & Hapes, 2022; Farr & Cunningham, 2022), especially those that enhance relational skills and improve effectiveness (McGill, Heikkila, et al., 2020). Academic advising scholarship recognizes that continuous learning is essential (Byington et al., 2022); therefore, structuring mandatory training programs can provide advisors with knowledge and skills necessary for their roles (Turner & Farr, 2022), and regular program assessment ensures that advisors meet objectives (Zarges & Adams, 2022).
Increasingly, PD incorporates reflective practices, which encourages advisors to evaluate their philosophy, strategies, and interactions critically (McGill, Duslak, et al., 2020). By asking advisors to critically self-evaluate, reflection supports professional adaptation to changing educational landscapes (Schön, 1983). Mentoring and self-care are also crucial, providing guidance and promoting well-being to prevent burnout (Kyncl et al., 2022; Medrano et al., 2022) and therefore longevity in the profession. Technology enhances PD by offering flexible learning opportunities (Howard et al., 2022), such as training in intercultural competence and relational skills—two skills vital for supporting diverse student populations. Intercultural competence helps advisors respect cultural differences (Lemrow et al., 2022), build supportive relationships, enhance the advising experience, and promote student retention and ultimately success (McGill & Lazarowicz, 2022).
Despite PD resource availability, scholar practitioners have criticized the lack of mandatory training before individuals assume academic advising roles (Duslak et al., 2023). Givans Voller et al. (2010) noted the inadequacy of PD, which led advisors to rely on informal learning and may result in inconsistent practices and a disconnect between advisor and student. Two primary issues arise here: the absence of prerequisite PD activities for new advisors and the lack of compulsory ongoing PD. Without foundational knowledge in advising theories, student development, and communication strategies, advisors may struggle; without ongoing PD, advisors cannot adapt to the ever-changing educational landscape.
Methods
To capture NACADA leaders’ perceptions of PD for primary-role academic advisors, I employed a basic qualitative design commonly found in education (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). By focusing on the qualitative aspects of leaders’ experiences and insights, this research sought to uncover the underlying dynamics and operational realities that contribute to PD’s ecosystem within academic advising.
Sample
After gaining IRB board permission, I recruited 17 NACADA leaders based on their availability and expertise (Patton, 2002). Participants had to be a community chair, a subject matter expert publishing about the professionalization of academic advising, or a high office holder (e.g., presidents, board members). After assessing credentials, I emailed qualified individuals; 17 participants agreed and, prior to the study, gave informed consent. Table 1 displays participant profiles.
Data Collection
The interview protocol examined various roles performed by practitioners; advisor career stages; the role of scholarly literature and graduate curricula; stakeholders’ perceptions of the field; and future directions (See Appendix A). Questions regarding learning were not part of the original protocol, but nonetheless emerged as an important topic. These semi-structured interviews ranged from 74–147 minutes. The data was professionally transcribed, double-checked, and then sent to participants to verify accuracy.
Data Analysis
NVivo assisted with tracking the codes in the interview transcripts. Here, holistic coding (Saldaña, 2021) resulted in categories of data, including PD and training. After chunking these larger topic areas of data, I examined the data for meaning and nuances within these larger categories. This analysis revealed perceptions, attitudes, and details of how participants viewed learning within advising and challenges to providing staff with such opportunities. Next, I described the codes and sub-codes, noting the distinctive nature of each (Boyatzis, 1998). Finally, I distilled the data into key statements and added representative quotation to my emerging analysis (Creswell & Poth, 2024).
Findings
Three themes emerged. First, that professional associations play critical roles in supporting learning and growth. Second, that substantial financial and structural barriers to professional development remain. Third, there is an essential need for institutional recognition and support. These themes underscore the complexities academic advisors navigate as they seek to enhance their skills and professional standing.
Professional Associations and Communities: Sources and Opportunities
The first theme highlights the indispensable role of professional associations in fostering PD and continuous learning of academic advisors. It explores how these organizations provide a rich platform for advisors to engage with a diverse array of knowledge, practices, and perspectives. For instance, Participant 13 noted:
NACADA is rich with professionals and professional ideas and different practices … Growing and evolving different ways of serving specific student populations or approaches to advising…By immersing oneself in that world, you absorb and learn a lot more than you even realize.
Participant 13 suggested that immersing oneself in NACADA allows advisors to learn a great deal. By engaging with professionals from different institutions and programs, advisors glean other perspectives, approaches, and practices. Such immersion fosters continuous learning and professional growth.
Participant 2 discussed their approach to helping connect people in NACADA with writing mentors and/or opportunities:
I ask, “What are you interested in writing and researching and how can I connect you to resources? Who can you partner with, and who can help you with that research? How can I connect you?” The second thing is, “I understand where you’re at, I’ve been there. Here’s how I did it. Here’s how I found time. Let’s talk.”
This approach underscores the value of professional associations in providing a platform for advisors to connect, share knowledge, and exchange ideas. By participating in professional communities, advisors can tap into a wealth of resources, experiences, and expertise.
Professional associations provide an array of resources designed to enhance advisor knowledge and competencies. Regarding NACADA, Participant 8 noted:
These people came, were doing it conscientiously, and said, “I got together with other folks who are doing this conscientiously too, they’d have all kinds of great ideas that I’d love to know about, that I can incorporate at least some of in the things that I do,” and they started an organization to share these things. The NACADA Journal started out as a newsletter before it became a formal journal. That’s the essence of it. They were knowledge workers, and they didn’t have to have a certificate or a degree. They just said, “I want to do this, I want to do this well.”
NACADA is portrayed as an organization advisors founded out of passion about their work and a need to network. This grassroots approach emphasizes the value of informal learning and peer-to-peer collaboration in PD.
Several participants emphasized NACADA members’ commitment to conscientious practice. These advisors recognized the importance of improving their skills and incorporating new ideas, such as Participant 8, who challenges the notion that formal degrees or certifications were prerequisites for being a knowledgeable and effective advisor. To this participant, a genuine desire to perform well and a commitment to learning and growth were more important than formal credentials. This opinion highlights the perceived importance of continual PD beyond formal instruction, and indeed some participants stressed the value of networking, collaboration, and staying current with evolving practices in academic advising. Participant 1 noted:
I didn’t have a background/exposure to these theories, but in my environment, I was around people who did. And because I was involved in NACADA, I was around other people who did. And so those two things made it clear to me that these are important things to know about…if I’m going to interact with students in ways that change them. So, the interaction with my colleagues, locally and with NACADA colleagues, both tipped me off that I should be doing some other work.
Participant 1 recognized the power of immersing oneself in the world of NACADA, where advisors can learn about a wide range of perspectives, approaches, and best practices. For Participant 3, however, professional associations were more important than a degree: “You can become a member of a professional organization like NACADA and learn and develop your skills. So, actually, NACADA is more important than having specific academic degrees in academic advising.” Such immersion fosters continuous learning and professional growth, enabling advisors to improve their knowledge, skills, and effectiveness in their roles.
Professional associations and communities play a significant role in advisor PD. They act as catalysts for learning and growth, offering networking resources, fostering a culture of collaboration, and encouraging engagement with peers. This theme underscores the significance of advisor active participation in these professional communities.
Financial Challenges, Resource Limitations, and Problematic Perceptions
Academic advisors face stark realities and constraints when pursuing PD. Often, institutional budget allocation favors faculty, leaving advising staff with insufficient support. Several participants agreed with this assumption, citing their own personal experience. Financial limitations further hinder professional growth for those who cannot pay for such opportunities out-of-pocket. Participant 17 argued, “The cost of participation in conferences and development activities, or limited funding for critical functions of the job, continues to be a significant barrier.”
Negative or neutral attitudes about advisor roles across campus further reduces chances for resource allocation. As Participant 7 observed:
If they oversee in their department or college primarily professional advisors who have advising loads of 800 to 1, and the role has traditionally been the graduation audit and periodic checks to see where students are on their plans, then they see advising as a clerical role.
Many participants agreed with this statement and connected their financial constraints with misconceptions about advising roles. Participant 4 noted that many advisors see themselves primarily as “class schedulers” or “course planners.” Participant 12 added, “We still have some faculty that think academic advising is course registration. It's really changing, and it's changing because of the work that NACADA has been doing.” This misconception of advisors inhibits the allocation of resources towards academic advisor PD and growth.
Time constraints also emerged as concerns. Participant 14 noted, “Some administrators believe that any problem or crisis the student has could or should be dealt with by the academic advisor. One example is financial issues, which should ideally be handled by our financial aid office.” This perception, that advisors should “catch all” student concerns, stretches their roles beyond feasible limits. Participant 16 agreed, pointing out perception issues within faculty and HR, that faculty have “competing things going on. At smaller institutions, advising is a faculty function, so the profession of advising doesn't register because that's what faculty do. At larger institutions, it's somebody else's problem.” Participant 16 further noted,
HR people decided to do an assessment of roles and determine which roles were more or less challenging, tying salary increases to those stages. The problem with advising is that it was seen as collaborative and thus didn't rank highly. This has fortunately begun to change.
Participant 10 asked, “What are some minimal things we should consider as we look to train, develop, hire, promote, and support talent in this field?” They suggested comprehensive approaches to talent management, such as hiring and promoting individuals but also ensuring their continuous training, development, and support. Clearly, demystifying the perception that advising is simply course selection is essential if resource allocation is ever to change. A great first step would be establishing foundational standards for PD that recognize and promote the multifaceted nature of academic advising—both its student-facing and administrative dimensions.
Institutional Recognition and Support
The final theme, recognition and support, accentuates how senior administrators can shape how advising is perceived and valued within institutions. Access to funding for professional development activities, including conferences and training programs, is essential not just for personal growth, but for public recognition.
Senior administrators' support can significantly influence institutional perceptions of advising (Duslak et al., 2023). For instance, Participant 4 worked with a provost who so appreciated the value of academic advising they arranged a presentation about the benefits of advising at a meeting of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU). This example demonstrates the potential for senior administrators to champion the cause of academic advising, although such support is rare.
Participant 5, an associate dean and director of academic advising, recognized the role of resource advocacy in professional development and frequently provided funds for his team to attend conferences:
As director of academic advising, I don’t force my staff to do [PD], but I do encourage it. I provide them with travel funds to go to conferences, especially if they present. But not enough of them will take me up on it.
Further highlighting the importance of career progression opportunities, Participant 7 emphasized that “without some type of formalized progression, advising is never going to go any further than it is on most campuses. It's going to be seen as scheduling course selection because on many campuses, even clerical staff have a ladder.” This opinion underscores the view that PD holds for many advisors.
Leadership support can also play a vital role in advancing the advising mission. Participant 14 shared how well established dedicated advising groups and open communication channels were on campus:
We have two distinct advising groups: our council of advisors and our administrators' group that meet and keep those lines of communication open. Our administrators' group includes admissions, financial aid, the registrar, the provost's office, orientation, and other key areas. The distinction of this meeting is that the agenda items are always advising-related. That's what makes it work.
Clearly, institutional support—here through dedicated meetings—can facilitate the advancement of advising.
Conversely, administrative confusion about advising can be a significant hindrance. Participant 16 noted, “I keep the provost and the president out of the picture because they have lots of responsibilities. Unless they are specifically the associate provost for undergraduate education, I’m not sure academic advising is well understood by them.” Such reflections of feeling unseen reinforce the need for institutional buy-in for PD. As Participant 17 pointed out, “This [institute] is making moves to support professional development opportunities [and] this place is showing interest in supporting activities to further progress in the field.” Such buy-in pays dividends.
Overall, participants highlighted that lack of recognition, and lack of understanding, within their campus community significantly impacted the rate of advisor growth, expertise, and motivation. This gap between available and allocated support regarding advisor participation in PD activities underscores the complex interplay between university culture and institutional need. Recognizing advisors' professional contributions via institutional support are integral to the increased success of the advising mission.
Discussion
By analyzing and integrating the views of NACADA leadership, this study highlights crucial elements that support PD: advising leader advocacy on campus, professional associations with their access to networks, collaborative efforts that enrich PD, increased institutional recognition, and incentivizing PD activities. Although NACADA advocates for institutional support, there are limits to its impact.
Participants held that misconceptions of advising—namely, that advisors simply schedule classes—hinders PD funding and opportunities. This finding underscores NACADA's vital role in advocating for broader institutional commitments, including financial resources and increased recognition. NACADA can target their outreach and education efforts toward senior administrators, policymakers, and other key stakeholders in higher education. This approach may involve presenting research and data that demonstrates the positive impact of well-supported advising programs on student success, retention, and institutional outcomes. Additionally, NACADA can develop and disseminate best practices, guidelines, and recommendations aimed specifically at administrators to influence institutions to support and invest in their advising programs and staff.
Although NACADA can and should continue to advocate for increased advisor support, ultimately institutions must prioritize advisor PD. For institutional culture to change, advisors must act as agents of change. To that end, advisors should take the initiative by engaging with other professional associations, such as the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE) or the American College Personnel Association (ACPA). Both offer PD resources that may complement NACADA's offerings.
Regarding financial constraints, advisors should investigate how funds might be diverted to support advisor PD. When leaders support advisors by connecting them to larger networks, they foster knowledge-sharing communities, bridge “structural holes” for better information flow, and facilitate social learning (Burt, 2005). Leadership should also normalize continual learning via PD (Schein, 2010), which can enhance the perceived value of professional association engagement and motivate more advisors to invest in PD (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998).
Leaders of professional associations must advocate for necessary resource allocation to support PD. They can do so by voicing advisor needs and challenges to administrators, calling attention to the financial challenges that restrict access to valuable social resources and social capital (Bourdieu, 1986). Such advocacy can involve presenting data from surveys or studies, engaging in strategic planning discussions, and collaborating with stakeholders to emphasize the need for increased funding. Such advocacy can influence the allocation of resources (Adler & Kwon, 2002).
Institutional recognition and support are signposts of a positive environment conducive to learning and PD. Such support can take various forms, including financial resources, learning opportunities, mentorship programs, and policies that recognize and reward PD (Eddy & VanDerLinden, 2006). When institutions value and prioritize ongoing proficiency and competency in advising, it paves the way for advisors to thrive and excel in their roles.
Implications
This study underscores several critical implications for the field of academic advising, professional development, and student success. To achieve these goals, a multifaceted approach that addresses advocacy, institutional support, overcoming challenges, and fostering collaboration is essential. Although the findings of this study are based on the perspectives of NACADA leaders, the implications extend to academic advising leaders within institutions. As NACADA plays a crucial role in shaping the field of academic advising, the insights and experiences of its leaders can inform the practices and decisions of advising leaders at the institutional level. To that end, leaders should consider sharing best practices through presentations, publications, and workshops at NACADA conferences. Additionally, they can create mentorship programs to guide new advising leaders, engage in direct consultations with institutions to tailor strategies for local contexts, and develop resource guides that outline successful advising models. By fostering collaboration between NACADA and institutional leaders, they can ensure the field continues to evolve in response to emerging challenges.
First, advocacy is vital if academic advising leaders are to broaden institutional support. Advocacy can foster a culture that values PD (Schein, 2010), not only by acknowledging the efforts of advisors in their professional growth, but by integrating PD into the institution's strategic planning and resource allocation (Eddy & VanDerLinden, 2006). Advocating for PD is a great first step in attempting resource reallocation.
Second, financial constraints and resource limitations must be addressed (Swanson & Holton, 2009). Institutions often inadequately fund PD activities, which can stifle the growth and effectiveness of academic advising. Addressing these challenges requires innovative solutions, such as establishing partnerships with external entities for sponsorship, leveraging technology for cost-effective training opportunities (Noe, 2017), and creating dedicated budgets for in-house PD initiatives. A strategic and proactive approach is crucial to ensure that financial barriers do not impede PD and the growth of advisors.
Third, networking and collaboration among academic advisors can greatly enrich PD experiences (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Engaging in collaborative projects, sharing knowledge, and learning from one another can significantly broaden advisors' perspectives and enhance their advising strategies. Institutions should actively encourage such collaborative efforts, recognizing their potential to build a stronger, more interconnected advising community.
Fourth, an essential aspect of promoting PD and securing necessary resources is effectively communicating the value of academic advising (McGill & Lazarowicz, 2022; Lowenstein, 2014). This involves demonstrating to stakeholders the critical role that advising plays in student success and the impact of PD on enhancing advising services. By articulating the importance and outcomes of advising work, institutions can better align stakeholder expectations, build trust, and justify investments in PD. A comprehensive understanding of advising can lead to increased support for PD initiatives.
Fifth, overcoming the challenges to PD in academic advising requires thoughtful strategic planning and a commitment to innovation. This might include exploring new models for PD, such as blended learning opportunities, micro-credentialing, and peer-led training sessions, to accommodate the diverse needs and constraints of advisors. Institutions must adopt a forward-thinking mindset, recognizing the dynamic nature of the educational landscape and the evolving needs of both advisors and students (Kuchinke, 2010).
Finally, this study opens the door for further research into the dynamics of learning and PD within various institutional contexts. Investigating the long-term effects of PD activities on advisors' professional growth and the direct impact on student outcomes can provide deeper insights into effective PD strategies (Osteen, 2011). Additionally, exploring the role of social interactions in PD, such as networking and collaboration, can offer valuable perspectives on how to maximize the benefits of these activities.
Limitations
This study has a few limitations. First, it highlights the problematic perceptions of advising as primarily an administrative task, which can stifle the potential for broader development. This suggests that further research on changing institutional and cultural perceptions of advising is needed. Second, the study's focus on NACADA leaders might not fully capture the diversity of views and experiences of academic advisors at different levels or institutions. Third, the study primarily includes perspectives from NACADA leaders at larger, public, four-year, doctoral institutions; experiences may differ at community colleges, private institutions, or smaller universities. Future research should explore a more diverse sample. Also, because the study employs a basic qualitative design focused on the perceptions of NACADA leaders, its findings are not representative of all academic advisors, especially those in non-leadership positions or from institutions with different cultures or resources for PD.
While the study highlights the importance of fostering a culture of inclusion, it does not delve deeply into how PD programs are (or are not) addressing the needs of advisors from diverse backgrounds or how PD initiatives can better promote inclusivity—a notable omission considering the increasing diversity of student populations. Finally, although the study captures a snapshot of perceptions and experiences related to PD for academic advisors, it does not address how these may change over time with shifts in educational policies, technologies, and student demographics.
Although this study provides valuable insights from NACADA leaders, future research should also explore the perceptions of advising leaders who are not associated with NACADA to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges and opportunities surrounding advisor PD and learning. Additionally, further investigation is needed to determine whether NACADA could play a more influential role in shaping institutional support for advisor PD, beyond its current efforts.
Conclusion
This study contributes to the existing literature on advisor PD by gathering perceptions of NACADA leaders about the role professional associations can and should play in supporting advisor growth. The findings highlight the importance of institutional support, the value of engaging with multiple professional associations, and the need for further research on the factors influencing the allocation of PD resources within institutions. By filling these gaps in the literature, this study provides a foundation for future research and informs practices aimed at enhancing advisor PD and learning.
References
Interview Guide
What is a profession? What constitutes a profession?
How does theory add to the discussion of professionalism in advising?
What role should theory play in the professional development of academic advisors?
Is there a common core of theoretical knowledge that should be mastered by those practicing academic advising?
What is the essence of academic advising? What is the distinctive nature of academic advising?
What specific roles do academic advisors play that people outside of the field do not?
To what fields is advising related? How does this relationship influence its advancement as an independent, distinctive field?
What sort of specialization is required for academic advisors?
What are the career stages for academic advisors? What is important for career progression in the field of advising? What are the criteria for advancement in the field?
Should there be a distinct program of study for academic advisors?
What would a formalized field of study for academic advising look like?
Should there be coursework distinct from that of higher education, student affairs or educational leadership graduate programs?
What role should credentialing play in academic advising?
What are important considerations for professionalization for the future of academic advising?
Where does the field stand in terms of public understanding and public acceptance?
What perceptions do university provosts have of the field of academic advising?
What perceptions do university presidents have of the field of academic advising?
What perceptions do faculty have of the field of academic advising?
What perceptions do administrative staff have of the field of academic advising?
What perceptions do support staff have of the field of academic advising?
What perceptions do students have of the field of academic advising?
What impact does this have on the field?
How should academic advising strive for professionalization?
Is there anything I should have asked you about the professionalization of advising that I didn’t?
Is there anything you’d like to add?