A Comparison of Intrusive and Prescriptive Advising of Psychology Majors at an Urban Comprehensive University

To investigate whether intrusive advising is effective for nontraditional students at an urban comprehensive university, we compared it with prescriptive advising in a 3-year trial of randomly selected psychology undergraduates (N = 126). We hypothesized that advisees in the intrusive track would feel more satisfied, more connected to the department, and be more academically successful than those in the prescriptive track. Secondary questions concerned the relationship of advising preferences and demographic characteristics. Students receiving intrusive advising reported greater satisfaction with advising, felt more connected to the department, but were not more academically successful than those in the prescriptive track.