Advising as Policy: Institutional Advising Models as Levers for Retention and Career Readiness in U.S. STEM Education
Abstract
United States science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education enters 2026 amid strong demand and persistent concern about supply. STEM employment continues to grow faster than the rest of the labor market and to pay a clear premium, yet too many students who begin STEM study do not complete it, and a labor market that now hires on demonstrated skills rather than credentials alone leaves many graduates unable to evidence their readiness. Recent scholarship has also complicated the familiar leaky pipeline story, showing that movement into and out of STEM is more varied than a simple unidirectional loss, which sharpens rather than dissolves the case for deliberate institutional support. This paper argues that academic advising, long treated as a routine service, should be recognized and resourced as institutional policy infrastructure, and that the deliberate design of an advising model is a measurable lever on both retention and career readiness. It distinguishes relational advising approaches, which describe how advisors engage students, from structural advising models, which describe how advising is organized, and it identifies caseload, coordination, and accountability as the parameters that determine whether good practice is possible. It presents recent causal evidence that targeted, proactive advising informed by learning analytics improves grades and persistence, shows how an advising relationship can integrate competency development into a skills based labor market, and assesses the arrival of artificial intelligence and early warning systems in advising, arguing that these tools can scale proactive outreach but cannot replace the human relationship and must be governed for equity and privacy. The paper then turns to implementation, addressing sequencing, cost, workforce professionalization, and measurement, before offering eight policy recommendations for institutional leaders, accreditors, and funders, answering the principal objections to them, and identifying the limits of the present argument and the questions that future research should resolve.
Keywords
References
More Articles from INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Author: Uchechi Mary-Linda Unamma, Ifeanyichukwu Jeffrey Okwesa, Uzoamaka Iwuanyanwu
Author: Ifeanyichukwu Jeffrey Okwesa, Uchechi Mary-Linda Unamma, Uzoamaka Iwuanyanwu
Author: Uchechi Mary-Linda Unamma, Ifeanyichukwu Jeffrey Okwesa, Uzoamaka Iwuanyanwu
Author: Funmilayo Ashore-Onisemo, Uchechi Mary-Linda Unamma, Ifeanyichukwu Jeffrey, Okwesa,
Author: Onwuzurike Peter Tobechi, Owoh Akwa Owoh, Unoh Grace Inyang, Umaru Musa
