By Bill DeBaun, Senior Director, Data and Strategic Initiatives
Reading time: Five minutes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is everywhere these days across a broad range of arenas and use cases, including postsecondary advising. The media has recently focused on AI for college search, with both the New York Timesand
Inside Higher Edexamining the topic. The National College Attainment Network (NCAN) and
many members are interested in this use case and how AI can be, and is being, used in our field more broadly.
To better understand NCAN members’ sentiments toward AI for postsecondary advising, we fielded a survey in December and January. The survey yielded 103 respondents who weighed in on their trust of AI, its benefits and risks, and how NCAN can support their
learning.
(As a sidenote, we’re very grateful to those who did respond to the survey, but I stress that when we field surveys, we really need members to lean in and respond. The information is invaluable for our programming!)
Here are some of the key takeaways from the survey results:
Who responded:
Organization Type: Nearly 70% of respondents were from community-based organizations, with state agencies and K-12 public, charter, or private schools/districts/networks making up the largest portion of the remainder.
Role: About 40% of respondents were program managers or directors, 30% were direct service providers (e.g., advisors, counselors, coaches), and 15% executives or senior leaders.
Familiarity: 50% of respondents self-identified as novices with AI for advising while about 40% said they had an intermediate level of familiarity. Respondents who were not at all familiar (8%) and experts (4%) were in the tails.
Outlook for AI: 62% of respondents said that they were at least somewhat optimistic about the future of AI in postsecondary advising; just 17% said they were at least somewhat pessimistic.
Trust for AI in advising: Respondents were largely neutral on their trust of AI generally. On a scale of one to five from do not trust at all to completely trust, respondents averaged a three for “neutral.” That result was the same around trust
in AI to support college and career readiness advising. Broken out by role and looking at respondents who said they at least “somewhat trust” AI-powered tools generally, direct student service respondents (27%) had the lowest proportion followed
by program managers/directors (36%), and executive or senior leaders (63%).
The survey also asked respondents to describe their level of trust in AI-powered tools to support various aspects of college and career (CCR) advising. Student nudges or reminders (85%) were by far the activity to earn at least a “somewhat trust”
rating with career exploration and goal setting and tracking close behind. Notably, as the “stakes” of the activities increase in the chart below (like for example FAFSA, or Free Application for Federal Student Aid, completion or risk intervention)
the level of trust in AI to perform the activity decreases.
AI’s role in CCR advising: Most respondents see AI as more of a supporting player. Asked, “which best describes your preferred role for AI in CCR advising?” 43% said “AI should play a minor role, with advising led by advisors/caring adults.”
Right behind that, 42% said “AI should enable advisors to focus on deeper student engagement.” Notably, those two responses aren’t mutually exclusive, so there’s a lot of agreement in this vision of AI as a tool. 14% of respondents said that human
advisors and AI should share advising roles equally, and just 2% of respondents said AI should not be used in CCR advising at all.
Current uses of AI: Chatbots were the most frequently selected approach respondents were currently using or exploring. Respondents were more likely to say they weren’t using or exploring any tools than to select any of the others on
the list .
Benefits of AI: Respondents cited “increased efficiency and time savings for advisors and students,” “extended advising reach,” and “improved use of data for decision-making” as the top benefits they see for using AI for CCR advising. This
makes some sense, given the processing efficiencies that are a hallmark of these platforms. On the other end of the spectrum, “increased student agency” and “increased student engagement” were the least cited benefits.
Concerns: Respondents also raised some concerns with AI for CCR advising, none of which is altogether surprising with the most common concerns voiced about these platforms in the broader world or other fields. Respondents were most likely to
cite “inaccurate or inappropriate outputs,” “bias in AI-generated recommendations,” and “data privacy or misuse” as concerns.
What’s needed for greater trust: Lastly, we asked respondents what would increase their trust in using AI-enabled tools for CCR advising. Training for staff on how to use AI came in at the top for this item, more on that in a moment. Respondents
also sought the ability to customize or override AI decisions and clearer transparency into how AI makes decisions.
Speaking of training, NCAN will host a four-part Spring Institute on AI in College Access that starts on April 23 and runs weekly through May. We are building
an excellent series of trainings that will bring in both the nuts and bolts and member perspectives on how these tools are accelerating postsecondary advising for students. Additionally, NCAN members can you the NCAN Online Practitioner Community (based in Slack ) to chat and compare notes on AI.
Back to the survey, the hope is that the results above will be illuminating about the sentiments and use cases NCAN members have for AI. This is not the last time NCAN will solicit member feedback about AI, far from it, but as we embark on this important
body of work NCAN wanted to establish a baseline upon which to measure changes in members’ perspectives.
Have questions or concerns you’d like to share? I’d love to hear from you! Please reach out at debaunb@ncan.org!
Email to a Friend
