Degree audits aren’t designed for recreational reading. But the documents, which are so important to students at the university, are one of the key reasons academic advisers are in place.

This is one of the areas of academic advising that has been focused on by students who responded to a survey randomly e-mailed to more than 3,000 students during the fall semester.

“The degree audit is still ridiculous to read,” Student Senate President Andy Oettinger said. “There’s so many requirements; if you take a couple of wrong classes you’re in trouble.”

Oettinger, the former director of the Academic Affairs Commission, introduced a bill on April 2, his final day as the director of the commission, that will form an ad-hoc chairperson position within the commission. The chairperson will create a committee and oversee the review of the results from the survey.

“We wanted to make it as easy as possible for people to do,” Oettinger said of the survey.

The e-mail sent to students explained the survey and contained a link to a Web site housing the survey. Oettinger said a 15 percent response rate was needed to validate its findings. More than 30 percent of students responded.

Current Academic Affairs director Andrea Michalski will oversee the choice of the chairperson, which could happen as soon as today.

The committee will review the results in detail and present a report and recommendations to Senate by May 7. Oettinger, who has reviewed some of the returned surveys, said there were some common responses from students.

“It seemed real clear that students wanted the means to evaluate their adviser,” he said. “And it seemed real clear that a lot of students used friends and peers rather than advisers in their major and degree planning.”

Oettinger also said some students were expecting certain things from their advisers that they weren’t receiving and that the university has been very supportive during the process.