Disability Services for Students
NACADA
Finessing the Academic and Social-Emotional Balance:
A Revised Developmental Advising Model for Students with Learning Disabilities
or AD/HD
Jeannine Ryser, Landmark College
Peg Alden, Landmark College
Advisor perceptions of and responses to the social and emotional needs
of college students with learning disabilities (LDs) and attention deficit/hyperactivity
disorder (AD/HD) are studied. Through a mixed-method approach of surveys
and focus groups, four themes emerged: social-emotional issues that students
present in the advising relationship; advisor challenges and responses
to presenting issues; sources of advisor support; and monitoring of student
medication. Data support a revised and expanded developmental advising
model that includes the complex layering of social and emotional challenges
that face students with LDs or AD/HD and the factors that keep this complex
domain in balance with academic and career exploration. The revised model
may also be useful for advisors whose students have any social or emotional
challenges.
KEY WORDS: administrative organizational systems, advisor role, attention
deficit/hyperactivity disorder, developmental advising, high-risk students,
learning disability
Introduction
Developmental advising models are based on the concept that the personal
domain is an intrinsic aspect to student growth in an academic context.
Students with LDs or AD/HD often present emotional challenges that affect
the personal domain and consequently the academic advising relationship.
The emphasis is on the importance of balancing the social and emotional
needs of students with an LD with their academic goals. Stress that support
programs need to consider the possibility that some students with LDs
attending their institutions may need at least as much social as academic
support.
In this article we explore the unique elements of social and emotional
support in the context of developmental advising for students with LDs
or AD/HD. Our presentation reflects the collective 170-year experience
of 34 advisors from Landmark College in southern Vermont, a college that
exclusively services students with a diagnosis of LDs or AD/HD. We focus
on these advisors’ perceptions of, and responses to, the unique
social and emotional needs of this student population. Based on the data
collected from a survey and focus groups, we recommend four strategies
to enhance the overall development of college students with LDs or AD/HD
as well as other students who may bring social or emotional challenges
to the advising relationship. These strategies, when implemented at an
institutional level, allow advisors to finesse the balance among the
personal, academic, and career domains of developmental advising.
Literature Review
College students with LDs or attentional disorders are likely to present
a much broader range of diverse and complex social and emotional challenges
than will their peers who have no such diagnoses. Some of these social
and emotional issues will be co-morbid; that is, they exist alongside
the LD or AD/HD diagnosis. Other challenges often called “embedded
social-emotional issues,” are a part of the intrinsic symptoms
or characteristics of LDs or AD/HD. A third type of social-emotional
issue is defined as “secondary” because it is a consequence
of an LD or AD/HD. All of these challenges, regardless of their origin
or relationship to a student’s LD or attentional disorder, have
implications for academic advisors and have a particular effect on advisors
who embrace a developmental advising model.
Co-morbid Social and Emotional Issues
When exploring co-morbidity issues for students with LDs or AD/HD,
one should first consider the degree to which the two primary diagnoses
exist in tandem. Research has shown LD and AD/HD co-morbidity in 7 to
60% of the cases studied; results depend upon the definitions used and
the age group under study, but researchers have come to the general consensus
that a diagnosis of either LD or AD/HD will increase the likelihood that
the person will be diagnosed with the other condition. IN addition to
the co-occurrence of LD and ADHD, students with either diagnosis are
likely to be challenged by co-morbid conditions. It is clear that many
with LDs have overlapping, associated, and clinically significant learning
disabilities and emotional or behavioral disorders. Although students
with LDs struggle with social and emotional challenges at a rate significantly
higher than their peers with LDs, experts have debated about whether
these characteristics are embedded aspects of the student’s profile
or are examples of undiagnosed co-morbid psychiatric disorders.
Students with an AD/HD diagnosis are perhaps at an even greater risk
of co-morbid social and emotional issues than are those with an LD. Students
with AD/HD are 5 to 8 times more likely to suffer from an anxiety disorder
and more than twice as likely to suffer from major depression, obsessive
compulsive disorder, and substance abuse as are their peers without AD/HD.
Those with AD/HD have a 44% chance of being diagnosed with one other
psychiatric disorder, a 32% chance of having two other disorders, and
an 11% chance of having three disorders in addition to AD/HD. Although
the rates and symptoms of co-morbid disorders may vary according to gender,
with current diagnostic nomenclature, a heterogeneous group receives
the diagnosis of ADHD, the majority of whom have at least one other co-morbid
diagnosis.
Embedded Social and Emotional Issues
In additional to the increased likelihood of having coexisting diagnoses,
students with LDs or AD/HD are also dealing with social and emotional
issues that are embedded symptoms or characteristics of the LD or attentional
disorder. Although a clear understanding of the underlying causes of
the social and emotional problems exhibited by persons with LDs remain
unclear, the same cognitive processing deficits that appear to interfere
with writing reading, or other academic tasks may be adversely affecting
the learning of social skills. The many social and emotional skills that
can be compromised by an LD include nonverbal communication, emotional
decoding, social judgment, cause and effect abilities, social problem
solving, and social role taking. While not all students with LD exhibit
social and emotional problems, both research and clinical data suggest
that a significant proportion of individuals with LDs face serious challenges
in the social sphere.
As for students with AD/HD, one need look no further than the diagnostic
criteria listed in the most recent Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Test Revision to find embedded social
and emotional aspects of this diagnosis. For example, the fourth diagnostic
criterion of AD/HD is stated as “There must be clear evidence of
clinically significant impairment in social, academic, or occupational
functioning.” The associated features listed in this publication
highlights characteristics of AD/HD that have profound implications for
social and emotional functioning, such as low frustration tolerance,
temper outbursts, bossiness, and stubbornness.
Secondary Social and Emotional Issues
College students with LDs or AD/HD likely face a gambit of challenges
that are the consequences of their disabilities. Although LDs and attentional
disorders have been blamed for a range of social and emotional problems,
from family discord and negative parent-child interactions to severe
anxiety, the most oft cited consequences are a pervasive lack of self-esteem
and compromised peer interactions. Students with LDs and those with AD/HD
are likely to have experienced repeated academic failures. The cumulative
effect of these negative experiences for college students with LDs or
AD/HD is a diminished self-concept and the range of feelings associated
with a sense of inadequacy and lack of confidence. Perhaps due to this
lack of self-confidence, students with LDs or AD/HD commonly feel isolated
and withdrawn, and these feelings interfere with their developing relationships
with peers. Peer rejection and peer victimization are common experiences
for students with LDs.
In addition, social and emotional skills are learned. Therefore, those
students who struggle with learning, either because of a diagnosed LD
or an attentional disorder, may also struggle with social and emotional
skills. Regardless of whether the diagnoses are due to co-morbid, embedded,
or secondary social and emotional symptoms, most college students with
LDs or attentional disorders bring challenges with them to their college
campuses, and these issues affect the student’s relationship with
his or her academic advisor.
Independent Social and Emotional Challenges
Although students with a diagnosis of LD or AD/HD are likely to face
more social and emotional challenges than will their peers, a large and
increasing number of college students without an LD or attentional disorder
are confronting significant social and emotional difficulties are confronting
significant social and emotional difficulties. Two recent surveys, one
of counseling center directors and another of college students, highlight
a trend toward increased use of psychiatric medications as well as an
overall increase in social and emotional challenges among college students.
A recent poll of campus counseling center directors shows that among
college students seen for therapy on campus, the number taking psychiatric
medications rose from 17% in 2000 to 24.5% in 2004. Drawing from a survey
of 29,230 college students conducted by the American College Health Association,
it has been reported that 35% of college students are currently taking
medication for depression alone. In another interesting finding, students
self-reported a higher rate of medication usage for one psychiatric condition
(depression) than the counseling center directors reported for all psychiatric
conditions combined. Clearly, many students are taking medication to
address psychological challenges whether or not they receive on-campus
counseling support.
Students who are not taking medication are also facing significant
social and emotional issues. According to counseling center directors,
almost one half of all students experience a level of depression that
interferes with their ability to function. In addition, the directors
reported a sharp rise in bipolar disorder, eating disorders, and drug
and alcohol problems that require student hospitalization. Furthermore,
the students described their academic performance as being hindered by
stress, sleep difficulties, and concern for a troubled friend or family
member. The study also showed that 9% of students have seriously considered
suicide within the year prior to the study. Evidently, students with
LDs or AD/HD are not the only ones whose social and emotional challenges
are likely to be affecting academic advising relationships.
Developmental Academic Advising
Although a continuum of advising is practiced on campuses today, at
many colleges, advisors have embraced the developmental model and emphasize
a comprehensive and collaborative approach to the advising relationship.
In the model conceptualized by Winston et al. in 1984, the advisor’s
role is to recognize the interactions that inhibit or enhance growth
within the educational, personal, and career domains. By moving in the
continuum beyond prescriptive advising and encouraging the integration
of personal as well as academic and career goals into the advising relationship,
developmental advisors are likely to address the social and emotional
issues of advisees with LDs or AD/HD. Therefore, advisors who plan to
work effectively with this population must have a keen understanding
of their advisees’ evolving social and emotional needs and have
strategies to address those needs appropriately within the advising relationship.
Although over 200 colleges and universities in the Unites States are
listed as providing comprehensive programs for students with LDs or AD/HD,
including specially designed advising services, little has been written
and even less research published on the specifics of advising college
students with LDs or AD/HD. In one book which is dedicated to providing
an annotated bibliography on academic advising, only one source is directly
related to advising students with LDs. Since 1994, more attention has
been paid to LDs as they relate to advising, but the scholarship remains
scant. Most recent literature consists of descriptions of college services
frequently used by students with AD/HD or LDs, and general suggestions
for advising this population. Nothing in the academic literature specifically
addresses advisor experiences of managing the social and emotional aspects
of student with LDs or attentional disorder in the advising relationship.
Of course, not every student with an LD arrives at a college campus
with major emotional and social challenges; indeed, a small percentage
of these students exhibit strength in these areas as these skills serve
as a compensatory strategy for their disabilities. However, students
with an LD or attentional disorder who do not evidence any kind of social
or emotional difficulty are exceptions.
Clearly the needs of college students with LDs or AD/HD are not limited
to traditional academic issues. To advise these students successfully,
an advisor must understand the students’ social and emotional needs
and be clear on her or his own role vis-à-vis those needs. By
examining how advisors of students with LDs or AD/HD perceive and respond
to the social and emotional challenges presented by their advisees, we
hope to help advisors enhance, rather than inhibit, the development of
students with regard to educational, personal, and career domains. In
addition, this study may assist advisors whose students without a diagnosis
of LD or AD/HD face social and emotional challenges.
Methodology
Through a mixed-methods study, we set out to answer the following question:
How do advisors who work with college students with an LD or AD/HD perceive
and respond to the social and emotional issues that arise with their
advisees? Participants were drawn from the Advising Department of Landmark
College in Putney, Vermont, a college designed exclusively for students
with LDs or AD/HD.
For this research project, we included data from both surveys and focus
groups. A 15-questoins survey, which we designed with input from the
Director of Advising, a six-member Research Awards Task Force, and a
nine-member Research Committee, was distributed to all 50 Landmark College
academic advisors. Thirty-four surveys, with roughly 170 years of collective
experience advising students with LDs or AD/HD were completed within
the specified time frame.
We used emerging themes from the survey data to generate protocols
for the focus groups. The focus group questions were reviewed by two
separate research committees, which consisted of administrators, faculty
members, and academic advisors. Focus groups were formed based on advisors’ willingness
to participate and the length of time that they had served in their advising
role. To form the two 1-hour focus groups, we randomly selected two participants
from each of five experience cohorts: less than 1 year, 1 to 3 years,
3 to 6 years, 6 to 9 years, and over 9 years experience advising students
with LDs or AD/HD. This layered approach to data collection allowed for
an expansion of our analytical lenses and greater depth of information
sharing.
Using either descriptive statistics for the quantitative materials,
we analyzed data from both survey responses and transcripts of focus
group audiotapes. We development thematic clusters by an inductive process
of studying, reducing, and analyzing the text. This approach allowed
us to summarize important points and implied meanings. We strove for
internal validity by inviting peer examination through advising department
and campus-wide presentations as well as distribution of preliminary
reports. This distribution and discussion of data provided an opportunity
for feedback from both research participants and the campus professional
community at large.
Finding and Discussion
Three themes emerged from the survey and focus group data:
- social and emotional issues that students with LDs or AD/HD present
in the advising relationship,
- advisor challenges and responses
pertaining to the advisees’ social
and emotional issues, and
- advisor challenges and responses pertaining
to the advisees’ social
and emotional issues, and
- sources of support for advisors working
with students with LDs or AD/HD.
A fourth theme, monitoring of medications, emerged solely from the focus
group data.
Social/Emotional Issues
Figure 1 depicts the wide variety of emotional issues that students
with LDs or AD/HD bring to the advising relationship. These categories
represent advisor perceptions of student issues and may or may not represent
medical diagnoses.
In addition to the emotional issues cited in Figure I, 41 % of advisors
reported that students brought problematic family issues to advising;
35% reported that students had roommate problems; 35% reported that students
had difficulties pertaining to friendships; and 24% reported that students
were experiencing problems in their romantic relationships. When given
the opportunity to add problematic social or emotional issues that were
not listed on the survey, 24 out of34 respondents listed problems that
could be categorized generally as inappropriate or immature behaviors,
such as lack of socialization skills, unawareness of social norms, social
immaturity (talking too much, interrupting, and inappropriate laughing),
and other types of social inappropriateness.
The majority of the advisors in this study spoke to the interconnectedness
between the social and emotional aspects and academic domains for students
with LDs or AD/HD. The following theme was repeatedly voiced throughout
the focus groups:
So much of [these students'] academic history . . . is so connected
to emotions that you can't start talking about what [they] are learning
about [their] learning disability without emotions coming out. . . .
We can't say, "Let's talk about your learning profile and your dyslexia,
but not talk about your feelings about it."
Another participant added, "It does seem almost ridiculous at
times to talk about students' active reading process when whatever is
bubbling up underneath the surface. . . just years and years of academic
frustration." Consistent with the literature on LDs, AD/HD, and
co-morbidity, advisors in this study perceived a high percentage and
a wide variety of co-morbid social and emotional challenges among their
students with LDs or AD/HD. Students consistently brought these issues
with them to their advising relationships, which created unique challenges
for those advisors who were committed to facilitating their growth.
Advisor Responses
In the survey data, 24 of 34 advisors stated that students' social
or emotional issues are a challenge to them as advisors. When focus group
members were asked how their students' social or emotional issues personally
affected them in their role as advisors, they spoke of often feeling "anxious" and "insecure" and
finding the advising process "draining." The challenges of
advising students with LDs or AD/HD are varied, but three difficulties
topped the list. Advisors feel that when dealing with the social or emotional
issues of students they are working beyond their level of expertise.
They reported spending a great amount of time fielding students' social
and emotional problems. They also expressed challenges managing role
boundaries when advising students with LDs or AD/HD.
Level of expertise. Although the participants in this study
work exclusively with college students with LDs or attentional disorders
and have the support of other colleagues who do the same, we found that
advisors feel as if they are in over their heads.
The majority of advisors surveyed expressed a feeling that the social
and emotional issues of advisees are beyond their own area of expertise
more than 50% of the time. The study participants most often cited referrals
to other services as the means of handling overwhelming student challenges.
While approximately one quarter of study participants responded to
student social and emotional issues by listening and pursuing lines of
inquiry, over three quarters said that they referred students to other
on-campus resources when they felt that emotional issues were either
beyond their expertise or impacting the student's academic performance.
Figure 2 highlights the types of referrals made and the percentages
of advisors who made them. Few advisors referred students to off-campus
resources. When they did, the advisors were most likely to refer students
to medical professionals, such as physicians or community health centers.
Advisor's time. The amount of time needed to address students'
social and emotional issues emerged as a challenge for many, but not
all, of the advisors surveyed. The survey responses were remarkably varied
and well distributed across the gambit of possibilities: Some advisors
reported spending less than 10% of their advising relationships focused
on students' social or emotional needs, and others reported spending
up to 70% of their time on students' social and emotional issues. In
an attempt to better understand the variables that might have impacted
advisors' answers, focus group participants explored the factors that
influence advisor time spent on the social or emotional issues. The two
focus groups identified three possible explanations for the varied responses:
the degree of student need, the gender of the student, and the advisors'
comfort levels and philosophies about their role.
The diversity of student need is a major factor in the differing amounts
of time that advisors spend on students' social and emotional issues.
[It] depends on the student that you have. For one student, whose social
and emotional issues overpower everything else; it's probably going to
take 70% of your time to get through that before you can even start working
on something else. For some of the students who are just fine and don't
have social and emotional problems, I would say even as little as 5%
of the time [in advising] is spent on [social or emotional issues].
Participants also feel that the advisee's gender plays a role in the
amount of time spent on social and emotional issues presented in the
advising relationship. According to the focus group participants, females
bring more social or emotional issues to their advisors. One advisor
described the difference as follows:
Particularly female students who just come in and. . . gush forth with
all this. . . . They're in the middle of talking about what courses and
[then] they're talking about what happened to their boyfriend. . . .
They just ooze emotional stuff. And then. . . I have a boy, I mean he's
a boy, he's very young and, "How are you feeling?" . . . "I
don't know." Even for me to. . . get a little sense of his emotional
state is difficult.
Advisors in the study perceive that males bring their social or emotional
problems to their advisors only when they have reached a crisis stage,
while women jointly process their social relationships and their academic
lives. These perceptions account for the divergent percentages that advisors
reported spending on social or emotional issues with male and female
students.
The advisor's comfort level with and philosophy about students' social
and emotional needs impact the amount of time that he or she spends on
such issues with advisees. In describing the range of advisor comfort
levels, one respondent shared the following:
I've been aware of an advisor that really feels kind of uncomfortable
dealing with social and emotional issues and it seems to me some. times.
. . their [sic] own personality tends to be very matter of fact and business-like
when they're meeting with their advisees. . . .
Whereas [for] other advisors, [the social and emotional issues] may,
in fact, be something that they have particular skills in or that they
kind of enjoy.
The more comfortable the advisor is with the social and emotional domains,
the more time they are likely to spend focusing on specific social or
emotional issues with their advisees.
Whether due to need level, student gender, or advisor comfort level,
the amount of time (or the lack thereof) spent on advisees' emotional
and social issues is a recurring challenge. As one advisor put it, "One
of my biggest problems is time. When an advisee is in crisis, they take
a lot of my time. Since students tend to reach crisis states at the same
times. . . it becomes a matter of triage-who needs me most first."
Role boundary tension. When asked about the role that they
play vis-a-vis their students' social and emotional needs, advisors described
a multidimensional relationship. To advise students with LDs or attentional
disorders, advisors must playa range of roles, from listener to strategist
to source of acknowledgment and support. When describing how they balanced
these roles, advisors spoke of the strain of managing their role as academic
advisor while dealing with their students' social and emotional needs.
We refer to this strain as "role boundary tension."
Providing support, without crossing into a therapeutic relationship
with students, is a particular challenge for advisors working with students
with LDs or AD/HD. Although eager to listen, empathize, reflect, and
strategize, advisors recognize the limitations of their training and
role, and at times they struggle to determine where support ends and
therapy begins. Some feel more confident in their ability to draw the
line: "I definitely keep an eye open for those types of things to
go to counseling. . . . I won't touch it because I think we can do more
damage than good." Others saw the boundary as more blurred, "[To]
draw this line and only talk about the academics and ignore the other
piece would have really been a waste of our time because they were so
integrated."
Identifying which issues are within the academic domain is difficult
enough, but for advisors who adhere to a whole-student developmental
model of advising, drawing the fine lines can be extremely difficult.
The balancing act is particularly difficult for advisors who perceive
a direct relationship between social and emotional issues and the academic
domain. This focus group participant articulated: "It's very hard
to move forward with the academic part of the responsibilities if the
student is still dealing with a social/emotional issue." Another
participant said, "[I see my role as] helping students understand.
. . how their social behavior impacts [their] homework and. . . their
ability to talk in class. . . . There are all kinds of things that are
definitely socially related but are certainly having an impact on their
academic performance." Even advisors who philosophically agree that
they should limit their role with regard to social and emotional domains
find themselves wanting to reach out to a student in emotional or social
crisis! Although new advisors of students with an LD or AD/HD were quick
to report that they have had trouble feeling too emotionally involved
in their students' successes and failures, even the most seasoned advisors
reported being challenged to find a balanced perspective. One spoke to
this challenge:
I think it's particularly hard when you first are starting because
you do have a whole mixture of high hopes. . . . You could be a fantastic
advisor and. . . you're still going to have. . . like 20% quote-unquote "failures.
. . ." Until you've done it a lot you don't have that sense of proportionality.
. . . I'm getting closer to that. . . .
The more I do this the more I'm able to just say, "So that's the
one, sad as it is, that's the one that's not quite ready. . . ." The
seed may have been planted. . . but right now the rain is coming down;
there's no seed coming up. There's nothing but mud!
While the majority of participants in this study encountered challenges
in advising students with LDs or AD/HD, they responded to these challenges
with a creative combination of listening, supporting, assessing, strategizing,
and referring. Despite witnessing students who could not overcome their
challenges, participants spoke of the importance of celebrating the successes
of students who were able to constructively and creatively meet them.
As one advisor commented, "You've got to dance while you see the
flowers coming up, because with any luck [for] a few. . . the flowers
are coming up!"
Sources of Advisor Support Because the study focused on advisor
perceptions of, and responses to, the social and emotional issues of
their high needs advisees, the overall picture of these advisors' experiences
sometimes appears bleak. Despite the challenges that they have encountered,
these advisors also experienced many successes. Advisors in this study
identified several factors that are essential to success: training in professional
boundary discernment and student development:. supervision and peer support:.
and consultation with counselors.
Training . Many of the advisors in this study expressed that
both their initial training as advisors and ongoing professional development
opportunities are helpful to their work. Furthermore, they frequently
cited more information and training as resources that would help them
be more effective advisors, especially when responding to advisee social
and emotional challenges. They are particularly interested in training
on professional boundary discernment and student development.
Although advisors used a variety of phrases to describe the type of
training that would be helpful ("clarifying the boundaries," "assessment
and response," "triage"), many of their suggestions fell
under the general heading of "discernment." One advisor explained
in the focus group, [We need] training in how to sift it out, and be
just clearer about what is an appropriate thing to just deal with right
then. . . . What we are and aren't capable of getting involved in. I
would appreciate that.
Advisors were quite clear about not being counselors, but they want
some consistent framework for advising a student population for whom
the social, emotional, and academic domains are intertwined.
Advisors are also looking for more information about the developmental
elements that are typical for general college students and those with
an LD or AD/HD. As one focus group participant explained:
I don't have as much background knowledge as I'd like now about what's
normal developmentally from say age 16 up to about 22/25. . . . That
would be such a useful piece of in formation because I think sometimes
I hit my [head] against the wall thinking that it's LD-related when in
fact it may not be.
So, clearly training in professional boundary discernment and developmental
norms helps advisors of students with LDs or AD/HD students work more
effectively.
While the academic, social, and emotional domains are often intertwined
for students with LDs or AD/HD, advisors must distinguish between advising
and counseling roles. Counseling refers to provision of treatment, diagnosis,
evaluation, or counseling for the purposes of alleviating mental disorders.
It is conducted by professionals who are trained and regulated by discipline
standards and may be regulated by state and federal law. Regulation by
discipline or by state law is not universally applicable, therefore counselors
and advisors should consult with the state regulatory agency for definition
clarification.
Supervision and peer support. According to a number of advisors,
a supervision model that encouraged both formal systems and informal
networks of supervision and peer support was instrumental to their success.
Reflecting on her challenges with students' social and emotional issues
early in her advising career, one advisor noted the importance of mentors: "That's
really what got me through it. . . . Quite a few people told me, 'Get
used to it! It's normal.' I took them at their word." Another new
advisor commented:
If maybe three or four people who have a little more experience. .
. could say, "You're doing exactly what I'd do". . . that would
somehow allow you to let go of any feeling that somehow you're not doing
it right.
Experienced advisors as well as academic and residential deans were
all sources of supervision and support for those new to advising students
with LDs or AD/HD. Similarly, both new and experienced advisors benefited
from discussions with their peers concerning the challenges of their
role. Advisors unquestionably felt that supervision and peer support
were intrinsic to their success as facilitators of student development.
Consultations with counselors. Recognizing the social and
emotional issues that many students with LDs or attentional disorders
bring to their college experience, Landmark College institutionalized
several forms of collaboration between the counseling and advising departments.
The system was implemented so that a student seeing a counselor could
sign a release that allows her or his counselor and advisor to converse
freely about presenting social or emotional challenges. At the time of
this research, advisors met weekly with representatives of the counseling
staff to present anonymous cases for input and support. Although most
consultation with counselors focused on students' needs, advisors also
found the counselors to be supportive of their own challenges in advising.
As one advisor said, "If nothing else, I needed the counselor to
give me emotional support because it was a difficult situation."
Training in professional boundary discernment and student development,
supervision and peer support, and consultation with counselors were most
often cited as the supports that helped advisors effectively fulfill
their roles. When asked what advice they would offer to those who were
new to advising students with LDs or AD/HD, participants in this study
emphasized all of these supports. One advisor stated, "Reach out
early to all support structures available!”
Monitoring Student Medications A fourth theme, monitoring of
student medications, emerged independently of the survey and focus group
questions. To treat their AD/HD and other co-morbid disorders, students
frequently use psychotropic medications, which can profoundly impact
their well-being and academic performance.
Yet advisors in one of the focus groups expressed concern over their
unclear role in monitoring a student's use of medication. They do not
know when to engage students in conversations about their medications:
We sort of pretend that's on the other side of that boundary of advising.
. . yet everything that we can do as teachers and as advisors sometimes
just falls flat if. . . medication [isn't] in place. Medication that
is monitored correctly and that works. . . could make a world of difference
in terms of a student's success.
Another added, I think that even more complicated have been some of
the students who were on medications for other psycho-related problems:
depression, eating disorders. . . the gamut of things. . . . There doesn't
seem to be any clear way of broaching that subject. But it definitely
has a huge impact on their ability to perform as students.
The advisors did not offer any specific suggestion for actions that
would help them clarify their role, but they mentioned that training
and institutional policies and guidelines may be helpful. They also expressed
the wish that students themselves could be better educated about their
own medications.
Summary of Data
Students with LDs or AD/HD bring social and emotional issues with them
to the advising relationship, which frequently presents significant challenges
to advisors. When social and emotional issues affect the student's academic
life beyond the level where advisors can be helpful, advisors can feel
anxious, sad, and insecure in their roles. Boundary tension, or the strain
of managing the role as academic advisor with suitable support for students
with social and emotional difficulties, is a particular challenge for
many advisors working with students with LDs or AD/HD. Clear protocols
for assessing the urgency of students' social and emotional needs and
making appropriate referrals are particularly important.
Advisors reported varied percentages of time spent addressing students'
social and emotional issues. This range of responses is best explained
by the degree of student need, the gender of the student, and the advisor
comfort level with and philosophy about students' social and emotional
needs.
Advisors can best enhance student development when provided with adequate
training in professional boundary discernment and student development,
supervision and peer support, and ongoing consultation with professional
counselors. A wide variety of campus resources provides Landmark College
advisors with an essential referral network to optimize their successes
in advising students with LDs or attentional disorders. Finally, advisors
who are trying to help students with LDs or AD/HD to achieve academic
success feel that protocols for discussion of medication monitoring are
important.
A Revised Model to Finesse the Advising Balance
In the developmental advising model, the advisor's role is to facilitate
student growth within educational, career, and personal realms (Winston
et al., 1984). See Figure 3. Both the existing literature and the data
from our research highlight the complex social and emotional issues of
students with LDs or attentional disorders. See Figure 4. These complex
issues can, and frequently do, jeopardize the balance of these three
domains addressed in the advising relationship. The personal domain for
the student with an LD or AD/HD frequently encompasses a range of complex
social and emotional issues that can easily expand and affect progress
in the academic and career realms, thereby inhibiting overall development.
Of course, the role of the advisor is limited, and the advisor should
refer the student to appropriate counseling services when necessary.
In addition, advisors should know the specific legal definitions regarding
the practice of counseling in their state to make sure that they do not
inadvertently cross the advising-counseling line.
The data from this study show that many advisors struggle to maintain
a balance when addressing the three developmental advising domains, and
the percentage of time spent addressing the social and emotional issues
of students varies among advisors. The data suggest the following four
strategies that institutional leaders can implement to help advisors
successfully finesse this balance among the domains of developmental
advising (Figure 5):
- Acknowledge the personal domain as a complex layering of social
and emotional challenges.
- Provide advising supports that enhance
efficacy of advisors, such as training in professional boundary discernment
and student development, supervision and peer support, and consultations
with counselors.
- Support and encourage use of referral services
and clarify state laws that define counseling.
- Create a protocol
for medication monitoring.
Conclusion
In this study, we highlight the complexity of the social and emotional
aspects of the personal domain for students with LDs or AD/HD with regard
to developmental advising. We also suggest four strategies that allow
advisors to keep the personal domain in balance with educational and
career exploration.
We hope that the proposed methods to finesse the balance of academic
advising will benefit students with LDs or AD/HD and their advisors.
Because social or emotional challenges are clearly not limited to students
diagnosed with LDs or AD/HD, the findings of this study may likewise
be relevant to all advisors who are working to maintain the balance among
personal, educational, and career domains for all of their students.
Under the proposed developmental advising model, more students will have
access to optimal support, assessment, and appropriate referral sources,
and more advisors may experience their role as the following research
participant described, "Even with all of these challenges and personal
stressors, it's one of the most gratifying things in the world."
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2000).
Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition,
test revision. Washington , DC : Author.
Barkley, R. A., Fischer, M., Edelbrock, C. S., & Smallish, L. (1990).
An 8-year prospective follow-up study: The adolescent outcome of hyperactive
children diagnosed by research criteria.
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
29(4),546-57.
Brown, T. E. (2000). Attention-deficit disorders and co-morbidities
in children, adolescents, and adults. Washington , DC : American Psychiatric
Press, Inc.
Brown, T. E. (2002, February). ADHD impairments in learning and "emotional
intelligence": Assessment and treatment of complicated cases. Presentation
at Landmark College , Putney , VT.
Duenwald, M. (2004, October 26). The dorms may be great, but how's
the counseling? The New York Times. Retrieved November 1,2004 , from
www.nytimes.com/2004/1 0/26/health/ psychology
Dunwoody, P. T., & Frank, M. L. (1995, September). Why students
withdraw from classes. Journal of Psychology, 6, 553.
Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D.
(1993). Doing naturalistic Inquiry:A guide to methods. Newbury Park ,
CA : Sage.
Frost, S. (1991). Academic advising for student success: A system of
shared responsibility. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.3). San
Francisco : Jossey-Bass. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED339272)
Gaub, M., & Carlson, C. (1997). Gender difference in ADHD: A meta-analysis
and critical review.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry, 36(8), 1036-44.
Gordon, V N. (1994). Academic advising: An annotated bibliography.
Westport , CT : Greenwood Publishing.
Gordon, V N., & Habley, W. R. (Eds.). (2000). Academic advising:
A comprehensive handbook. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Gottesman, R. L. (1994). The adult with learning disabilities: An overview.
Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 5(1), 1-14.
Grites, T., & Gordon, V (2000). Developmental academic advising
revisited. NACADA Journal, 20(1),12-15.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1992). Effective evaluation: Improving
the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic
approaches. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Gunther-Mohr, S. (2003). Counseling college students with learning
disabilities. In L. C. Shea & S. W. Strothman (Eds.), Understanding
learning disabilities at the postsecondary level (pp.77-106). Putney
, VT : Landmark College .
Jarrow, 1. (1996). The Americans with Disabilities Act, students with
disabilities, and the role of the academic advisor. NACADA Journal, 16(2),
6-10.
Jordan, P. (2000). Academic advising in the 21st century. NACADA Journal,
20(2),21-30.
Kadison, R., & DiGeronimo, T. (2004). College of the overwhelmed.
San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Karmen, K. (2003). Advising students with learning disabilities: A
developmental approach. In L. C. Shea & S. W. Strothman (Eds.), Understanding
learning disabilities at the postsecondary level (pp.133-60). Putney
, VT : Landmark College .
Katz, L. 1. (2003). The college student with AD/HD.
In L. C. Shea & S. W. Strothman (Eds.), Understanding learning
disabilities at the postsecondary level (pp. 33-62). Putney , VT : Landmark
College .
Katz, L. 1., Goldstein, G., & Beers, S. R. (2001).
Learning disabilities in older adolescents and adults: Clinical utility
of the neuropsychological perspective. New York : Kluwer Academic/ Plenum.
Mangrum, C. T., III, & Strichart, S. S. (Eds.).
(2000). Colleges with programs for students with learning disabilities
or attention deficit disorders, 6th Edition. Princeton , NJ : Peterson's.
Marshall , c., & Rosman, G. B. (1998). Designing qualitative research.
Newbury Park , CA : Sage.
Nadeau, K., & Quinn, P. (Eds.). (2002). Understanding women with
AD/HD. Silver Spring, MD: Advantage Books.
Pliszka, S., Carlson, c., & Swanson, 1. (1999).
ADHD with co-morbid disorders: Clinical assessment and management.
New York : Guilford Press.
Quinn, P. 0., & Nadeau, K. G. (Eds.). (2002).
Gender issues and AD/HD: Research diagnosis and treatment. Silver Spring
, MD : Advantage Books.
Ramos, M., & Vallandingham, D. (Eds.). (1997).
Advising students with disabilities. (Monograph No.5). Manhattan ,
KS : National Academic Advising Association.
Reiff, H. B. (1997, July/August). Academic advising: An approach from
learning disabilities research. Journal of Counseling and Development,
75(6),433-40.
Reiff, H. B., & Gerber, P J. (1994). Social/emotional in daily
living issues for adults with learning disabilities. In P. J. Gerber & H.
B. Reiff (Eds.), Learning disabilities and adulthood (pp. 72-81).
Austin , TX : ProEd.
Rock, E. E., Fessler, M. A., & Church, R. P (1997).
The concomitance of learning disabilities and emotional/behavioral
disorders: A conceptual model. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30(3),
245-63.
Rucklidge, 1., & Tannock, R. (2001). Psychiatric, psychosocial,
and cognitive functioning of female adolescents withADHD. Journal of
the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(5),530.
San Miguel, S. K., Forness, S. R., & Kavale, K. A.
(1996). Social skills deficits in learning disabilities: The psychiatric
co-morbidity hypothesis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9(4),252-61.
Saracoglu, B., Minden , H. A., & Wilchesky, M.
(1989). The adjustment of students with learning disabilities to university
and its relationship to self-esteem and self-efficacy. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 22(9), 590-92.
Satcher, J., & Adamson, K. (1995). College students with learning
disabilities: Their use of support services, accommodations, and study
skills. College Student Affairs Journal, 14(2), 83-90.
Shmulsky, S. (2003). Social and emotional issues for students with
learning disabilities. In L.Shea & S. Strothman (Eds.), Understanding
learning disabilities at the postsecondary level (pp. 63-76). Putney
, VT : Landmark College .
Solden, S. (1995). Women with attention deficit disorder. Grass Valley
, CA : Underwood Books.
Synatschk, K. (1995). College-bound students with learning disabilities:
Assessment of readiness for academic success. LD Online, LD Forum. Retrieved
May 14,2004 , from www.ldonline.org/ Id_indepth/ postsecondary /ldforum_assess.html
Szatmari, P., Offord, D. R., & Boyle, M. R. (1989).
Ontario child health study: Prevalence of attention deficit disorder
with hyperactivity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 30(2),
219-30.
Valletutti, P. (1983). The social and emotional problems of children
with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: An Interdisciplinary
Journal, 2(2),17-29.
Wiener, J. (1998). The psychiatric morbidity hypothesis: A response
to San Miguel, Formess, and Kavale. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21
(3), 195-201.
Wiener, 1. (2003). Resilience and multiple risks: A response to Bernice
Wong. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 18(2), 77-81.
Wilchesky, M. (1991). Beyond the 3 R's: Socialemotional aspects of
learning disabilities.
Selected proceedings of the 1991 AHSSPPE conference. Columbus , OR
: Association on Handicapped Student Service Programs in Postsecondary
Education.
Wilchesky, M., & Minden , H. A. (1988). A comparison of learning
disabled and non-learning disabled university students on selected measures.
Proceedings of the 1988AHSSPPE conference. Columbus , OR : Association
on Handicapped Student Service Programs in Postsecondary Education.
Willcutt, E. G. (2000). Co-morbidity of reading
disability and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Differences
by gender and subtype. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(2), 179-91.
Winston, R. B., Jr., Miller, T. K., Ender, S. c., & Grites, T.
G. (Eds.). (1984). Developmental academic advising. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Wong, B. Y. L. (2003). General and specific issues for researchers'
consideration in applying the risk and resilience framework to the social
domain of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,
18(2),68-76.
Authors' Note
This project was supported by Landmark College with funds from a 5-year
grant (2000-2005) for $1.75 million from the United States Department
of Education Title III Strengthening Institutions Program.
Jeannine Ryser holds a Master of International Management degree. She
is a former assistant professor at Landmark College where in addition
to conducting research and writing, she advised, taught, and worked in
study abroad. She enjoys exploring how to optimally facilitate student
development with particular interest in international student populations
and international exchange. She can be reached by E-mail atjryser@landmark.edu.
Peg Brigham Alden, EdD, is currently an associate professor and Title
III Project Director at Landmark College . In her role as Title III Director,
she has provided supervision and support to 18 faculty researchers who
are exploring various intersections of learning disabilities and higher
education. Dr. Alden can be contacted at palden@landmark.edu.
Questions? Contact Tim Dailey at tdailey@socc.edu
Back to Main Page
|
