The Pain Points and Payoffs of Academic Planning Software in Higher Ed

What would it mean for an institution to know, before registration opens, exactly which courses students plan to take and in what order? That is the core promise of education planning solutions. These tools enable students to signal their intended course sequence in real time, giving institutions a foundation for projecting class demand, guiding advising conversations, and making more informed decisions about resources and program viability.

Yet, student use of education planning solutions remains considerably lower than their engagement with degree audit tools, a gap that likely reflects how recently these tools have entered the market. Institutions that adopt these tools stand to make better decisions about how they plan, staff, and serve students.

Where Institutions Stand on Education Planning Solution Adoption

Not yet a standard feature of academic operations, education planning solutions are used by a meaningful, but still minority, of institutions. An AACRAO and Coursedog survey found that 43% of undergraduate-serving institutions offer these tools, with adoption dropping to 30% at institutions serving graduate populations.

Comparing these numbers to more established tools like degree audit solutions, that have adoption rates of 80% and higher at both undergraduate and graduate serving universities, puts them in perspective. Higher adoption of degree audit tools reflects years of availability, rather than a difference in institutional need. Education planning solutions address a distinct gap, and adoption rates are likely to continue growing as familiarity with the category grows.

Student Engagement With Education Planning Solutions Is Just Getting Started

Student use of education planning solutions varies considerably across institutions, and for graduate populations in particular, engagement remains limited. While undergraduate usage widely varies, nearly half (44%) of institutions report that fewer than 10% of their graduate and professional students use the solution. For undergraduates, just 21% of institutions report the same low engagement range.

Education planning solutions are most valuable when students engage with them consistently. For students, that engagement has direct benefits including the ability to plan further in advance, see a concrete path to completion, and better understand how requirements fit together across their program.

Higher engagement does not just benefit students; it gives institutions a more accurate foundation for the decisions that shape the academic experience. When students map out their intended course sequence, they improve an institution’s ability to anticipate demand, allocate resources, and support timely degree completion.

Education Planning Data Remains Untapped by Majority of Institutions

Access to education planning data is one thing; effective usage is another. Among undergraduate-serving institutions, 39% describe their use of data from degree audit and education planning solutions as some localized, reactive analytics and reporting efforts, while 36% report none or very little data use. That number rises to 48% among graduate-serving institutions, where data use remains similarly limited.

Only 7% of institutions in either group report a significant predictive analytics strategy with dedicated analytics staff. That figure reflects both the relative newness of these tools and the broader resourcing challenges that academic operations teams navigate.

As familiarity with these tools grows, so does the potential for institutions to shift from reactive reporting to proactive planning. The expanding role of AI in academic operations adds another dimension to that opportunity, offering new ways to ingest and analyze student intent data.