Students benefit most when their academic choices and career goals are connected. By aligning academic advising and career coaching within the same organizational structure, we ensure that advisors and coaches can work hand-in-hand. Academic advisors will continue to guide students on course planning and degree requirements, while career coaches will help them understand how those choices connect to professional pathways. Together, they will give students a more seamless, forward-looking experience that strengthens persistence and prepares every graduate for life after college.

Our current academic advising and career coaching structures vary widely across colleges. A localized approach may allow teams to tailor services and create strong relationships between faculty and advising staff; it also produces challenges for students. For example, when a staff member is out of the office or changes roles, there may be no backup in place, leaving students waiting for support.

Additionally, student success service providers need standardized onboarding, whereby new hires can step into gaps with adequate training, minimizing disruption for faculty, staff and students. For staff, working in isolated structures too often has meant fewer career pathways and salary inequities across the university. Those inequities have led to units competing for talent, with academic advisors’ movement between units disrupting continuity of support for students.

Moving to a regional model creates an opportunity to address many of these issues. Larger, cross-trained teams ensure students have timely, reliable support. Standardized processes reduce confusion, making services easier for students to navigate. For staff, a regional structure brings greater clarity in roles, equity in workloads and salary and stronger opportunities for professional development and career advancement. It also allows for staff to collaborate more effectively in putting students first. Finally, this approach helps the university steward resources wisely, ensuring both scale and sustainability as we grow toward our Impact 2030 goals.

The regions were designed to balance primary major caseloads, with each serving roughly 10,000 students. This helps ensure that no region is disproportionately large or small and that staffing structures remain consistent and equitable across the university.

In shaping the regions, other factors were also considered, such as advising complexity, prerequisite and course-sequencing patterns, shared service needs and projected enrollment growth, among others. For example, Region C brings together multiple colleges/schools and programs, but within that structure, each college/school (or combination of colleges/schools) will have its own advising Hub, leaders and faculty engagement rhythms. This approach creates consistency at the front door for students, while preserving the distinct needs of each program behind the scenes.

No. Navigate Hubs will remain the student’s home base for academic advising and coordinated support. The new regional model is not a replacement but an evolution that builds on the Hub structure. It serves as an operating system that standardizes and strengthens how Hubs connect with career coaching and other student success services. This means students will continue to rely on their Hub as their primary advising home, while also benefiting from clearer pathways, shared practices and stronger connections across colleges. For staff, the regional model creates more equitable primary major caseloads, clearer roles and stronger collaboration across units, ensuring they have the support they need to serve students effectively.

The Honors College has been working with colleges and departments to embed Honors curriculum into every major. As the regional advising model is implemented, Honors will provide training to academic advisors of each region to assist students pursuing Honors.

We’ll know the model is working if students can access timely, high-quality support and staff feel they have the clarity, resources and career pathways to thrive. Progress will be tracked at the region, college, Hub and major level. We'll know we're moving in the right direction by looking at student access (time to appointment, drop-in wait times, no-show rates, etc.), quality of services (effectiveness of handoffs, completeness of notes, student satisfaction, etc.), student outcomes (course completion at key gateways, term-to-term persistence, 4/5/6-year graduation rates, placement rates, etc.) and staff experience (caseload balance, pay equity, access to professional development, etc.). If any program or unit consistently falls below agreed-upon thresholds, we’ll adjust staffing, resources or structures to ensure both students and staff are supported.

No. This work isn’t about reducing staff. It’s about realigning resources to improve student support. As part of the SEP, we are sunsetting some roles in academic advising, as well as discontinuing student success coaching, while creating new positions in advising, career services and guided services.

Research shows that outcomes like graduation and job placement rates improve when students have timely access to advising, career guidance and other direct support. In academic advising, that’s why we’re shifting toward more student-facing roles and working to make caseloads more sustainable. The goal is to help every student stay on track and reach their academic and career goals, while giving staff the clarity and capacity they need to support them fully.

The implementation planning team includes deans (or their designees) and associate deans for academic affairs from every college/school as well as the advising and career success coaching leads from each Hub and region working with the Vice Provost for Student Success. This structure ensures that every college/school has a voice in shaping the details of the new model. In addition, all faculty and staff are encouraged to share their perspectives using the feedback form on this webpage or by talking with their supervisor, so input continues to inform the planning process.

More information will be shared this fall as part of the implementation planning process. At this stage, we don’t have all the answers, and that is intentional. Planning will involve many voices to ensure implementation works well for students, advisors, coaches and faculty. Our webpage will be updated as these details are determined.

Some roles may change as part of the transition. The goal is not to eliminate positions, but to reorganize how advising and career coaching are structured so that students have a clearer, more consistent path to support. Exactly what this looks like (for example, how specific responsibilities are assigned) will be determined during the implementation planning phase. We are committed to being transparent throughout this process.

It is likely that some staff will move offices or departments as teams are realigned. Phased implementation will begin in January 2026, but that does not mean everyone will move or will move at once. Transitions will be carefully planned and communicated so that staff have time to prepare and to ensure that students continue to receive uninterrupted support.

No. Advisors will specialize in a defined set of majors so they can build deep expertise. No one is expected to know everything about every program. Advisors will remain connected to their Hub, with regional collaboration designed to provide backup and consistency, not to replace local expertise.

Under this model, academic advising and career coaching will be organized into three regions, each led by a senior director who oversees both functions. Each college/school will have a director of advising who reports to the senior director while keeping a dotted-line relationship with their college/school, similar to the U’s advancement staffing model.

Just like in the U’s advancement model, the dotted-line relationship means college/school leaders will continue to have input and collaboration with advising leads, while formal reporting lines go through the regional structure. This ensures both alignment across the university and strong ties to each college/school.

The regional model is designed to expand professional pathways. Academic advisors and career coaches will have access to cross-training, clearer career ladders and opportunities for advancement into leadership roles. Larger, coordinated teams also mean stronger peer support and professional development resources.

Yes. In addition to reorganizing how services are delivered, the project will include upskilling current staff so they can take on new and expanded responsibilities. That may mean learning new tools, being cross-trained to handle a broader range of student needs or moving into roles with clearer career ladders and advancement pathways. Our goal is for staff to grow alongside the university, with opportunities for professional development that benefit both their careers and the students they serve.

Yes. A baseline level of professional development support will be available for all advising staff. This will include equitable access to funds for conferences, as well as structured professional development opportunities on campus. Processes will be transparent across regions, with clear eligibility and pre-approval standards to ensure consistency and to make sure students are not negatively impacted when staff participate in professional development events.

Academic advisors and career coaches will continue to work directly with students but with greater support. Workloads will be more equitable, onboarding and training will be standardized and staff will have colleagues available to backfill when they are out of the office. These changes are intended to improve staff’s daily experience and students’ access to consistent support.

Yes, one of the benefits of this model is greater consistency across colleges/schools. Standardization will reduce confusion for students while still allowing space for college/school-specific expertise to be maintained.

Advisors will remain focused on advising as their primary role. During implementation planning, we’ll carefully review how staff time is currently allocated and determine where other responsibilities should reside. Activities closely tied to advising (monitoring for curricular bottlenecks, providing input on functional four-year degree plans, orientation advising, etc.) will continue to be part of the role. Other duties that are not directly related to advising (event planning, marketing, general administrative tasks, etc.) will be reassigned so that advisors can focus on supporting students. We’ll approach this thoughtfully, learning from earlier shared advising transitions in the Colleges of Humanities, Science, Social & Behavioral Science, and the School for Cultural and Social Transformation, as well as in the Colleges of Education and Social Work.