The 2026 NASPA Top Issues in Student Affairs examines priorities in higher education among student affairs professionals in 2026. This third annual iteration of NASPA’s survey offers a more comprehensive view of the field by bringing together perspectives from 846 members across professional levels and institutional sectors.
The 2026 NASPA Top Issues in Student Affairs provides a snapshot of priorities in higher education among student affairs professionals in 2026. The third annual iteration of this survey has evolved and expanded to include perspectives from student affairs professionals at all levels – including vice presidents of student affairs, senior level, assistant vice president or “number two”, faculty, mid-level, or new professionals – and also ask about level of preparation to navigate important issues. This updated approach provides NASPA and the field with a more comprehensive understanding of the landscape of priorities among student affairs professionals and their institutions. By examining perspectives by professional level, the research shows where the field has shared priorities and where differences in responsibilities and proximity to implementation shape how issues are experienced. The findings present an opportunity to consider whether professionals have the knowledge, tools, and resources needed to address priorities effectively.
NASPA identified 25 issues for the 2026 iteration of the survey. This year, NASPA included several of the same issues from the 2024 and 2025 surveys for longitudinal analysis purposes and also removed issues that were rated lower in importance. Questions ask respondents to denote the importance of each issue in a given topic area. The topics covered include:
Vice presidents of student affairs were asked to rate each issue on a scale of 1 to 10 of level of importance to their institution in 2026, with one being not at all important and 10 being extremely important. NASPA members employed at a higher education institution or state higher education system who self-identified across other professional levels were asked to rate each issue by level of importance to their role in 2026. This distinction in question framing by professional level speaks to differences in vantage point and relationship to issues, with VPSAs having a clearer understanding of institution-wide priorities while other professional levels are closer to the day-to-day implementation of these in their management responsibilities or work in student-facing roles. The levels of importance respondents selected for each issue were assigned to one of three categories: not important (ratings of 1 to 3), somewhat important (ratings of 4 to 7), and very important (ratings of 8 to 10). All professional levels were asked how prepared they were to navigate each issue rated as very important as well as open-ended questions about strategies used to navigate issues rated as very important. For the first time, the survey also examines how prepared professionals feel to navigate issues they identify as most important.
Throughout the year, NASPA will conduct deeper analysis into the breakdown of rating and level of preparation by professional level, institutional type, and key area and analyze qualitative responses about ways institutions and individuals are addressing highly prioritized issues to inform member-facing resources. This synthesis of responses from 846 student affairs professionals provides a foundation for building comparisons in priority level over time and insights into where NASPA and institutions should target professional development and training.
CONTACT: Please share any questions or feedback about the survey to [email protected].
For a complete list of the 25 issues, including their overall rankings and ratings by professional level and a breakdown of respondent characteristics, click the link below.
A breakdown of issue importance ratings by professional level show differences and similarities in prioritization by position. Across all professional levels, highest rated issues in the top 10 for all professional levels include increasing collaboration to deliver coordinated student success supports, advocating for investment in holistic student success, and providing students with an affirming institutional experience.
Gaps in priority emerge around issues in the area of Administration & Governance, with addressing funding challenges and re-imagining student affairs positions and structures rated higher in importance among VPSAs, AVPs, and senior-level professionals than new professionals in particular. In the area of Assessment & Evaluation, differences in importance across issues largely reflect areas of responsibility by professional level. For example, measuring program impact and using student feedback to inform improvements are more highly rated issues of importance at the AVP, senior-, and mid-level, while VPSAs are more focused on tackling this area by connecting assessment with strategic planning. Certain issues in the area of Health, Safety, & Well-Being and in Technology & Digital Innovation – such as developing clear guidance for appropriate and ethical use of AI tools and addressing basic needs insecurity – are especially emphasized at the VPSA level as being of high importance for institutions, but data suggests further communication is needed at the new professional level to frame why these matter to the roles of new professionals. Faculty leading graduate programs for student affairs professionals also show high prioritization of Student Success area issues related to career supports, rating the importance of these issues similarly to VPSAs and more highly than respondents from other professional levels.
The interactive bar charts below display how issues were rated by professional level. Respondents rated each issue on a scale of 1–10. Click each Professional Level to view to what degree each of the specific issues related to it were rated as very important (8–10), somewhat important (4–7), or not important (1–3). Hover over each chart’s grouping to view the distribution of data by level of importance.
When looking specifically at VPSA responses around perceived importance of issues to institutions, a comparison of 2025 and 2026 Top Issues in Student Affairs survey data show an increase in prioritization for 8 out of the top 10 issues, with the largest increases around issues in the area of student success. Increasing student access to personalized advising and career supports is the issue with the largest increase in being rated as very important to institutions, with 78% of VPSAs ranking it as very important this year, compared to 58% in 2025. Addressing basic needs insecurity for students, also remains a top priority for institutions according to VPSAs, with a 7 percentage point increase in the issue being rated as very important.
Comparison of survey data from 2025 and 2026 also indicate an increased prioritization of funding, collaboration, and strategic assessments to improve operational efficiencies needed to provide such personalized student support. Advocating for institutional investment in resources that support the holistic success of all students, represents the second largest jump in increased importance, with 77% of VPSAs rating this as very important to their institutions in 2026 compared to 58% in 2025. Addressing funding challenges while advocating for continued investment in student affairs has also risen in the ranks for VPSAs, with a 15 percentage point increase in being rated as very important. With increasing institution-wide collaboration to deliver coordinated student success supports as the top ranked issue of importance according to VPSAs this year along with issues focused on leveraging assessment to demonstrate impact further speak to a focus on increasing institutional capacities to meet student needs.
The importance of addressing external pressures is still clear, but survey data comparisons suggest there has been a decline in felt urgency to address these compared to prioritization of other issues. Specifically, navigating political and legislative pressures affecting institutional policies and practices decreased in level of perceived importance among VPSAs by 9 percentage points. While this issue is still within the top 10 highest rated issues of importance to institutions by VPSAs, it was previously ranked as the second highest rated issue of importance. Similarly, addressing compliance with state, federal, and accreditation standards is still a prevalent and important issue, but it decreased by 1 percentage point in its very important rating by VPSAs and dropped in its ranking from #4 in 2025 to #14 in 2026. In the area of Technology & Digital Innovation, protecting the institution against cyberattacks has decreased in level of perceived importance among VPSAs by 6%, although it is still among the top 10 issues of highest rated importance for VPSAs.
Data also highlights how prioritization of issues differs by professionals’ institutional sector and size. The issue of increasing institution-wide collaboration to deliver coordinated student success supports emerged to the top five most important issues across all institutional sectors, with 81% of respondents from public 2-year institutions rating it as very important, compared to 72% of public 4-years, and 77% of private 4-years. Similarly, respondents from small and mid-size institutions also rated collaboration for student success as very important (80% and 76%). The issue of providing students with education and supports to ensure they have an affirming institutional experience was also a top rated issue as very important across respondents from all sectors and sizes. Moreover, respondents from public 2-year institutions rate increasing student access to personalized advising and career supports as very important (70%) more than those from other sectors and are also more adequately prepared to navigate it.
The interactive bar charts below display how issues were rated by institutional sector and size. Click each Institution Type to view to what degree each of the specific issues related to it were rated as very important (8-10), somewhat important (4-7), or not important (1-3). Hover over each chart’s grouping to view the distribution of data by level of importance.
