The AIR National Survey is a comprehensive, longitudinal study of the data function within U.S. higher education institutions. The current iteration of the survey is open now until January 15, 2025. Darlena Jones, Ph.D., AIR Senior Director of Analytics, Research & Education, shares information about the survey process and goals.

eAIR: Tell us about the survey at a high level.

Jones: The goal of the National Survey is to contribute to a better understanding of current practices, structures, and roles of IR/IE. It helps us identify emerging trends and operational standards, and it can inform resource allocation to support the effective, ethical, and equitable use of data within higher education institutions. The survey provides a reliable and complete set of information that accurately represents the current state of IR/IE including functional roles, responsibilities, trends, structures, and the diversity of activities.

eAIR: How does the survey data get used?

Jones: First, it’s important to note how the data don’t get used. AIR produces reports only in the aggregate, and we also disaggregate by U.S. region and institutional sector. We do not report individual institutional data.

As for how we do use the data, we provide summary analyses in both narrative and tabulated forms which are available on our website. The reports are publicly available and presented in various reports and formats as a resource for the higher education community. We also use this data to help educate the higher education community via workshops and webinars on the work and value of IR/IE. 

eAIR: How have those in the field leveraged the survey data?

Jones: Anecdotally, we know that several IR/IE leaders have successfully used staffing data to advocate for additional team members and have leveraged salary data to secure more competitive compensation for their staff. Many leaders have also utilized insights on work output to restructure their office’s responsibilities to better meet institutional needs.

I’ve shared these findings in pre-conference workshops and concurrent sessions at the Higher Learning Commission, which has sparked follow-up conversations with institutional provosts and presidents about the value of hiring Chief Data Officers to improve their data environment which, in turn, improves IR/IE.

At the AIR Executive Office, we’ve also drawn on this data to identify and develop targeted professional development opportunities.

In short, this information is actively supporting efforts at all levels to strengthen the IR/IE profession and community.

eAIR: Any predictions on what we might see of note in this year’s responses?

Jones: As a researcher, I’m cautious about making predictions, but I can share my hopes for the survey results. I’m optimistic that IR/IE offices will show an improvement in resources compared to 2021. I expect to see a rise in remote staffing, as this is likely to help with recruitment. Additionally, I hope to find more Chief Data Officers in place—professionals with a strong background in data and analytics who can champion the value of IR/IE within their institutions. I’d also like to see IR/IE teams taking a more active role in promoting data literacy campus-wide and, ideally, leaders reporting that their institutions have more mature data environments, reflecting real progress.

We’ll all have to wait for the analysis to see if these hopes are realized!

eAIR: On a personal note, what do you love most about working on this particular project?

Jones: This project is an enormous endeavor that involves nearly every member of the AIR Executive Staff to bring to life. While it may appear on the surface to be “just a survey,” there are countless moving parts. One of the aspects I appreciate most is the incredible teamwork that makes this possible—from designing the survey metrics and identifying participants to creating the webpages and building support in spaces like the AIR Forum.

Another rewarding part is hearing from participants who express their gratitude for this work. So many IR/IE leaders rely on these results as trusted evidence to advocate for changes within their institutions. We recognize that this survey is comprehensive, and every question has been carefully selected to serve a purpose.

Personally, I love diving into the data to uncover relationships between variables, drawing insights into the current and historical landscape of our profession, and finding innovative ways to communicate these findings. 

I also love presenting these results and watching the “light bulb” moment when senior leaders realize how under-resourced IR/IE offices directly affect the quality and effectiveness of their institutions’ data environments.

eAIR: What’s the history? How long has it been running?

Jones: This is the fourth iteration. We conducted this survey in 2015, 2018, 2021, and now again in 2024. With this extended history, we’re revealing valuable trends. This longevity, combined with the actionable insights we’ve consistently provided, solidifies our role as the go-to source for understanding the current state of IR/IE.

eAIR: How can institutions participate in the survey?

Jones: The website (airweb.org/nationalsurvey) has information needed to get started. At a high level, we need to know who your institution’s contact is. We’ll send that contact an invitation email with a unique link to the survey, and they’ll have until January 15, 2025, to respond.

eAIR: Who is the best contact to complete the survey?

Jones: We recommend the person who leads the IR/IE office, or the data/analytics function, serve as the contact and complete —or coordinate the completion of—the survey.

eAIR: If an institution has separate IR and IE offices, which leader should respond?

Jones: Actually, we’d love to have both leaders respond this year. We’re interested in learning about the similarities and differences between the IR and IE functions where both exist at a given institution, so we’re encouraging responses from both offices.

eAIR: How long does it take to fill out the survey?

Jones: It takes on average 20 minutes to complete. We’ve refined the survey over the past decade, simplifying the experience for respondents while ensuring we get the data we need to provide valuable insights. We have also provided a PDF of the survey instrument to help respondents coordinate and gather data before responding.

eAIR: What’s the current response rate?

Jones: Response rate alone is not a reliable metric for assessing survey success. Instead, we should focus on the representativeness of the response data. In previous years, we’ve achieved strong representation across the three major nonprofit sectors—public 4-year, public 2-year, and private nonprofit 4-year institutions—closely aligning with the IPEDS universe. We’ve also maintained robust representation across U.S. regions. Our goal for the 2024 survey is to uphold this level of representativeness to ensure that we can confidently rely on the results.

eAIR: What kinds of questions does the survey ask?

Jones: As in years past, the study collects information about office structures, leadership, staffing, resources, and activities. This year, we also added questions to gather insights on emerging topics, like how IR/IE offices are using artificial intelligence, the prevalence of the “chief data officer” role and their core responsibilities, and where we are in terms of maturity levels of the data function within the IR/IE office and their institutions. And, as I mentioned earlier, we’re interested in learning how the roles and responsibilities of IE offices differ from, or compare with, IR offices.

eAIR: How are you collecting the survey data this year?

Jones: In the past two survey cycles (2018 and 2021), we used a platform that enabled us to offer benchmarking reports for purchase. However, due to low uptake and the high cost of the platform, we decided to return to QuestionPro, the survey system we use for all our surveys. This transition allows us to maintain consistency and manage costs more effectively.