What NASH’s Survey Reveals About Systems Operations, Data Sharing, and Student Momentum

In a recent webinar hosted by the National Association of Higher Education Systems (NASH) and Coursedog, higher education leaders gathered to examine how system-level operations shape institutional effectiveness, data culture, and student success.

The discussion featured insights from Maureen Heacock, University Dean for Records and Executive University Registrar at the City University of New York (CUNY), whose reflections grounded the conversation in the realities of managing academic operations across a complex, multi-institution environment. The webinar also walked through new survey results from NASH, offering a clear picture of both the challenges and the opportunities facing systems.

Below, we break down the major takeaways for system-level academic operations professionals.

The State of Data Sharing Across Higher Ed Systems

Results from a recent NASH survey reveal a consistent theme: data sharing across systems remains uneven. More than half of respondents (53%) described their current culture of data sharing as “moderately collaborative,” meaning institutions share data only where necessary, typically for compliance or benchmarking purposes .

Another 33% reported fragmented practices, where institutions operate independently and coordinate minimally. Only 13% described their systems as highly collaborative.

As Heacock explained, strong data culture is not only beneficial but essential.

“Data sharing is so critical for so many reasons. It gives us a common ground for analysis of concerns or challenges. It gives us accurate system-wide reporting... It can foster innovation and collaboration that can really benefit students and help us run efficient system-wide operations.”

At CUNY, the Office of Applied Research, Evaluation, and Data Analytics provides a useful model of how system-level analytics can operate at scale. As Heacock noted, their centralized Tableau environment allows campuses to review data at the system, sector, or campus level, backed by clear definitions and consistent methodologies—a critical enabler of trust and comparability.

For many systems, moving from “moderately collaborative” to “highly collaborative” will require investment not just in technology but in shared definitions, cultural alignment, and transparent governance.

Where Data Can Unlock the Most Value

The webinar surfaced several high-impact opportunities for system-wide data sharing, many of which map closely to pain points raised in the survey. For example, systems can leverage shared data to unlock insights in areas such as:

• Sharing assessment insights across campuses
• Leveraging open seats across institutions
• Improving transparency for course and program changes

Heacock shared an example of what this might look like in practice: using shared program and course data to model transfer pathways and anticipate how students move through the system. This is especially important for institutions like CUNY, where students frequently transition from community colleges to senior colleges or pursue graduate study at a sister campus.

Predictive insights, she noted, could help the system better support these common transitions:

“Predictive analytics that would help us anticipate the most likely transfer or transition pathway… would really help us to better promote and support those actions and increase their likelihood of success.”

In other words, systems already hold data needed to better understand student pathways. The next step is making that data visible, actionable, and trusted across campuses.

Which Academic Operations Functions Offer the Greatest Opportunities?

A central question of the webinar focused on where systems can have the greatest operational impact. NASH survey respondents identified three functions as having the highest potential value when centralized or coordinated across the system :

• Student pathway planning
• Faculty workload management
• Course demand and enrollment management

These functions sit at the intersection of resource planning, student progression, and data-driven decision-making—areas where systems can support local campuses without overriding autonomy.

Heacock shared how CUNY is already leveraging course demand information to drive impact:

“CUNY recently implemented Coursedog’s course demand projections to provide analytical support to departments… We really firmly believe that widespread and consistent use of this tool will help all CUNY schools improve their ability to know what classes to offer… and how to help avoid conflicts and bottlenecks.”

Technology Hurdles Continue to Slow Progress

When asked about their biggest barriers to adopting system-wide tools and processes, NASH survey respondents pointed to two issues above all others: legacy integrations and workforce capacity. These challenges each accounted for 14.6% of responses, the highest-ranked obstacles in the survey .

Heacock noted the particular challenge of standardization, a prerequisite for any meaningful integration effort:

“It may not be possible or even desirable to standardize in all areas. However, the more standardization can be achieved, the easier it is to provide training and support… Often technologies can be implemented more easily and can operate at lower cost or higher capacity if they’re not being adapted to fit the varying needs of multiple institutions.”

However, standardization can look different depending on on how system is accredited, as singly accredited systems and systems of independently accredited institutions tend to operate differently. The latter, like CUNY, must strike a balance between alignment and local identity.

Campus-Level Innovation Still Matters

Even as systems move toward greater alignment, respondents and speakers agreed that local innovation and autonomy still remain essential. Systems can empower campuses while still advancing unified goals. For example, technology and tools purchased at the system-level should still support a level of customization at the campus level. Examples include:

• Flexible workflows tailored to each institution
• Distinct catalogs, syllabi, and event sites
• Preservation of campus brand identity
• Access to campus-level analytics alongside system-wide views

Adopting Student-Centric Operations at Every Level of a System

Student-centric operations are particularly important for systems with high levels of student movement between member institutions. Heacock highlighted the work going on a CUNY to support seamless student movement across institutions within the CUNY system:

“It is really vital that schools within a system adopt a whole-system perspective to ensure that student success is paramount, as opposed to the primacy of individual school metrics… And that can really occur when this perspective is consistently articulated at all levels of leadership, and when policies and tools are developed explicitly to support this part of the student journey.”

Ultimately, system-level structures are most powerful when they clear the path for students not just at one institution, but across every campus, office, and person who they interact with.

‍