By Kalifa Madden, Communications Manager, Network
Ioakim Boutakidis, Ph.D., professor of child and adolescent studies and chair of the department of educational leadership at California State University, Fullerton, has been deeply involved with the Network and Middle Leadership Academy (Academy). His work in student equity and retention reflects CSU Fullerton’s dedication to fostering more inclusive pathways for diverse student populations. Building on our introduction to an upcoming Academy impact series on CSU campus participation and outcomes, Boutakidis shares insights into his career, Fullerton’s past and ongoing projects, and the influence of the Academy’s initiatives back on campus.
Kalifa Madden: Can you tell me about your career journey in higher education, including your initial inspiration for participating in the Academy and the Network?
Ioakim Boutakidis: Sure. I am currently a professor of child and adolescent studies, and I’m also serving as the chair of the Department of Educational Leadership. Over the years, I’ve held various roles, including associate dean, department chair, and participant and lead in multiple Academy teams, as well as team facilitator and Academy director. My connection to the Network happened somewhat serendipitously through Pam Oliver, Ph.D., a colleague who also served as provost and associate vice president. She invited me to be a liaison between our campus and the Network. At the time, the Academy’s focus on equitable student outcomes resonated with me as I was also shifting my work in that direction. I appreciated that the Academy provided a structured way to engage with these issues on a broader level, across the CSU system. I was inspired by its commitment to system-wide equity and student success, which aligned perfectly with my growing interest in making a direct impact on students I see in my classrooms and on our campus.
KM: Looking across the years at Fullerton’s participation, what stands out for you in terms of the projects developed in the Academy?
IB: The through-line has been focusing on promoting equitable outcomes for students, particularly students who have faced systemic challenges in their paths toward a successful experience at our institution. Sometimes the projects have been more specific in terms of the outcomes or the particular metrics of success that we’re focused on. Sometimes they’ve been more general. Sometimes they even involved interactions of different populations or intersectional components. For example, we had a team focused on low-income, underrepresented, and first-generation students. The recent projects I’ve seen have placed a stronger focus on Black student success. So it’s covered a range, but there is a consistent focus of promoting equitable student outcomes, which is very much in line with what the Academy wants to do.
KM: Do you have a sense of how Academy participation has aligned with the GI 2025 initiatives on campus?
IB: Yes, not only have they aligned, but [the Academy] has fed directly into our GI 2025 initiatives. The GI 2025 framework provides institutional support that justifies sending teams to [the Academy]. For staff, [Academy] participation requires significant time off-campus that requires approval. For faculty, it’s different because they control their schedule more, but for staff, it’s a considerable investment of time, and there are concerns from supervisors about how that time is utilized. Once you tie it to GI 2025 goals, which we’ve been explicit about, it helps tremendously because campuses feel the pressure to meet GI 2025 goals. Often, it’s challenging to separate the impacts of GI 2025 initiatives from [Academy] work since they both work toward similar outcomes. But the two frameworks create a synergy that’s vital for our ongoing work in student success and equity.
KM: What successes have you seen in terms of implementing Academy projects back on campus?
IB: I wish I had a clear-cut answer for that. Directly linking a specific project to campus-wide change is challenging, and that’s something the Academy itself has tried to address. However, I do see the cumulative impact. For instance, Fullerton’s consistent participation has seeded dozens of faculty and staff with newly developed skills, relationships, and motivations to do equity-minded work. Some of those folks have since become associate deans, deans, or vice presidents. I’m a good example; my [Academy] experiences directly impacted the student support initiatives and success work I now oversee on campus. Those initiatives have had positive impacts on student outcomes, like retention and graduation rates. So I’d argue that one of the most important sustained impacts of the [Academy] is that folks return to their campuses with new competencies and motivations and a network of similarly-minded people. In that respect, the [Academy] has played a role in building these competencies and networks that drive sustained impact.
KM: In thinking about sustained impacts on campus, what about potential student impacts or outcomes as a result of Fullerton’s participation in the Academy?
IB: I think we had definitely some kind of top-line improvements in retention and graduation rates at Fullerton, coming out of this more laser-like focus on the groups with the biggest equity gaps. We call this the ‘Triple Opportunity’ group—students who are underrepresented, low-income (Pell Grant eligible), and first-generation. This focus was furthered in [Academy] work, and we saw success in closing and improving graduation rates for both transfers and freshmen. GI 2025 was focused on six-year graduation rates for freshmen and four-year for transfers, and all retention and graduation data was improving, with equity gaps closing as well. Then COVID hit, which set us back, and there’s still a strong impact from the lockdowns. We’re watching data as freshman cohorts from that period reach four-year marks and transfer students hit two-year rates, so we’ll see. I don’t want to blame everything on COVID, but it did disrupt major student success markers. So that’s where we’re at right now.
KM: There were three consecutive teams from Fullerton focusing on the development of a new student equity initiative. How was Fullerton able to prioritize this work and use the Academy to address its equity goals over several years?
IB: To achieve meaningful results on campus, you need specific people who are willing to engage in sustained effort toward a common purpose, especially at large campuses with multiple goals to meet. If you don’t have a core group invested in moving something forward, especially people who don’t quit when they face roadblocks, it’s tough. The Academy is critical because it provides the impetus for these projects and professional development, which we can’t underestimate. This includes opportunities to connect with middle leaders from other campuses who share similar goals and challenges. Deans and vice presidents often have regular opportunities to meet counterparts at other campuses, but it’s rare for faculty, staff, and director-level folks to get that same experience. The Academy creates a strong, motivated team that maintains those connections even after returning to campus. Often, the key to getting things done is knowing whom to reach out to, and the Academy helps build that network among campus leaders, both within their own campus and across the CSU.
KM: What key challenges or opportunities does Fullerton face in building on the work of Academy teams?
IB: One of the practical challenges is coordination. Sometimes multiple teams are formed on our campus with similar goals, but they aren’t aware of each other’s work until much later. We don’t have a centralized committee that oversees [Academy] applications or coordination across teams. Another significant challenge is resources. Many projects reach a point where they need financial support, and that’s where things can stall. Teams often return from the [Academy] energized, but without dedicated funding, projects can’t be fully realized. At times, we’ve had to scale back projects due to limited resources, which is a common story across campuses. One idea I think would help is adding a budget-planning component to the Academy curriculum, especially on how to pitch projects for funding. Understanding the budgetary language and processes is crucial for ensuring these projects can move forward. In the current climate, where the CSU system faces significant budget constraints, finding support for new initiatives will be even more challenging.
As the Network and the Academy continue to explore the impacts of budget constraints on our work, Boutakidis reflects on the Academy’s unique role in fostering campus connections to advance equity-minded practices at Fullerton. While highlighting broader institutional impacts remains a challenge, Boutakidis indicated that the Academy’s most significant contribution at Fullerton seems to lie in creating a space for leaders to apply their knowledge to drive change across campus. Boutakidis’s experiences underscore the importance of investing in leadership development and equity-focused training as part of a larger effort to achieve meaningful, long-term change.
Stay tuned for an upcoming Academy Impacts brief to learn more about Fullerton’s ongoing efforts to enhance equity and student success.