Strengths-Based Advising Approaches: Benefits for First-Year Undergraduates

Abstract

We explored the benefits of strengths-based academic advising approaches for first-year students (N ¼ 1,228). We used propensity score matching techniques to create matched pairs of students who did and did not engage in strengthsbased advising conversations with an advisor. First-year students who experienced strengthsbased conversations had significantly higher rates of first-year retention and graduation in 4 years, levels of engagement, and academic selfefficacy than students who did not participate in these conversations. Focus groups of 21 advisors provided insights into strengths-based advising in 3 findings: strengths approaches facilitated advising relationships (thereby supporting students' engagement, retention, and graduation), enhanced students' self-awareness and confidence, and advanced advisors' own personal and professional development (thereby positively influencing student success).

Strengths Use, Environmental Factors, and Academic Outcomes in Newly Matriculated College Students

“…However, inconsistent with our hypothesis, environmental support did not predict leadership. Other previous studies point to the importance of environmental support, including from academic advisors (Soria et al 2017) and learning communities (Nahavandi 2006). Given the inconsistent findings, additional research examining the relationship between environmental support and leadership with college students would be beneficial.…”

“…This is a serious issue at universities across the U.S., with about one-third of students transferring schools one time, one-half of those transferring more than once, and over 50% of students at four-year institutions dropping out of school at some point during their enrollment (NSC Research Center 2015). Findings from a previous study (Soria et al 2017) provided guidance on the importance of supports and barriers to strength use that could be implemented by University faculty and staff to prevent student retention difficulties. Faculty and advisors could take the time to have one-on-one meetings with studentsnoting and encouraging their strengths usewhich aids in community building and making the student feel noticed (Soria et al 2017).…”

“…Findings from a previous study (Soria et al 2017) provided guidance on the importance of supports and barriers to strength use that could be implemented by University faculty and staff to prevent student retention difficulties. Faculty and advisors could take the time to have one-on-one meetings with studentsnoting and encouraging their strengths usewhich aids in community building and making the student feel noticed (Soria et al 2017). Furthermore, support from classmates and peers has also been shown to promote strengths use (Kim et al 2017), which could also be more readily encouraged and facilitated by faculty and staff.…”

Youth and Undergraduate Leadership Experiences as Pathways to Leadership Education

“…Students have the opportunity to work with and be mentored by one of the program's research partners in investigating the impacts of UMN leadership programs on student growth, development, and outcomes. Students have previously been published and had opportunities to present their findings at national conferences (Soria, Hussein, & Vue, ; Soria, Morrow, Laumer, & Marttinen, ; Soria, Werner, & Nath, in press).…”

Creating inclusive classrooms by engaging STEM faculty in culturally responsive teaching workshops

“…Across institutions, multiple student-focused strategies have been implemented to improve student success. These include summer bridge programs to broaden college access (Kallison Jr. & Stader, 2012;Murphy, Gaughan, Hume, & Moore, 2010), modernized advising practices (Soria, Laumer, Morrow, & Marttinen, 2017), cohortbased student retention programs (Matsui, Liu, & Kane, 2003;Stolle-McAllister, Domingo, & Carrillo, 2011;Toven-Lindsey, Levis-Fitzgerald, Barber, & Hasson, 2015), cocurricular resilience programs such as those offered through campus student learning centers (Duranczyk, Goff, & Opitz, 2006), learning communities (Zhao & Kuh, 2004), and social belonging interventions (Yeager et al, 2016). Many of these strategies have led to improvements in student outcomes, but they are focused largely on the student and often are run by administrative staff, separate from the faculty and instructors who deliver course content.…”