The sustainability of American higher education has reached a critical inflection point. Years of systematic disinvestment in public institutions have finally strained the faculty and staff who anchor these campuses to their limits. The 2026 State of Faculty Development Survey conducted by the National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity (NCFDD), emphasizes how these systemic pressures are reshaping the profession and what leaders must do to stabilize the academic workforce.
NCFDD CEO Geoff Watson
The NCFDD survey, which collected responses from 1,098 faculty and academic leaders across more than 300 institutions, reveals a workforce under extraordinary strain.
Seventy-one percent of respondents reported decreased institutional funding for professional development, with investment averaging just 34.6 on a 0-to-100 scale. Faculty's own valuation of professional development averaged 70.5 on that same scale, a 36-point gap between what faculty need and what institutions are providing.
The human toll is equally stark. Nearly 64 percent of faculty reported declining well-being over the past year, with early-career and adjunct faculty hit hardest, and only 10 percent of faculty reported strong institutional investment in well-being and mentoring.
Geoff Watson, CEO of the NCFDD, said via email, “Presidents and Provosts are beginning to realize how central 'faculty success' is to both student success and long-term institutional sustainability. When institutions were faced with budget cuts over the last two years, I think they overcorrected in cutting faculty development without fully recognizing the larger consequences.”
A Warning Sign Hidden in Plain Sight
For those who have worked in public K-12 education, this pattern is not new. Shrinking resources, rising expectations, and overextended educators have been the cultural standard in underfunded public schools for decades. That playbook is now being run at the collegiate level, and the compounding stakes are different.
Watson discussed the impact of the precarity gap, where faculty at wealthy institutions mirror the experience of underfunded K-12 teachers, saying, “Faculty should not be shouldering the costs for their own professional support, especially when their development benefits the university.”
“The reality is that there's significant budget at many institutions, but it's fragmented: some of it exists centrally, some in the colleges, some at the department level. There needs to be a smarter way to invest in development efforts that create real outcomes and scale,” Watson continued. “This is what NCFDD does with its university partners. Of course, if faculty are required to fund their own development, that will disproportionately impact faculty at less well-resourced institutions.”
The Human Cost of Policy
Federal funding decisions have grown increasingly volatile; nearly one in three faculty reported delays or increased uncertainty in funding decisions. More than one in four reported being unable to secure new funding at all. Seventeen percent shifted their research focus as a survival response — not out of intellectual curiosity, but financial necessity. Faculty at research-intensive institutions are faring the worst, where productivity demands are highest and pressure most acute. Additionally, the quiet withdrawal of faculty development is disintegrating infrastructure.
Watson provides insight into the long-term effects of this action: “Faculty development should absolutely be treated as essential infrastructure. The long-term risks of not investing in supporting faculty range from further loss of research funding, reputational decline [as top faculty leave], and further deterioration in the student experience. NCFDD exists to help institutions build faculty success cultures.
AI Reservations and Resolutions
NCFDD's findings identify several actionable steps for institutions: close the 36-point gap between what faculty value and what institutions fund. While faculty are “stepping up” to maintain the integrity of the institution, rapid adoption of Artificial Intelligence is another barrier and technological benevolence. Watson said that’s why NCFDD recently launched a course called "Teaching Toolkit in the Age of AI" to help faculty adjust to the AI adoption curve.
“Rapid AI adoption is one of many burdens being placed on the shoulders of faculty, which is contributing to declines in well-being. Some of this is because the AI ball is moving so quickly without clear guardrails from a policy, teaching, assessment, or research perspective,” Watson said. “Faculty can leverage AI in targeted and intentional ways to improve their own practices.”
Overall, Watson said the survey’s findings reinforce the idea that faculty members are not machines to be optimized or numbers to be managed, but educators, researchers, and mentors holding institutions together through sheer professional commitment.
