REVISING THE ADVISOR

Now that the Student Advisors, appointed last fall, have all been informed whom they are to advise and which of their advisees have been unsuccessful in their hour exams, it may not be out of place to consider the workings of this much talked of system.

In the first place we can say that it seems to be the common experience of those Seniors and Juniors who have seen their advisees that they have been able to be of real help to at least some of them. There are cases, of course,-the Freshman, for example, from the big school who has made his class football team,-in which advice from a Senior is superfluous. But in the main there the system should be continued and developed.

The question is, then, how successfully it is being worked out. And we come at once to the realization that however much occasion there may be for enthusiasm over the possibilities of the scheme, there is equal occasion for criticism of its application.

We have said before that the Senior advisor system will never be successful as long as the College Office gives the Senior the impression that it is not particularly interested in his work as an Advisor. It is to counteract this impression that the grades of advisees have been sent out to Seniors. But to make the Senior advisor amount to anything his work must be checked up. We suggested that it would be advisor asking him to report at least once upon his advisees. It may be said that this smacks of the much feared "Paternalism." As a matter of fact it is no more than common sense efficiency. It serves at once to test the success with which the work is being done, and, too, it may he of help to the Deans. Unless some such method of checking up as this is employed, there will be no means of improving the system; each year the Committee in charge of the appointment of improving the system; each year the Committee in charge of the appointment of Seniors will be in the position of a man shooting at a target with no means of determining the accuracy of his marksmanship.

There is one other important criticism of the system as it now stands. The advisors are appointed some two months too late. Whatever the practical objections, there can be little question that it would add greatly to the advantage of the Senior and Freshman if the appointments were made before College opens.

What are the objections to doing this? In the first place it is objected that the College Office is too swamped with work at the additional burden. But considering that the necessary data for a large percentage of the incoming class is at hand by July, it seems as if this clerical work could be done before the September rush begins. True, the Freshman Dean has had no opportunity of sizing up the Freshman. Yet there is almost sufficient data in the records of the sub-Freshman to give him an advisor who would have the same interests as his and would be sufficiently older.

Another objection is that it is not felt advisable for young students to be influenced by undergraduates in choosing their courses. To this we would say first that in many cases such advice could not be more unfortunate than that sometimes given by faculty advisors and secondly that if the Faculty has no more confidence in the upperclassmen than that the whole system might as well be abandoned once and for all.