To reread Crookston and O'Banion is to enjoy the pleasures of revisiting familiar territorv. As early proponents of a developmental model of advising, Crookston and O'Banion have had enormous influence on our ideals for advising, if not our practices. In contrasting prescriptive with developmental advising, in which the" establishment of the relationship [is] the first order of business with the student," Crookston emphasizes the desirability of the shift from a medical model of advising to a psychological one. In his advising model O'Banion appears to build on Crookston's assumptions." The purpose of academic advising" he finds," is to help the student choose a program of study which will serve him in the development of his total potential." His model includes five dimensions or steps that constitute academic advising:(a) exploration of life goals,(b) exploration of vocational goals,(c) program choice,(d) course choice, and (e) scheduling courses. Since Crookston's and O'Banion's work in the early 70s, developmental advising, with its concern for stages of student growth and for the student as a whole person, has been advocated as the way to insure advising encounters that move the student forward. Unquestionably, developmental advising provides a powerful conceptual approach to advising. But despite the significance of its theoretical contributions, in practice the model serves more as a goal than as a description of how advisors work. Even if one agrees with O'Banion's selection of the five dimensions for advising, for example, his suggestions for accomplishing their goals are optimistic. The team approach he advocates with life and vocational goals dealt with by counselors during summer orientation, program choice and course choice by instructors, and course scheduling by peer assistants suggests a neat sequencing that simply does not allow for the sophomore still clueless about choice of major or career, the older student returning to college as an opportunity to redefine life's goals, or other realities of academic life. In the real hours of real days advising often becomes whatever can be done to get through most expediently. Faculty and professional ad-visors alike attempt to serve ever-growing numbers of students whose diverse needs have increased with their numbers. Notwithstanding the genuine helpfulness of many advisors to many students-help in averting disaster, help in discovering new resources, help in increasing self-esteem or self-awareness-more often than not, advisors' days record missed opportunities and unexplored possibilities. Most advisors recognize the difference between prescriptive advising and developmental and espouse the latter, but when five students are standing outside the door eager to register for next semester's classes before all seats are occupied and the advisor must attend a meeting in 15 minutes, prescribing is often what occurs. Advising as practiced is characterized more by its random, ad hoc nature than adherence to a developmental model.

Despite a quarter century or more of experience with developmental advising, it remains more promise than reality. What we seldom discuss but all know is that O'Banion's developmental model is difficult to put into practice with students whose developmental positions and needs are vastly different from one another; with students who seek advice when they think they need it, not necessarily when they do need it; and with students who increasingly come to college from complex family backgrounds bringing with them difficult, unresolved personal issues and a high degree of uncertainty about the future, theirs in particular. Given the number of students for whom most …