Survey Results: Leading Academic Change National Survey 2.0 Reveals Valuable Insights in Academic Innovation Leadership
How can we equip universities to continually adapt to the needs of faculty and students?
Over the past year, Quantum Thinking and the University of Michigan’s Center for Academic Innovation (CAI) collaborated to develop Leading Academic Change National Survey 2.0. This initiative was designed to gather vital data and insights that bolster academic innovation leadership across universities.
Now the survey results are ready, offering a broad view of the academic innovation leadership ecosystem and guiding future directions for organizational leadership.
“We are thrilled about the caliber of responses we received from survey participants,” says Keehn, Co-Principal Investigator of the survey. "Participants from the higher ed community of academic innovation leaders provided a diverse spectrum of perspectives and were authentic in sharing their experiences. We can’t wait to see how leaders use the results to shape the future of this work.”
Fresh insights for a new era in academia
On the heels of the COVID-19 pandemic, and now with the ubiquity of AI, the time is ripe for a pulse check on the new “normal” in academic innovation. Academic leaders rely on accurate and recent data as the foundation for shaping effective strategies and support structures in higher education. Leading Academic Change National Survey 2.0 was designed to unearth those findings.
The survey delved into the most pressing challenges faced by academic innovation leaders and directors. Questions aimed to elicit thought-provoking responses about topics surrounding institutional impact and barriers to success in the field. The survey also directly addressed the long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and how academic innovation has been redefined at its core.
“Our goal was to formulate deep and provocative questions that would inform progress,” says Cait Hayward, Director of Research & Analytics at CAI and Co-Principal Investigator for the project. “There’s a great deal of data to surface through this survey – not only regarding the state of academic innovation leadership but the mood across the industry and where that will take us. We hope the results will serve as a compass to set the course for the collective future of this field.”
Results to elevate academic innovation leadership
The survey's findings promise to be a catalyst for change in higher education. From revealing the impact of recent global events to identifying emerging trends, the insights are poised to shape academic innovation support structures and best practices.
Hayward emphasizes the excitement of bringing a longitudinal view from both surveys.
"By combining the data from the 2014 Leading Academic Change report and surveys with the latest findings from National Survey 2.0, we are not just looking at snapshots; we are capturing the evolution of academic innovation over time," she says.
Key points include:
A shift in reporting structures: The majority of academic innovation units report to the Provost/Academic Affairs, but fewer than in 2014 (81% in 2014, 73% in 2024), indicating a shift to more diverse reporting structures. The President/Chancellor has emerged as a new reporting line in 2024 with 12% of units having shifted to shape university strategy through this connection.
More innovation units and more staffing: Academic innovation is a persistent growth area, with nearly 22% of these units starting in the past 4 years alone. 38% were formed between 2011-2020, and 25% have been around for more than 20 years. Staffing for academic innovation units has grown significantly, from an average of 6.4 full-time professional staff in 2014 to 36.1 in 2024 – a nearly 6x increase. Institutions are continually recognizing their value and supporting their efforts – good news for those passionate about the future of education.
Maturing priorities: In 2014, the top priorities were student engagement practices and on-campus course/program redesign and development. In 2024, top priorities include online and on-campus program/course design and development, funding and supporting new academic initiatives, and adopting and developing new academic technologies. Over the next three years, priorities will focus on hiring and retaining qualified staff, supporting teaching in a GenAI world, and leveraging resources and services to advance student success. This shows broadening responsibility and impact for academic innovation units.
Necessary budget increases: The average unit budget is ~$4.5 million, which is a significant increase from ~$522K in 2014. R1s and private 4-year colleges invest on average +$1 million more a year, while R2 universities invest the least. Budgets for these units tend to be moderately or significantly increasing.
Digging deeper into the results reveals a wealth of insights into trends, challenges, and opportunities, contributing to a collective knowledge base that empowers the academic innovation community to make informed decisions. A valuable resource for benchmarking and best practices, the insights provide a foundation for crafting adaptive policies, fostering adaptable and resilient learning environments, and addressing the evolving needs of students, faculty and staff.
Survey respondents have already received an initial copy of the results and analysis, empowering them with the knowledge to drive positive change within their institutions. Get your copy of the results here.
Leading Academic Change: National Survey 2.0 is sponsored by Class Technologies, the Online Learning Consortium (OLC), POD Network, Acadeum, Intelliboard, Bentley University, the University System of Maryland Kirwan Center for Academic Innovation, the University of Michigan Center for Academic Innovation, EdPlus at ASU and Auburn University Biggio Center. Thank you for your support!
