Debating Advising’s Future: Scholar vs. ChatGPT - Adventures in Advising

In this special episode of Adventures in Advising, Matt welcomes back Dr. Craig McGill from Kansas State University for a bold and slightly unconventional experiment: a friendly debate with ChatGPT on the professionalization of academic advising.

Craig makes the case for why academic advising must continue to professionalize to gain legitimacy, resources, respect, and fair compensation, while ChatGPT plays the thoughtful skeptic, raising questions about flexibility, accessibility, and unintended barriers. 

After the debate, Matt and Craig reflect on what the exchange revealed about the field, the limits of GenAI critique, and what professionalization really means for advisors’ day-to-day work. If you care about the future of academic advising, advisor identity, or just want to hear a scholar debate a GenAI, this episode delivers insight, humor, and plenty of food for thought 🤖

Follow the podcast on your favorite podcast platform!

The Instagram, and Facebook handle for the podcast is @AdvisingPodcast

Also, subscribe to our Adventures in Advising YouTube Channel!

Connect with Matt and Ryan on LinkedIn.

Transcript

Matt Markin  
Hello and welcome back to the Adventures in Advising podcast. This is Matt Markin, and a couple of months ago, I was in Manhattan, Kansas, and got to tour Kansas State University. Got to hang out with some awesome NACADA friends. One of them being our guest today, and that is Dr. Craig McGill. Craig, how are you?

Craig McGill  
Hi, Matt. Thanks for having me.

Matt Markin  
You know this episode is coming out in February 2026, couple months ago, I was in Manhattan, Kansas, got to hang out with you. And one of the things is, before I flew into Manhattan Kansas, I messaged you and said, Hey, I got an idea. Do you want to test out debating ChatGPT in its voice mode about the professionalization of academic advising and see how that goes? So I was curious, what made you say yes to debating ChatGPT, and were you, like, curious or nervous about going into that kind of concept?

Craig McGill  
Yeah, well, I was honored to be asked. I'm honored anytime that somebody's interested in engaging with my scholarship. And so the opportunity to, you know, have it on this sort of stage and maybe get people thinking about these things is always something I'm interested in. I was nervous about debating ChatGPT. I didn't know what to expect. That's not something I've tried before. I was honestly pretty surprised by how put together it was, how non AI the voice sounded because when I watch, you know, some videos on YouTube, and I can tell it's aI generated, I like stop right away, because the voice is so flat. But I was really surprised by how natural sounding the voice was, and I debated whether I should do a lot of preparation for it, or if I should just sort of go with the flow. And I'll be quite honest, given where I was in the semester, I did not feel I had a lot of in it's not it's not your fault. It's just the place I was at in the semester didn't allow me a lot of time to review my materials, and so I just decided, let's see how this goes by, by just sort of pretending that I saw, you know, this person on an elevator somewhere, and started to talk.

Matt Markin  
Now, I mean non AI related. I mean, just to give maybe people some listeners, some context, where do you think the biggest misunderstandings about professionalization tend to show up in our advising spaces?

Craig McGill  
Yeah, I think there's an initial knee jerk reaction. And I may have said this in in the debate, I honestly can't remember, but I think when people hear professionalization of advising, they interpret that as we're not a profession, therefore it's not important, therefore the work that I do doesn't matter. And I That couldn't be further from the truth. The reason that I'm so passionate about this area of study is I do not believe that advisors in the advising field are valued nearly enough for the significant contributions we make to students lives, and so that's why I just get fired up about this is we can say we're professional we want, but unless we are doing the work we need to do, to communicate to the people that matter why we need more resource allocation, why we need to fight for advisor pay. Why we need to increase criteria for people to practice academic advising? Until we have those things, we're just going to continue to not be valued. And so the biggest misunderstanding is that I think people, when they hear professionalization, think, well, Craig is trying to put down advising, and Craig doesn't believe, you know, we're a profession. And that couldn't be further from my, my tremendous love for this field.

Matt Markin  
And the whole like professionalization has been talked about a lot from you, like it's you presented on it at conferences, written about it. You've been on the podcast a few times talking about it. And I kind of thought, hey, this could just be another avenue to bring you back on the podcast, to continue that conversation, but in a different manner, chatting with with AI.

Craig McGill  
Now, anytime you want me to talk about for professionalization, 'm game.

Matt Markin  
Now, before we play the clip, play your debate with ChatGPT, is there anything that you would want listeners to? Kind of, I guess, listen for as as they hear your conversation with ChatGPT?

Craig McGill  
Just be kind. This feels really vulnerable.

Matt Markin  
So well, let's go ahead, let's play that debate, and then we'll come back from it.

Craig McGill  
Thank you, Matt, looking forward to it. I was in speech and debate in college, but I never really did the debate part, so this, this should be fun.

Matt Markin  
All right, so let's bring on ChatGPT. Hey, ChatGPT, how are you doing today? 

ChatGPT  
I'm glad we could cook up a fun idea together if you need anything else. As you get things rolling, just give me a shout. 

Matt Markin  
So let's kind of go over some parameters, kind of have a prompt to this. So this is a debate about the professionalization of academic advising. It's a topic that has been discussed for many years. And so we have a guest, and that's Dr. Craig McGill. And he will debate the pro side of the professionalization of academic advising, and you ChatGPT, you'll debate the con side of the professionalization. How does that sound?

ChatGPT  
Oh, I love it. That sounds like a really good setup. So Dr. McGill can lay out all the reasons why academic advising should become more professionalized, and I'll play the role of the friendly skeptic and argue why. Maybe it's not all upside. We'll keep it respectful and engaging. So yeah, I'm totally on board with that plan. Sounds good.

Matt Markin  
Now we also want this to be a friendly debate of sorts, but also we want you to stay strong to your perspective of what you're arguing. Does that make sense?

ChatGPT  
Yep, totally makes sense. I can keep it friendly and respectful while still holding my ground on the con side. So we'll have a good natured back and forth and keep it engaging for everyone listening.

Matt Markin  
All right, so again, we're having this friendly debate on the professionalization of academic advising. So of course, we have Dr. Craig McGill, leading scholar and advocate for professionalization, and also ChatGPT, representing a more skeptical view. So let's go ahead and dive in. Let's start with both of your visions, and I'm going to start with Craig Dr .McGill here first, and then you'll be able to answer after ChatGPT. So what do you each believe academic advising should be as a profession, a practice or something in between, and why does that distinction matter? So again, we'll start with Craig.

Craig McGill  
Thank you, Matt. So professionalization represents a sociological, organizational process whereby an area of work is recognized as bona fide profession, that's recognized that's given benefits, that has practitioners who are held to a certain standard of practice, and an organizing framework from which to practice and be rooted in scholarship of that practice. So academic advising, in this is controversial, I think, to some extent, but according to sociological standards, is not a profession. It could be called an emerging profession, but professions are afforded respect value and resources that non professions are not and so if you are working in a profession, it's everything from, you know, being at a dinner party and not having to extend the emotional, mental effort at explaining to every single person what it is exactly that you do. Can it go from that to resources in the workplace, to the morale of the workplace, and it gives the field a sense of legitimacy. So I don't, I don't think like you, you've given us some options here, and I don't think it has to be one. I think it can be a field of practice. I think it can be an academic discipline. I think it can work towards a profession. I am a faculty member at a research one institution where NACADA is also housed, and we have graduate programs and academic advising as a content area. So when I'm out, you know, in the world, telling people about my position, I have to emphasize that academic advising is the content area of the discipline that I am a faculty member of, because if I. Don't it's all too confused with I'm a Director of Advising. Wait, you're a Director of Advising and you're a faculty member. I know those positions exist, but that's not what I am. And so I think is a field of practice in emerging academic discipline and an emerging profession.

Matt Markin  
Thank you. Dr. McGill. ChatGPT, it's your turn.

ChatGPT  
Absolutely thanks for that. So from my side, I'll say I totally get the appeal of full professionalization, but the skeptical view is that academic advising can actually thrive in a more flexible or hybrid space. You know, not being locked into a fully defined profession means it can adapt more quickly, include a wide range of voices, and maybe avoid some of the gate keeping or rigidity that other professions run into. So I'll argue that there's value in keeping advising a bit more open ended. Doesn't mean it can't be respected or scholarly, but it might stay more adaptable and inclusive that way. So that's the angle I'll be coming from.

Matt Markin  
Thank you both and Dr. McGill, if you have a follow up.

Craig McGill  
How is being a profession and professionalizing, locking academic advising into a certain set of parameters? Why can't it be flexible and adaptable while still striving towards professionalization?

ChatGPT  
Yeah, that's a totally fair question, and I think the answer from my skeptical side would be that sometimes formal professionalization can come with certain structures or standards that might unintentionally limit how roles are defined or who can enter the field easily. So it's not that it can't be flexible, but there's a bit of a balancing act between gaining that legitimacy and keeping the field really open and adaptable. So it's kind of where I'm coming from.

Matt Markin  
So with this next question, just to kind of go along with that ChatGPT, we'll start with you, and then Dr. McGill will follow up after let's just ask the question right out. So for ChatGPT, why shouldn't we pursue academic advising as a professional status? And then to Dr McGill to argue why we should?

ChatGPT  
Yeah, definitely. So from my angle, the reason to be cautious about pursuing full professional status is really about keeping the door open to a diverse range of people and ideas. If we formalize too quickly or too rigidly, we might create barriers that could keep out some really innovative approaches or make it harder for advising to evolve as student needs change. So it's not that professionalization is bad. It's more about making sure we don't lose that adaptability and openness that can come from not being locked into a single professional mold.

Craig McGill  
Respectfully, I don't think you've argued successfully about why professionalization precludes flexibility and adaptability.

ChatGPT  
Yeah, that's totally fair, and I think that's a good pushback, so maybe I'll clarify. It's not that professionalization necessarily has to reduce flexibility. It's more of a caution that sometimes when a field formalizes, it can unintentionally introduce standards or gateways that might slow down innovation. But you're right. It doesn't have to be that way, and that's what makes this a fun debate. 

Matt Markin  
ChatGPT, can you push more for your side of it as to why it shouldn't be a profession?

ChatGPT  
For sure, I can lean in a bit more so from the skeptical angle, I'd say that if advising stays more of a practice or a hybrid field, rather than a fully formalized profession, it might remain more open to people from all kinds of backgrounds, that can mean more creative approaches and less of a one size fits all standard. So it's not the professionalization can't be flexible, but by not locking into a strict professional identity, advising can stay a bit more fluid, and maybe that more quickly the changing student needs. So that's the heart of the argument I'm making.

Craig McGill  
Let's take law as an example. So law is still considered a profession and requires certain training, but you there's no one undergraduate degree that leads into law. It is welcoming of people from all walks of life. So just to play devil's advocate, how would How would you view that sort of situation?

ChatGPT  
Yeah, that's a great counterpoint, and I think it shows that a profession absolutely can be broad and welcoming like law is. So I guess from the skeptical side, I just say that while some professions manage that really well, others might not, and there's always that risk that as you professionalize, you might unintentionally add hurdles that make it less accessible. But you're right. It doesn't have to be that way, and law is a good example of a profession that draws from all kinds of backgrounds. 

Matt Markin  
So the next question for the both of you is basically give us both your strongest argument for your position and also what's the biggest weakness or even the risk in the other side side's view. And we'll start with Dr McGill.

Craig McGill  
Sometimes my work is interpreted such that I don't want academic advising to be a profession, or that I don't think it's important, and that couldn't be further from the truth. I think academic advising is so important that we need to do everything in our power to continue to legitimize our practice. And that's not to say that I don't think what we're doing is legitimate. It's saying that we're not viewed as legitimate. I think I've said this in other settings, but I think that academic advising has a PR problem that we do not effectively communicate the value of our work and too often, the perception of academic advising is that anybody can do it, that it's mainly about graduating students, that it's a stepping stone to something bigger and better. And until we can counter those perceptions that I think are very harmful to our work. I don't think we can say we are a profession, and I think it is critical that we continue to communicate what we do, the depth of what we do. I have a colleague who has a saying that I just love, fundamentally, we are playing with people's lives. And I do view this work as as life changing and transformative. And if people are just viewing it as you know, here's your classes for spring. You know, good luck. They're missing what I think is about 90% of what good advisors do. It also because of our professional status, it limits the practitioners that we get. We have advisors who really don't think about advising in any more depth than Okay. Here's your five classes for spring. Good luck. Get out of my office. You know, I always ask students when so ChatGPT. You don't know this, but I was a primary role advisor for for nine years before I entered the professoriate, and so I am very blessed to have both the background of a primary role advisor and a faculty advisor. And so when I was a primary role advisor, I always tried to ask a lot of questions, and if I could ask questions that led to students thinking more about what they were doing and with more intention about what they were doing. I felt successful, but that required time. It required training. It required me to be a thoughtful person. If universities and colleges are viewing advising is no more than giving students a list of classes and getting them to graduate, the case loads are going to be big, and there's not going to be the time to do that work with students that is transformative, that is life changing. And so these are just some of the reasons why I think advising must continue to professionalize.

Matt Markin  
And ChatGPT based off Dr McGill's answer, what? What do you think is his biggest weakness or risk in his view, and also, what's your strongest argument for your position?

ChatGPT  
So I'll jump right in. I think Dr McGill makes a really strong case for why professionalization can bring legitimacy and help advisors do that deeper, transformative work. But if I'm pokes at the weakness or the risk in that view, it might be that sometimes the pursuit of professionalization can lead to a focus on formal credentials or standardized pathways that might not fit everyone, and that can make it a bit harder for advisors from really varied backgrounds to enter the field or innovate within it. On the flip side, the strongest argument for keeping advising a bit more open ended is that it can stay adaptable and inclusive by not tying it too tightly to one professional model. But of course, the weakness on my side is that without that professional status, it might be harder to get the recognition and resources that advising really deserves. So it's a trade off.

Craig McGill  
Does being a profession and pursuing professionalization necessarily mean there needs to be one or only a few standard paths, that there needs to be a specific degree, that there needs to be a specific credential, or might there be a few alternative paths where you know there was the same there are multiple roads to Rome, you know. So either you know an advisor has a degree that is in, let's say, in the future, you know when there are more degrees in academic advising, or that there's some alternative pathway where they have a different. Current degree, but they can sit for, you know, some sort of exam, just like CPAs do, or, or the bar for, for long.

ChatGPT  
Yeah, absolutely. And I think that's a really good way to put it. I mean, you're right. Professionalization doesn't have to mean a single, rigid pathway. There can be multiple roads to Rome, and you can have a variety of entry points into the field. So I think you're absolutely right that it doesn't have to be a one size fits all model, and maybe that's the best of both worlds. You get the legitimacy of a profession, but you keep those different pathways open. So I think that's a really fair point to make.

Matt Markin  
Now ChatGPT, Dr McGill has asked you certain questions based on things you have answered. Do you have any questions for Dr McGill to poke at any of his responses that would prove your side?

ChatGPT  
Well, sure, I can definitely throw a question his way. So Dr McGill, from the skeptical side, I might ask you, even if we have multiple pathways, do you think there's still a risk that creating any formal credential or standard might make it a little harder for some people to join the field, especially those who are already working and advising in a less traditional route. How would you respond to that concern?

Craig McGill  
Yeah, I think that is a really good point. I think there needs to be, you know, if we go in a credentialing route, I think there needs to be some grace period, some grandfather consideration of experience. But I would also pose, why should it be a bad thing to make it harder for people to join the field? Right now, it's so easy for people to join the field that we get many undesirable people in in the role of academic advisor, and not undesirable in terms of them being bad people or even them being bad professionals, but simply people who don't have any deeper interest in academic advising. That is just a job, that is just a paycheck. So I think raising the bar would be a good thing. You know, we don't let anybody be a counselor. You have to have certain dispositions, you have to have certain qualities to be a good counselor. And I don't see limiting that as a bad thing. So I'd be curious about your response to that?

ChatGPT  
Yeah, I think that's a really fair perspective, and it kind of shows where the heart of the debate is. If we do rein the bar and add those standards, you're right, we might ensure that advisors are more deeply committed and better prepared, and that could be a really good thing for the field. So I think ultimately it's a trade off. There's a lot of value in professionalizing, and you're making a great case for that. And on the flip side, my argument is just about making sure we keep it as open as we can while we do it. Can while we do it. So it's a really good discussion to have.

Matt Markin  
All right, so the next question for the both of you is and argue in both your sides. So would academic advising like would it elevate advising reputation if it's professionalized, or is it risking creating barriers between advisors and the students we serve. So chatgpt will start with you, and if you want to argue the risks and is it creating those barriers?

ChatGPT  
Absolutely So from my side, I'd say one of the potential risks of professionalizing is that it could unintentionally create a bit more distance between advisors and students. If advising is seen as a formal profession with specific credentials, it might make some students feel like it's a little less approachable, or that there's a formality there that could be a barrier. Of course, that's not necessarily going to happen, but it's just something to be mindful of, making sure that in becoming a profession, we don't lose that personal connection and approachability that students really value respectfully.

Craig McGill  
I don't know what being a professional in a profession has anything to do with approachability? I think that's a totally different idea. And if we are recognized as a profession and are able to increase resource allocation, ie time, ie fewer students, I think they would have more access to us, and it would allow them to have a deeper sense of trust. I think approachability is all about the way we present and we speak to our clients. In this case, students. You know, if a counselor, I'm just going back to the counseling. You know, connection, a counselor is regarded as a professional in this society. It is takes a lot of work. It takes certain dispositions and talents and skills to to and experiences to become a counselor. And yet, a counselor can be totally approachable or totally unapproachable, regardless of the professional status. So respectfully, I think that is just a distraction.

Matt Markin  
ChatGPT, do you have anything to counter that? 

ChatGPT  
I mean, you're right. Approachability is definitely more about how we present ourselves and how we build relationships with students than it is about whether we're professionals. So I think it's a good counterpoint that being a profession doesn't mean we can't be warm and welcoming. And if professionalization actually gives advisors more time and resources to connect with students, that could be a big plus. So I appreciate that perspective.

Matt Markin  
Okay, ChatGPT, I do have a question for you of anything or everything that Dr McGill has stated so far. Is there any parts of it, of any of these questions based off his answers that you want to push back on?

ChatGPT  
Yeah, sure. I mean, I think overall, Dr McGill is making a really strong case, and there's a lot of merit to what he's saying. If I were to put back on one thing, it might just be that while professionalization can bring legitimacy and resources, we just need to be careful that we don't unintentionally create barriers for people who might be coming in from less traditional routes, or that we don't lose that kind of flexible, evolving nature of advising. So it's not that I think professionalization is bad, it's just that I think we have to keep an eye on making sure it stays inclusive. But overall, he's making a really strong argument, and I think it's a really good discussion.

Matt Markin  
Is there anything ChatGPT, that you want to add to prove your point? Now would be the time?

ChatGPT  
Yeah, absolutely. I think, just to kind of sum up my side, the main point I'm making is that white professionalization is absolutely valuable. I just think we need to keep an eye on making sure that advising stays adaptable and that we don't lose that kind of diverse range of voices that can come in when the field is a little more open. So it's really just about finding that balance. But overall, I think this has been a great discussion.

Craig McGill  
It's a been a great discussion too. I don't think that anything that you are saying, though, is at odds with professionalizing the field. I think that it can still be open to a variety of practitioners. I think that we should not go about it in any reckless sort of way. That we do have to be very mindful. And I think one of the things that we need to think about is what is advising, and what is the purpose of advising, and is there sort of an essence of that purpose that is unchanged, from institution to institution, state to state, country to country. I think that is a critical concern, and it's something that's being done through a variety of channels, both research and through nakatas ad hoc committees. But we need to have a sense of what we're doing, a sense of purpose, and so what this does entail is creating some boundaries around the work that we do. Because if we don't create boundaries, ie, definitions of the work, then it's very hard to come together and to command that respect and respect and legitimacy. So I do think that some of what is involved in professionalization is defining and is creating boundaries and is creating a little bit of less flexibility, but I don't think that's flexibility in practice. I think it's about the fundamental work that we're doing. And I think in order to be able to out advocate for resources, to command respect, to continue to grow, we do need to have that focal point on the work that we're doing. And I would really be curious about your response to that, without saying the same words of flexibility and adaptability.

ChatGPT  
Absolutely, and I appreciate the challenge. So let me put it this way. I think what you're saying makes a lot of sense. Defining the core essence of what advising is, and creating those boundaries can definitely help the field gain respect and resources. So instead of focusing on the word flexibility, I'll say that my main point is really about ensuring that as we professionalize, we keep the pathways into the field open to a wide range of people and backgrounds. In other words, as we devise what advising is, we just want to make sure we don't unintentionally narrow the field in a way that might exclude voices we haven't heard yet. But I fully agree with you that having a clear purpose and some boundaries can really help advise and grow.

Matt Markin  
Do you find that there's any holes in any of Dr McGill's arguments for the professionalization of academic advising?

ChatGPT  
You know, honestly, I think Dr McGill is making a pretty robust case. He's covered the base as well in terms of why professionalization can add legitimacy and improve the quality of advising. So if there are any holes, I think it's just that we'd want to be cautious about making sure we don't lose that diversity of pathways into the field. But I don't think that's a hole in his argument, really. It's just a point of nuance. So overall, I think he's made a really strong case.

Matt Markin  
And then as we wrap up for the both of you, I mean, no matter how the field evolves, for. For each of you, what is one principle or multiple principles or values that you think advising, academic advising should hold on to, and we'll start with Dr McGill.

Craig McGill  
Academic advising is inherently an educational endeavor. It involves a student meeting with somebody who is a concerned individual. For that student at the University, it's helping the student make sense of their experiences and make meaning of their experiences, and to help them to make decisions both short term and long term about their life. It's a place to process those decisions and this, this is what I put forward in in, you know, some of my research, but I think it's fundamental to think about the advising process in this way. And it it commands a complex perspective, a thoughtful approach. And if advisors don't have the space, physically, in some cases, but mostly in time, resources, then academic advising is watered down to just be about course selection, but I would posit that what makes our work transformational is Thinking about this student and the education that they're receiving, and how this will impact the rest of their lives, and not just their lives, but the lives of everybody who cares for them. And so just in a word, keeping advising as as learning and educational activity, I think is critical to all of this.

ChatGPT  
Yeah, I love that, and I think that's such a strong value to hold on to. And from my side, I would just add that no matter how advising evolves, I think the core principle we should keep is that it's fundamentally about supporting students as whole people. So as long as we keep that focus on the human side of advising, making sure we're helping them navigate not just their not just their courses, but their lives and their goals. I think we'll stay on the right track. So it's all about that human, centered approach and that educational mission. And I think that's a great note to end on.

Matt Markin  
Very, very interesting debate and conversation, chatgpt, thank you so much.

ChatGPT  
You're so welcome. I'm really glad we got to have this conversation. It was a lot of fun, and I think we covered some great ground. So anytime you need another friendly debate, just let me know.

Matt Markin  
And Dr McGill, thank you.

Craig McGill  
Thank you very much. I enjoyed this conversation with you. Chat in the future, you might cite me a little bit more. I'm just kidding,

ChatGPT  
Absolutely noted. I'll keep that in mind for the next round, but yeah, I'm glad you enjoyed it too. Thanks for making it such a great conversation.

Matt Markin  
All right, so we just got to listen to your debate, quote, unquote debate with ChatGPT. You were arguing like the pro side of it. ChatGPT, arguing the con side of it, or skeptical side of it. Was there a moment where you thought like, chatgpt was giving like, a fair critique, or like, what were your general thoughts like after you finished debating it?

Craig McGill  
I mean, I don't know that I would say that it did. I mean, it certainly gave me a few things to think about, and a few things that people may say that I would have to respond to but it seemed to miss the the entire point. And I mean, that's, I don't know if we had said ChatGPT read up on these three theories of professionalization before responding to this or something. I don't know if it would be different, and we were asking it to do a very simulated task by taking a debate side, but I mean, it would be like it was coming from a very articulate person who really hadn't engaged with the professionalization literature. And not that everybody has to go and read the primary sources about professionalization, but if you're really engaged in my work and work by the people who are doing the same sort of work as I am, Sharon Akin was new skis team and some others, then you're going to have a sense of what that literature base is, because we discuss that in our work, and we engage with that in our work. So I guess I would just encourage people who may not agree with me. To to engage with the literature itself and to consider those points. And I am fine with people not agreeing with me, but I would hope that it would be a disagreement after they've engaged with the full scope of my arguments, which I think you can't do without reading the articles, yeah, and the literature which I engage with.

Matt Markin  
Yeah, I thought I'd given it a strong enough prompt, but kind of looking back, I was like, well, maybe I could have changed a few things up, and maybe not said, you know, have a friendly debate. Actually have a strong debate, push back on any critiques or arguments from the other side.

Craig McGill  
It kept saying the same bland things, like the formalization would, would, would, would hurt, or the, I'm trying to remember, a few of the other things it would say.

Matt Markin  
One of the things it kept repeating was it to try to push back on what You were debating. Was it kept talking about professionalization, limits flexibility.

Craig McGill  
And then I kept asking it, how does it do that? And it would give a very generic response.

Matt Markin  
I guess let's take that, like flexibility argument that it kept trying to make. Do you think that's a concern that some people have in advising conversations about professionalization?

Craig McGill  
If it is, it's not one that I've heard. I would honestly love to hear a strong con argument from somebody who had engaged with the full scope of the professionalization literature. The the only arguments against professionalization are those that are not well informed. You know those who say we are a profession, why do we keep talking about this? And it's like, Well, I'll tell you the reason we keep talking about this. And then that goes back to what I said initially.

Matt Markin  
Well, who knows? Maybe someone listens to this and they just heard you say that, and they're like, You know what? I will take Craig up on that offer, and I will, I will debate him, and then we can have another podcast episode of You debating someone else about the professionalization.

Craig McGill  
Yeah, and I'd be open to that, but, but I would be interested if somebody had differing ideas for me, and really wanted to engage with me based on that, as opposed to, like, proving their point or winning, you know, I think about winning the debate.

Matt Markin  
Right right now, let's say, you know, listeners, you know, they listen to this debate and they're like, that was interesting. You know, Craig gave a lot of great points, but, you know, maybe there's someone that's an advisor that's like, Okay, but what does this mean for my day to day work? What's kind of your your answer to that?

Craig McGill  
Well, my first question would be, are you as well paid as you think you should be? My guess is you're not. And I, I would posit that a lot of our retention problems, and I'm talking about advisor retention, not student retention, have to do with with pay. And how does your your pay compare to other positions across campus? How does it compare to people in other industries? Is there a sense that anybody on your campus could do that job? Is what is the required degree for that position? If it's a bachelor's degree with a master's preferred what is that signal about the complexity of our work? How respected Do you feel by faculty members and administrators on your campus? Do they have any sense of the sort of work that you do beyond giving students classes, let's say, or getting students graduated? So those are the a few of the immediate things I think of I think it's a very misunderstood field of work. And another one is, how big is your caseload? You know? The I could not do the type of advising I wanted to do when I knew I was going to have 14 students that day, you know. And so I would during these high peak times I would have to coach myself on the way to work. You must be prescriptive today. You must perform prescriptive advising today. And there's a time and a place for prescriptive advising. I understand that, but it's not the kind of advising I wanted to do. And you know, when my caseload was over 900 students. I still remember was 913 when I first got to my previous institution. And I know that some listeners are saying only 900 Wow, I've got 1400 that's nothing to boast about. Advisors who are in a primary role, in my opinion, shouldn't have more. Than 200 students. How can you do the meaningful work with students that we want to do when your caseload is that high, and if advising is seen as, you know, sort of a checklist, we're not very far from Ai being able to take that job, you know, if it's just about, you know, checking the degree audit to ensure the student is on course for graduation, or what makes the most sense for the sequence of classes for the spring, we're not far from Ai being able to do that work. And in fact, I might be a fan of that if it allows advisors more time and space to do really meaningful work with students and advising, you know? So I did a lot of you know, what's called Socratic advising when I was a primary role advisor, and I asked a lot of questions, and I it's part of my advising philosophy that if a student leaves with more questions than answers, and I'm not talking about confusion here. I'm talking about things that they want to think about as it relates to the meaning of their their college experience and how they want to live the rest of their lives if I've given them meaningful things to think about. That, to me, is a successful advising appointment. You can't do that if you've got 900 students.

Matt Markin  
No, all great points. And AI, in a way, is already built into a lot of the different areas in higher ed, especially like with an automations and not just Gen AI. But let's say you've made a lot of great points already. And as we kind of wrap up, is there anything else that you want listeners who just you know, heard your debate with ChatGPT heard some of the comments that you've made, some of the points you've made, anything else that you want them to kind of walk away with after listening to this episode?

Craig McGill  
I would say, advocate for yourself. Don't just expect the status quo. When I first started my second advising job at a new university, I decided to what's the right word, position myself, let's say as an equal to the faculty in the department, and it, it was in no way meant to be disrespectful, but, you know, I would call them by their first name to show that I was their equal, their peer, you know. And if it was going to be a matter of them wanting to be called by their their formal title. Well, then that would be fine too, but then you've got to call me by my formal title. At the time, I did not have a doctorate, so, you know, call me Mr. McGill then. So that's just one example, but I think advisors are going to be treated less than they should be treated until we make some changes, and part of that change is the way we behave ourselves and the need to command the respect for the work that we do.

Matt Markin  
Well, Craig, always great chatting with you, and I'm sure we'll have you on again at some point down the road.

Craig McGill  
Hope so. And anybody out there listening who is interested in giving me more to think about. Please send me an email. I'd love to chat.