Quality academic advising in higher education is the product of a multitude of elements not the least of which is institutional vision. By recognizing and embracing an institution's concept of its capabilities and the kinds of educated human beings it is attempting to cultivate, advisors gain an invaluable apparatus to guide the provision of effective educational planning to students. In a case study survey, we assessed whether and how institutional vision can be transformed into action as both vision-driven initiatives and more incidental activities reflective of an institution's vision statement. Relative emphasis: theory, research, practice

Academic advisors charged with developing and implementing student success strategies should ask: To what extent is the process of intervention, rather than the nature of any specific intervention, responsible for an influx in at-risk student performance and persistence? Students in varying degrees of academic probation were randomly assigned to one of three intervention strategies that incorporated controlled content but divergent levels of intrusiveness. The most intrusive intervention resulted in higher cumulative grade-point averages and higher retention rates for all students. Students with the highest risk of academic dismissal were the most responsive to the most intrusive intervention.

In two recent publications, we reported that the academic intervention process, not the specific intervention content, was responsible for a short-and long-term influx in at-risk student performance (grade-point average) and persistence (retention). All at-risk students who participated in the most intrusive of three interventions had higher cumulative grade-point averages and retention rates than those who received less intrusive interventions. In this post hoc analysis, we looked at probationary students with learning disabilities and found that they are only responsive to the individual attention and personalized accommodation provided under a highly intrusive model, and the impact is temporary.

Phoenix health care system that scheduling clerks had been instructed to falsify appointment wait-time data. According to the allegations, this was done to make it appear as though the facility was meeting the VA's 14-day wait-time standard for veterans seeking appointments. This prompted an investigation by the VA Inspector General's office, which sought to establish the veracity of the allegations, and whether or not any veterans died while waiting for an appointment. In the weeks that followed, it became apparent that these practices were widespread throughout the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system as other whistle-blowers stepped forward. On May 30, retired U.S. Army General Eric Shinseki, widely regarded as a person of great personal integrity, submitted his resignation as Secretary of VA. In his remarks that day, Shinseki (2014) commented, After Wednesday's release of an interim Inspector General report, we now know that VA has a systemic, totally unacceptable, lack of integrity within some of our Veterans Health facilities. That breach of trust involved the tracking of patient wait-times for appointments. Our initial findings of our ongoing internal review of other large VA healthcare facilities also show that to be true. That breach of integrity is irresponsible, it is indefensible, and unacceptable to me. .. I can't explain the lack of integrity among some of the leaders of our healthcare facilities. This is something I rarely encountered during 38 years in uniform, and so I will not defend it because it is indefensible. But I can take responsibility for it, and I do. (para. 1) Mitigating the risk of integrity violations such as those that led to the resignation of Secretary Shinseki should be a central concern for public administrators because a lack of trust in the integrity of public institutions undermines their ability to perform effectively (Perry, de Graaf, van der Wal, & van Montfort, 2014; Putnam, 1994; Wang & Van Wart, 2007). As Menzel (2015) has noted, however, many of those who occupy public leadership positions seem to have only a limited "awareness of their responsibility to build and sustain organizations of integrity" (p. 355). This may be due partly to the fact that public administration ethics education and scholarship has tended to 755006A RPXXX10.

In a recent report, the authors showed that the academic intervention process, rather than the specific intervention content, was responsible for a short-term influx in at-risk student performance and persistence. Students in varying degrees of academic probation were randomly assigned to one of three intervention strategies that incorporated controlled content but divergent levels of intrusiveness. Results showed that the most intrusive intervention produced higher cumulative grade-point averages and retention rates for all at-risk students. This follow-up study on the long-term impact of these one-time interventions confirms results regarding performance and persistence: Some intrusion is better than none in academic advising.