Small changes yield big impact in academic scheduling

Earlier this month, University Business presented an article titled "Change is an opportunity. Amid deepening pressures, universities must seize it.”

The article, written by Franklin D. Gilliam Jr., Chancellor of UNC Greensboro, highlighted why it’s sometimes necessary to take big steps toward collective action. This substantial change included the decision to discontinue some of its academic programs. Not surprisingly, this decision was met with both positive and negative reactions.

Wherever you might fall on the spectrum of whether it was the right decision or not, Gilliam makes a key point that higher education institutions cannot continue trying to be all things to all people. Instead, it’s important to decide where and through what actions the institution can be at its best today and in the future.

Ad Astra’s recent Benchmark report found that while 51% of all degree-seeking students are enrolled in an institution’s five most popular programs, these programs only make up 7% of all programs at an institution.

Since the pandemic, the number of Completion Paths (a combination of modality, location, and time of day chosen by students) has also markedly expanded. The average academic program now tries to support 4.05 Completion Paths. While this is motivated by a sincere desire to provide students with flexibility, it creates big consequences for an institution – namely, fewer clear paths to complete an academic program and Completion Paths that are not financially sustainable.

As Chancellor Gilliam mentions, institutions “must change, innovate and reinvent” to adapt to these modern times. But that reinvention does not purely mean reducing flexibility for students and/or removing programs.

Rather, reinventing the way we plan our schedule is a key resource we don’t focus on enough. In 2022, AACRAO reported that  76% of institutions just roll over their existing schedule term by term. Existing scheduling practices are not conducive to ensuring our scheduling decisions allow for sustainable flexibility. Nor do they provide clear pathways to graduation as 57% of students are blocked in their Completion Paths. Institutions need to evaluate their scheduling practices to be more intentional and thoughtful in their design.

In looking to create a collective mission of sustainability, strength, and excellence, we believe it is becoming increasingly critical for higher education institutions to be more proactive in their scheduling designs. This will require more effort, alignment, and collaboration across departments upfront, but ultimately will ensure sustainable flexibility for institutions and students.

This is a complex problem, one with emotional outcomes. Institutions that can adapt and implement systematic improvements to their processes can identify incremental changes to their schedules that have dramatic impacts on student progress and institutional sustainability. This process will include looking at both sides of the spectrum and including the right players at the table. Through this process, institutions will uncover a stronger point of differentiation and a viable strategy for positive change.

Learn more about Ad Astra’s Integrated Planning Solutions