From the Co-Editors

Abstract

In the most recent issue of the NACADA Journal, we began by offering our deep respect and gratitude to the former Journal Co-Editors for their skillful work in shaping the Journal into the premiere publication for the scholarship of academic advising. Now we find ourselves expressing our heartfelt sadness for the recent passing of Dr. Leigh S. Shaffer. Thus, we begin this issue with a dedication to Dr. Shaffer by his close friend and former NACADA Journal Co-Editor, Dr. Rich Robbins, who offers a personal tribute to the life and contributions of a remarkable higher education professional, colleague, and friend. While it is difficult to acknowledge his absence, we know that Dr. Shaffer's positive influence will have a continuing impact on the Journal and on the lives of all those he touched. We celebrate a life well lived and dedicate this issue to Dr. Leigh S. Shaffer.This issue of the NACADA Journal explores a range of salient topics facing academic advising from multiple perspectives gained through employing multiple methodological approaches. The authors explore perceptions and expectations of academic advising from both student and advisor points of view, consider academic advising within international contexts, challenge those in higher education to consider new ways of thinking about cultural immutability, and offer sharpened insights and thoughtful suggestions on assessment and improvement.In a Letter to the Editor, Ilya Winham, while not disagreeing with Andrew Puroway's (2016) attribution of advising as a political activity, suggests that a reflection on power dynamics in higher education might be a fruitful approach to advisor-student conversations.By comparing espoused ideals with practice, Sean Bridgen offered an examination on ways systemic issues contribute to the perpetuation of an enacted academic advising culture. The use of a case study approach allowed Bridgen to capture contextual nuances critical to the work of advising.Using the introduction of a new 4-year undergraduate curriculum as impetus for change, Rhonda Cheung, Andrew Siu, and Daniel Shek conducted a needs assessment to inform the development of an academic advising program at a Hong Kong university. Their survey results expand the understanding of student expectations of academic advising and academic advisors in a context outside of North America.Leaf Zhang and Trang Dinh, through a phenomenological study using semi-structured interviews, explored advisors' cultural awareness and competence in terms of knowledge, motivations, and abilities, and they looked at the influence of that competence on advisors' experiences in working with international engineering students. They adapted the intercultural communication competence theoretical framework as a means to guide their exploration on the advisor point of view.The articles in this issue shift to topics of understanding phenomena from the student perspective with a description from Ruth Walker, Alexandra Zelin, Carolyn Behrman, and Rachel Strnad of the formation and maintenance of student perceptions of advising. The researchers utilized story circles and structured interviews to understand ways students form their expectations of advising and advisors. Their work affirms previous research linking experiences with high school guidance counselors to student expectations regarding academic advising in college. Through their processual model, the understanding of the conceptual, informational, and relational elements of academic advising is enhanced.Krista Soria, Nicole Laumer, Dale Morrow, and Garrett Marttinen used a mixed-methods approach to understand the effectiveness of employing a strengths-based approach for academic advising. They gathered data from matched pairs of students and from advisors through the use of focus groups. The results suggest a positive influence of strengths-based advising for both students and advisors.Ye He and Bryant Hutson proposed a paradigm shift with regard to the consideration of faculty advising as service. Through their lens of assessment for rather than of faculty advisors, they promote the engagement of the faculty in a process designed to support advising improvement.In an exploration using work adjustment and social cognitive career theories, H. Gibbs Knotts and Claire Wofford informed the understanding of factors that contribute to the satisfaction and efficacy self-perceptions of pre-law advisors. Their findings suggest that among the many factors affecting advisor self-perceptions, the most salient related to an earned JD, sufficient resources, and time devoted to advising, which characterized study participants who reported relatively high levels of job satisfaction and self-perceived ability to help students gain admission to and succeed in law school.In summary, as is the tradition of the Journal, this issue offers critical concerns related to the role of academic advising in higher education through a variety of designs, lenses, and theoretical frameworks. We are interested in your reactions as you engage with these latest contributions to the literature: Use #MyNacadaJournal to respond!