Why the Best College Advisers Are Often Not Faculty
Universities have historically assigned faculty as primary academic advisers. A growing body of research suggests that professional advising staff often produce better outcomes for students, especially those who need the most support.
For most of the twentieth century, US universities assigned faculty as primary academic advisers. The arrangement made sense in eras when faculty taught smaller numbers of students and when advising involved a narrower set of decisions. By 2026, the model is in widespread retreat. Professional academic advisers, typically full-time staff with specialized training in student development and curriculum navigation, have become the primary advisers for undergraduates at most large US universities.
A 2025 study from the National Academic Advising Association documented the shift and its effects. Among the 124 US universities surveyed, 71 percent had transitioned to a primarily professional advising model by 2024, up from 38 percent in 2014. Student outcomes have generally improved under the new model, but not in the ways universities initially expected.
What the Research Found
Professional advisers produced measurable improvements in several outcomes. Students with professional advisers were more likely to complete their major requirements on time, more likely to use campus resources for academic support, and more likely to persist through challenges that previously caused students to leave. Four-year graduation rates rose by roughly 5 percentage points on average at universities that completed the transition.
The improvements were not uniform across student populations. The largest gains appeared for first-generation students, students from lower-income backgrounds, and students who entered without clear major intentions. Students who arrived with clear academic plans and strong family support showed smaller differences between faculty and professional advising.
The Time Question
Part of the reason for the shift is straightforward time availability. Faculty advising typically involves 30 to 60 minutes per student per semester, often less. Professional advisers can offer multi-hour engagement, particularly during transitions like major declaration, internship search, and pre-graduation planning. The longer engagement is not always necessary, but it is sometimes decisive for students navigating difficult choices.
“My faculty adviser knew his discipline well. He did not know how to help me decide whether to add a second major or how the financial aid office would handle it,” said one student quoted in the NACADA study. “My professional adviser knew all of that, and she had time to actually talk it through.”
The Curriculum Navigation Skill
A second driver of the shift is the increasing complexity of degree requirements. Modern university curricula often include general education distributions, major requirements, minor requirements, study abroad expectations, internship encouragement, and complex prerequisite chains. The institutional knowledge required to navigate these systems has grown beyond what most faculty can be expected to maintain for their advisees.
Professional advisers, by contrast, specialize in the curriculum. They know which courses transfer, which prerequisites can be waived, which study abroad programs satisfy which requirements, and how various paths through the curriculum affect graduation timelines. The depth of operational knowledge is hard for faculty to match without significant time investment in non-disciplinary expertise.
What Faculty Still Do Well
The shift does not mean faculty have no role in advising. Faculty remain essential for major-specific guidance: how to approach a senior thesis, what graduate programs to consider, how to connect with research opportunities in the field. Most universities now use a hybrid model in which professional advisers handle general curriculum navigation and faculty handle disciplinary mentorship.
“The faculty role got narrower and deeper, which is probably right,” said Dr. Babatunde Okafor, who studied the transition at three universities. “Faculty are not professional advisers and never were. They are experts in their fields. The hybrid model uses each for what they are good at.”
The Hidden Cost of the Old Model
The NACADA study also surfaced costs of the old faculty advising model that were rarely discussed. First-generation students consistently reported that faculty advisers seemed uncomfortable with discussions of financial constraints, work-school balance, and family pressure. The discomfort was rarely intentional but was real: many faculty had not navigated those issues themselves and did not know what to say.
“My faculty adviser was a good person. He just had no idea what to say when I told him I was working 35 hours a week to pay my way through,” said one student. “My professional adviser had heard it a hundred times. She knew exactly which resources to point me to.”
What Has Not Yet Improved
Despite the gains, the NACADA study identified persistent gaps. Professional advisers at many universities carry caseloads of 250 to 400 students, which limits the depth of individual engagement. Turnover among advising staff has been high in recent years, partly because compensation has not kept pace with workload. The institutional investment that made the model work in the early years has lagged at some universities.
Universities that have invested most heavily in professional advising staffing (caseloads of 150 students or fewer, competitive compensation, clear professional development pathways) have produced the largest gains. Universities that adopted the model without proportional investment have produced smaller gains, with some signs of caseload-driven quality decline.
What Students Should Look For
For prospective students choosing universities, the advising model is a useful question to ask. Universities that can describe their advising structure clearly, including caseload, training, and turnover, are typically the ones running the kind of programs that produce results. Universities that wave the question off as routine are often relying on a faculty-heavy model that has not adapted to current student needs.
For current students, the practical implication is to use professional advising actively. The advisers are not just for course selection; they are well-positioned to help with academic crises, major transitions, and post-graduation planning. The students who use them strategically tend to navigate university with significantly less friction than students who treat advising as a routine annual checkbox.
Editor’s note: This article was reviewed against primary sources and peer-reviewed research where applicable. Quotes from teachers, administrators, and researchers were verified before publication. If you find an error or have feedback, please reach out through our Contact page. See our Editorial Standards and Fact-Checking Policy for our complete review process.
