Difference between revisions of "Random Faculty Assignment"
From Help Wiki
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
*Faculty anxiety around advising students whose interest fall outside of their areas of expertise | *Faculty anxiety around advising students whose interest fall outside of their areas of expertise | ||
*Students’ anxiety around not being with faculty whose areas of expertise matches their areas of study. | *Students’ anxiety around not being with faculty whose areas of expertise matches their areas of study. | ||
| + | [[category:2011-2012]] | ||
Latest revision as of 16:20, 21 April 2017
Random Assignment by class standing. Faculty would be assigned students of the same level
and would follow through their career. Students grouped by lower and upper division.
Pros
- Encourages broad liberal arts and interdisciplinary advising conversations and content
- Common experience for students to meet other students across the curriculum who are at the same
- moment in their UG trajectory.
- Least administrative overhead
- Potential to allow for team coordination by faculty advisors who are working with different levels of
- advisees
- Frees faculty and students from presumptions about the advisor/advisee relationship
- Does the most to remove inequity from the process
- A great way to have students interact with disciplines they previously have not encountered
Cons
- Structurally doesn’t allow peer mentorship across levels within advising seminars
- Faculty anxiety around advising students whose interest fall outside of their areas of expertise
- Students’ anxiety around not being with faculty whose areas of expertise matches their areas of study.
