Example of the Practice
The case study's example of practice will focus on lessons learned from observations from the experience of a student who will be named Jane Smith for confidentiality purposes. Jane is a dear friend of the author and her experience with academic advising was closely followed by the author.
Based on the statistics from the U.S. Department of Education, online programs are known to have a retention rate of 55% for full-time students and 39% for part-time students. This statistic from 2008-2010 is in drastic contrast with the retention rates of traditional programs where full-time students have a retention rate of 77% and part-time students have a retention rate of 46% (U.S. Department of Education, 2008-2010).
The focus of this case study will be solely on online programs at a large, four-year, private, non-profit university which will be named University X. Academic advising will be the example of practice because it is one of the most critical practices that highly impacts student retention rates in academia, especially in online programs (Young-Jones, Burt, & Howthorne, 2013).
Online programs have a very limited amount of staff in academic advising. For example, the academic advisor discussed in this case study was not responsive to inquiries of the student for the first 2 years of the program. Please note that the student's program took twice as long to complete due to lack of engagement by academic advising staff and two faculty members. Hence, academic advising which serves a pivotal role in student success, was not available to help the student attain answers to questions that were time sensitive and critical to academic success.
Based on peer-reviewed literature reviews (Lynch & Lungrin, 2018), it is noted that academic advising is considered one of the most pivotal points in student services, for undergraduate, graduate, traditional and online programs . Thus, adequate academic advising is vital to student success for all of the above-mentioned programs.
This example would be highly unsupported by the Ivy League's university model where student-centered teaching and advising is a priority in attaining high retention rates in their respective programs.
If academic advising is not available to assist students in their first two years when the program may last a total of two years, that is a major problem which requires a solution at the earliest convenience. Therefore, if the issue is addressed with administrators, then it would be reasonable for administrators to listen to the feedback received from their student(s). 
In many universities, academic advisors are comprised of the most experienced faculty members because this method serves as an effective, efficient, adequate, and helpful approach to academic advising which consequently improves retention rates. Universities that do not endorse this infastructure tend to have the issues presented in this example. Based on the interviews with senior administrators, academic advisors would always comprise of faculty members versus staff who are not engaged with students. Many faculty members and senior administrators are very cognizant of the effectiveness of involving faculty members as academic advisors. This is a must in all program levels (undergraduate, masters, doctorate, and post-doctorate) in most universities, however not in all higher educational instutions.
Often times, bottom-up feedback is not appreciated by staff and administration. The result is fatal for the student(s) involved because they may be subject to possible retaliations from staff and administrators. One solution would be for administrators to be more receptive of student feedback and to find adequate, timely, and effective solutions that do not cause harm to the students who bring forth such feedback. The irony is that often times, surveys are sent to all students, asking them for such feedback and when this is received many students are faced with unanticipated retaliatory acts against them. This creates unnecessary burdens on students and thus lowers retention rates even further.
Going back to the example, how would an ivy league university respond to such feedback from their students. This is the question asked to which the answers include: taking the matter seriously, offering the students necessary information in a timely manner, making certain this does not re-occur with the students or other students, hiring adequate staff to allow proper attention from each academic advisor to their respective students.
At UX, the academic advisors assigned to a masters online program, comprise primariy of staff who have some background in the field of study of the group of students to whom they are assigned. There are approximately over 100 students assigned to each academic advisor staff. This renders the academic advisor virtually inaccessable to the vast majority of students. Hence, the retention rates drop.
Solutions for consideration that will be discussed in the 'Lessons' portion of this case study involve for staff and administration to: consider student feedback seriously; act accordingly to remedy issues; act accordingly to protect students from retaliations; act accordingly to improve the academic advising infrastructure of their respective programs; follow-up with different student cohorts to make certain the issue(s) are being or have been appropriately addressed.