Concerning the student to counselor ratio compared to the state average, what would you support?
|Population||Thumbs Up||Thumbs Down||Hang Loose|
|BC Classified Staff||15%||54%||31%|
*Percentages may not add up to 100% as some respondents did not respond to each metric.
THUMBS UP: 1214 students per counselor meet a reasonable mark for student counselor ratio.
THUMBS DOWN: We have not achieved a reasonable mark for student counselor ratio.
HANG LOOSE: HANG LOOSE. I have too many follow up questions to make a selection.
This is the newest metric on the CCC scorecard. These numbers are draft until the final numbers are posted on March 31, 2014. Definition: The ratio of students enrolled in credit or non-credit courses divided into counseling –related FTES during a fall term.
The Student-Counseling Ratio is based on student headcount and counseling Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) totals. FTEs are obtained from work assignments and course instruction load. The ratio is calculated with the following formula: Sum (Fall Unduplicated Student Headcount)/Sum (Fall Counseling FTEs).
We need more counselors. This is especially true for First Generation students. Intrusive counseling has been shown to work. Counseling can also be part of learning communities.
I think we could also focus on empowering our students to do their own ed plans by offering CAS-style Ed Plan Workshops, perhaps even by major, weekly or bi-weekly.
It's shameful that our ratio is so different from the Statewide ratio. Hiring counselors should become a priority.
Our student to counselor ratio is criminal and a disservice to this college and to our students and community.
We should try to rapidly increase the number of counselors - this may be the lynchpin to other low data marks in the first questions. Hiring more people is a long term and financially tricky thing but this needs to be a priority.
Adjusting this to state average might bring up our stats for bringing all students more quickly to a "completion" stat of some sort.
BC's student to counselor ratio is unconscionable. If we realize that several BC Counselors are on sick leave or release time (without replacements), our ratio is abysmal. This accounts for the low matriculation rate and many other of our poor outcomes.
It's abysmal. We've got to do better. I'm pleased we hired several new counselors, which demonstrates that we're serious about this. Counseling has a reputation for being a somewhat dysfunctional department. Administration should step in and put that to a more-or-less immediate stop.
This system I feel is really flawed from the beginning because there is no accountability for the advice that councilors are giving. I also feel for the counselors because the college system is so fluid that the counselors are always trying to hit a moving target. For example, the courses at the JC level are not accurate or properly articulated at the university level in many cases when student transfer out to another college.
What about advisors?
Advising is best done in our departments where a faculty member who knows the major can advise students. We should rely on departmental faculty advisors more and less on counselors.
Include faculty in counselor training, so students can hear multiple voices saying similar things.
We still get students coming in that say their counselor or advisor told them a particular thing and we know that was wrong. Counseling has continually said that programs should do the work to get the information to the counselors/advisors, rather than what I feel SHOULD be done: counselors/advisors should be required to be trained on the various programs and pathways at the College. Students lose respect for staff that give them wrong information. Don't just pick up the catalog and read it to students! That's what happens more than it should. The catalog is wrong in a number of places. I know we are understaffed for counseling, but when new ones are hired, to just put them out there without requiring they get trained on our programs, certificates, and degrees is perpetuating the problems that gave counseling a bad reputation among students in the first place. We (program faculty) should not have to be blamed for wrong information getting to students because we did not seek out a counseling department meeting to pitch our program. If time is the issue, let's eliminate the educational planning requirement and use the STDV class times to give counselors more time to interact with ALL the programs on the campus.
It is not about ratios, as much as it is about competent counselors.
Need more full-time counselors.
I'd like it to be even lower, but 600 seems somewhat reasonable, especially if faculty can be trained to help in some simple ways (ways that don't screw up the students' progress).
The standard needs to be something around 500 student to counselor FTE. My target of 800 is just short-term intermediate step toward the 500 standard.
The benchmark I would have chosen was not available as a choice: 1 to 300