Pay attention to the hallway conversations among faculty. Are advisors talking about their advisory groups with the same energy they discuss their favorite classes? Or do you hear phrases like “I don’t know what to do with them” or “It feels like babysitting”?

Faculty resistance isn’t necessarily a character flaw—it often signals a lack of training or unclear expectations. Current research emphasizes that effective mentoring and advisory relationships require specific skills and ongoing support for the adults involved.

Surface-Level Interactions Only

When advisory conversations remain consistently at the surface level—discussing weekend plans, favorite movies, or completing icebreaker activities without deeper follow-through—you’re seeing a program that’s happening but not working. Recent studies indicate that meaningful mentoring requires structured activities with clear goals rather than unstructured social time.

Some advisories repeat the same getting-to-know-you activities month after month because no one has developed a clear progression of relationship-building and skill development.

Inconsistent Implementation Across the School

Perhaps the most telling sign is the wild variation in how different advisors approach their groups. While some variation is healthy and reflects different teaching styles, dramatic inconsistencies suggest a lack of shared vision and training. If one advisor is facilitating deep conversations about academic goal-setting while another is supervising homework time, your program lacks coherence.

The Advisory Program Evaluation Framework: Six Essential Questions

Your advisory program is either building the relationships that transform student outcomes, or it’s an expensive waste of everyone’s time. Based on 2023-2024 research and best practices from high-performing schools, six essential questions help you determine which category your program falls into.

1. Are Students Forming Genuine Connections?

Look beyond surface-level politeness. A 2023 systematic review of school belonging research examining 86 studies found that teacher support is the strongest predictor of student belonging. The research identified that relationships characterized by acceptance, inclusion, and connectedness are essential for positive student outcomes.

Recent CDC research analyzing national Youth Risk Behavior Survey data found that school connectedness—defined as students’ belief that adults and peers care about their learning and about them as individuals—was associated with lower prevalence of every risk behavior examined in the study.

Observable indicators include: students seeking out their advisor outside of advisory time, advisors being aware of students’ academic struggles before they become crises, and students sharing genuine concerns rather than just surface-level updates.

2. Is There Clear Purpose and Progression?

Effective advisory programs have what we can call “intentional arc”—a sense that the program is building toward something meaningful rather than simply filling time. A 2023 study on school-based mentoring found that programs with structured activities and clear goals for developing self-regulation and engagement skills showed significant positive effects, while unstructured social time showed minimal impact.

Ask yourself: Could an outside observer articulate what your advisory program is trying to accomplish? Do advisors have a clear sense of how their work in September should build toward growth in May?

3. Are Advisors Equipped and Supported?

Current research consistently shows that effective school-based mentoring requires ongoing training and support for the adults involved. This goes beyond the initial orientation session—advisors need regular opportunities to problem-solve together, share successful strategies, and receive guidance on challenging situations.

Schools have found success with various support structures: some create “advisor advisor” roles where experienced faculty mentor newer advisors, while others dedicate monthly faculty meetings to sharing successful strategies and troubleshooting challenges.

4. Is the Program Affecting Academic and Social Outcomes?

While advisory impact can be difficult to measure directly, there should be observable connections to broader school goals. A 2025 research study using data from over 8,000 students found strong evidence that sense of school belonging significantly predicts later academic achievement, with effect sizes substantially larger than those reported in correlational studies.

The research shows that students with strong adult relationships at school demonstrate better attendance and are less likely to engage in risky behaviors.

5. Do Students See Value in the Program?

Student voice is crucial here, but go beyond simple satisfaction surveys. Current research indicates that when students feel genuinely known and supported by adults at school, they demonstrate increased motivation and engagement.

Conversely, if students consistently describe advisory as their least favorite part of the day or something they “have to get through,” the program isn’t serving its purpose regardless of adult intentions.

6. Is There Schoolwide Cultural Integration?

2024 research suggests that the most effective approaches to student connectedness become part of the broader school culture rather than isolated programs. This means advisory work connects to and reinforces what happens in academic classes, during school events, and in discipline conversations.

Does your advisory work complement your school’s approach to character education, college counseling, and academic support? Or does it feel like a separate initiative that exists in parallel to these other efforts?

Recalibration Strategies: Making August Count

If your evaluation reveals areas for improvement, the summer months offer a crucial window for recalibration. Here are specific strategies that current research shows are effective in strengthening advisory programs.

Start with Purpose Clarity

Before diving into logistics or activities, gather your advisory planning team to articulate, in writing, what you want advisory to accomplish at your school. This isn’t about adopting someone else’s model wholesale, but about being clear on how advisory serves your particular students and school culture.

Some schools develop simple charter documents that include their core purposes, non-negotiable elements, and areas of flexibility. These documents can serve as touchstones for all training and evaluation discussions.

Invest in Advisor Development

Successful schools treat advisor development as seriously as they treat department-specific professional development. This means providing initial training that goes beyond procedural information to address the relational and facilitation skills advisory requires.

Research emphasizes that effective mentoring relationships require specific competencies that can be taught and developed. Consider bringing in outside expertise, sending key faculty to advisory-focused conferences, or partnering with other schools that have strong programs.

Create Feedback Loops and Ongoing Evaluation

Build regular opportunities for advisors to reflect on their practice and share insights with colleagues. Some schools dedicate one faculty meeting per month to advisory discussion, while others create online forums where advisors can share successful activities and seek advice on challenges.

Current research indicates that programs are more effective when they provide structured opportunities for reflection and peer learning, rather than operating in isolation.

Design for Sustainability and Long-term Relationships

Consider your advisor assignment strategy carefully. Recent research on mentoring relationships indicates that longer-term connections (lasting at least one year) produce stronger benefits than short-term pairings.

Similarly, consider the advisor load and the other responsibilities you’re asking advisory teachers to take on. Advisory relationships require emotional energy, and advisors who feel overwhelmed in other areas may not have the bandwidth to invest meaningfully in their advisory role.

The Measurement Challenge: Tracking What Matters in Advisory Program Evaluation

One of the persistent challenges in evaluating advisory programs is measurement. Unlike math or science courses, advisory success can’t be easily captured in test scores or clear learning outcomes. However, there are meaningful ways to track progress over time through systematic evaluation approaches.

Relationship and Connectedness Indicators

Track relationship quality through periodic surveys that go beyond satisfaction to examine trust, comfort seeking help, and sense of being known. Research suggests including questions that assess whether students feel genuinely supported and whether they would turn to their advisor for help with problems.

Include questions like: “My advisor knows about my interests outside of school,” “I would feel comfortable talking to my advisor about a problem,” and “My advisor helps me set and achieve goals.”

Behavioral Data Analysis

Examine discipline referrals, attendance patterns, and academic warning trends disaggregated by advisory groups. Current research shows strong correlations between adult mentoring relationships and improved attendance, reduced risky behaviors, and better academic outcomes.

While individual advisors shouldn’t be evaluated based on these metrics alone, patterns across the program can indicate whether advisory is serving its early intervention purposes.

Longitudinal Tracking for Program Evaluation

Consider tracking students over multiple years to determine whether strong advisory relationships are correlated with improved outcomes over time. This longer view can help distinguish between correlation and causation in your program evaluation and assessment.

Moving Forward: Questions for August Planning

As you prepare for the upcoming school year, consider these planning questions with your advisory team:

Clarity Questions:

• Can every advisor articulate in two sentences what advisory is supposed to accomplish at our school?
• Do we have shared expectations for what effective advisory relationships look like?
• How does our advisory program connect to our broader school mission and values?

Support Questions:

• What ongoing professional development do our advisors need to be successful?
• How will we help new advisors learn from experienced ones?
• What resources and materials do advisors need to facilitate meaningful meetings?

Assessment Questions:

• How will we know if advisory is working for individual students and advisees?
• What data will we collect to evaluate program effectiveness over time?
• How will we adjust course if we discover problems mid-year?
• What evaluation tools will best capture the qualitative aspects of advisory relationships?

Sustainability Questions:

• How can we protect advisory time from administrative creep?
• What structures support advisor well-being and prevent burnout?
• How will we maintain program quality as our school grows or changes?

The Transformation Potential