BACKGROUND DOCUMENT: CREDIT TRANSFER BETWEEN COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Transcription

1 BACKGROUND DOCUMENT: CREDIT TRANSFER BETWEEN COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS First Meeting: November 5, 2015 Boston, MA The JFF Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, provides national thought leadership to help community colleges overcome the barriers to increasing graduation rates, accelerating achievement for underrepresented students, and meeting their communities needs. The Trust comprises four task forces, with each member of the Trust serving on one task force. Each task force focuses on one of the following high-leverage policy issues: Building pathways to credentials Redesign of developmental education Credit transfer between community colleges and four-year institutions Outcomes-based funding This document informs the first meeting of the Task Force on Credit Transfer between Community Colleges and Four-Year Institutions. STARTING POINT FOR THE DISCUSSION In Jobs for the Future s 2014 report, Driving the Direction of Transfer Pathways Reform, we reported on the troubling state of transfer between community colleges and four-year institutions. Despite the fact that four in five community college students indicate the desire to transfer to a four-year institution and attain at least a Bachelor s degree, 1 only one in five actually enrolls in baccalaureate-granting institutions within the first five years of their college career. Equally disturbing, only one in ten of all community college students earns a Bachelor s degree within six years. 2 Raising these dismally low transfer rates is imperative, particularly among low-income students and students of color who enroll disproportionately at community colleges. Improving equity of

2 educational outcomes, and driving economic mobility for low-income students, students of color, and underprepared students who have historically been denied college access, require improving transfer to four-year institutions. Many states and institutions have worked hard to improve the articulation of two- and four-year curricula and programs so that transfer students can earn university credits for past community college coursework. However, several research studies find that the emergence of statewide articulation agreements and other transfer policies do not yet yield significant improvement in student mobility from two-year to four-year institutions. 3 BIG GOAL To systematically improve transfer policy at the state level so that more community college students persist, complete, and transfer successfully to four-year institutions and attain at least a Bachelor s degree. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS This task force will tackle critical unanswered questions such as: How do we get states to buy into a general set of principles around transfer, including principles for general education programs, math pathways, and program-to-program transfer? How do we use these principles to develop a more coherent national conversation on transfer? What changes to federal and state policies are needed to support these principles (e.g., financial aid, gainful employment)? How do we develop a rational system of national credit transfer so students can transfer and apply credits at higher education institutions within and across states? If this is our goal, what are the intermediate steps required to get us there? What financial incentives are needed (for students, community colleges, and baccalaureate-granting institutions) to create a more effective system of transfer? What kind of technological infrastructure should be built to provide students updated, transparent, accessible information about the transferability and applicability of postsecondary credits? How do we shift the conversation beyond course-by-course transfer to the transferability of student competencies? How do we elevate student learning to be central in the transfer conversation? What are the opportunities and barriers to the development of a national transfer clearinghouse with student unit record data? What will it take to overcome the obstacles? How can a clearinghouse inform more effective transfer policy within and across states? Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 2

3 In addition to these unanswered policy questions, the task force needs to discuss how prescriptive a policy framework on credit transfer can and should be. Credit transfer, unlike other higher education policy areas where states might mandate certain processes or outcomes, depends on agreement about core academic functions of colleges and universities, including curriculum development, student evaluation, and program requirements. Decisions in these areas are traditionally the responsibility of the faculty, staff, and college leadership at an individual institution or within a particular higher education system, rather than prescribed by the state. While institutional diversity is an enduring strength of the U.S. higher education system, it also creates unintended barriers to student transfer. Community college students continue to experience confusion about which courses to take for transfer in spite of all the efforts to improve articulation agreements and transfer policies. They also experience significant credit loss in the transfer process, 4 which research shows is perhaps the most significant barrier to students completing a four-year degree. 5 Consequently, the task force will necessarily need to address how to leverage policy to create a clearer transfer pathway for students while working within our diverse and decentralized system of higher education. Ultimately, as is discussed in the conclusion, solving the transfer challenge may require more than a discrete set of policy initiatives if we are truly committed to giving community college students a real opportunity to achieve a four-year degree. INITIAL PRINCIPLES FOR A POLICY FRAMEWORK IN SUPPORT OF IMPROVED CREDIT TRANSFER BETWEEN COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS The following pages provide a starting point and background for discussion and offer a set of principles to help define an agenda for improving credit transfer for community college students. The policy framework draws on what research tells us about the barriers to transfer and how to eliminate them. The principles first focus on state- and institutional-level policy and practice, drawing on examples from work already accomplished in the field. Because credit transfer is primarily addressed at the state level, some states have already pursued some of the ideas outlined below. However, there is significant room for improvement in general. This document encourages the development of a broad set of principles that all states can adopt to rationalize and improve transfer policy, some of which are outlined in JFF s report, Driving the Direction of Transfer Pathways Reform. We then look at federal policy that can be implemented in the area of transfer in an environment of increasing student mobility. Please note that there are several policies relevant to this conversation about credential attainment and transfer, such as developing structured pathways and transforming developmental education into an on-ramp to a program of study, that will be addressed and Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 3

4 promoted by other Policy Leadership Trust task forces and will complement the work of this task force. #1: Create a flexible but focused core curriculum of lower-division general education requirements that transfer either in whole or by course from community colleges to fouryear institutions and promote policies that encourage momentum and support completion of the core. Why: Research shows that students in states with established core curricula who complete the core are more likely to transfer and complete. 6 However, students are often confused about which classes to take to complete the core transfer requirements. There is also evidence that students may end up taking courses they feel they will more likely succeed in and avoid core courses that are perceived as difficult, such as math and science, resulting in students taking more lower-division courses than necessary and that will not count in transfer. The result is too few students completing the core curricula and transferring. 7 Consequently, not only is a core curricula important to provide a clear set of pathways for students based on their expected major, but also providing supports and incentives for progress on those pathways and for completion of an Associate s degree. While completion of the core and ultimately completion of an Associate s degree (more below) is a goal that should be pursued, research also suggests that student coursetaking habits are hindered by too much choice in the general education program, and transfer can be stalled if credit for core curriculum courses only can be transferred upon completion of the core and/or attaining an Associate s degree. North Carolina addressed this problem by revising its Comprehensive Articulation Agreement in keeping with the national research and experience on structured pathways. The new agreement, a product of long engagement with faculty across the two- and four-year sectors, is a strong example of reverse engineering that ensures that the learning outcomes of the community colleges transfer programs align directly with the specific major requirements of the transfer institutions. It features a narrowed core curriculum and a mechanism for transferring courses from the core, whether students complete the entire sequence or not. 8 Outcome: States and institutions create and regularly review core general education curricula and audit community college performance on core curricula completion as part of a comprehensive articulation agreement. In addition to creating a pathway for students to transfer the core as a whole, agreements should include a means for students to transfer core courses regardless of completion of the entire core. Special attention should be paid to math, as we know that in addition to developmental education (which will be addressed by the Policy Leadership Trust task force on that subject) not completing math requirements is a key barrier to student progress and Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 4

5 completion (more below). States should support institutions to ramp up student support services so that students have access to early and consistent counseling and advising. #2: Develop and implement a set of rigorous but differentiated math courses that integrate remedial and gateway math appropriate for different programs of study. Why: Research clearly shows that traditional math pathways particularly developmental math courses, which are focused primarily on algebra and preparation for college-level calculus are a major stumbling block for community college students. 9 At the same time, recent research has shown that few professions (5 percent) require the higher-level algebra and calculus skills that most college algebra courses teach. Instead, most professions tend to rely on basic quantitative literacy and statistics skills, such as the ability to manipulate fractions and percentages, solve multistep word problems, and comprehend written statistical charts and graphs. 10 The Charles A. Dana Center at The University of Texas at Austin, in partnership with the Texas Association of Community Colleges, developed the New Mathways Project (NMP) to create differentiated math pathways aligned with different academic and career paths. Initial findings from the project demonstrate promising results, with 20 Texas community college systems offering at least one NMP course and reporting that 30 percent of NMP students completed a college-level math course in the first year, in contrast to only 8.3 percent of students enrolled in traditional developmental education classes during the same period. 11 Outcome: States and institutions create focused working groups to establish new math pathways for community college students in conjunction with four-year institutions, with the goals of increasing student success in math, greater persistence, and transfer. #3: Support directed cross-institutional working meetings of faculty and student services staff to iron out transfer details. Why: Success of transfer agreements is dependent on deep involvement of the frontline educators faculty and student services staff who are responsible for curriculum development, program of study requirements, student evaluation, and helping students navigate program and transfer requirements. They are responsible for ensuring rigor and accountability within their own classes and programs and, as such, seek to ensure that students who transfer are prepared for the challenges of upper-division work. Without deep involvement of faculty and staff, a certain level of doubt and mistrust in the transfer process will persist. Outcome: States plan and support cross-institutional convenings of faculty and student services personnel to work out, in person, the details needed for smooth transfer, such as curricular discussions that lead to alignment and transfer agreements, and solid student advising and information. These meetings should be carefully planned and facilitated to help participants develop trust and lasting relationships, hold serious and actionable conversations, and ultimately build coherent academic pathways that lead Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 5

6 into the majors of the transfer institutions. States should create an infrastructure for these conversations so that participating colleges maintain them and keep them current. #4: Incentivize students, community colleges, and baccalaureate-granting institutions to target student completion of the Associate s degree at the community college level before transferring to a four-year institution. Why: A growing body of evidence indicates that two-year students should hold off transferring to colleges and universities until after earning their Associate s degree. Although two-thirds of community college students transfer to four-year institutions without completing their program of study, there are good reasons for students to wait until they complete the requirements for an Associate s degree. 12 For starters, earning an Associate s degree prior to transfer increases the likelihood of earning a Bachelor s degree. According to nationwide data analyzed by the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, about 71 percent of students who transferred after receiving an Associate s degree earned their Bachelor s degree within four years, compared to 55 percent of those who transferred without the Associate s degree. 13 Even without formal degree attainment, the accumulation of community college credits also affects whether transfer students eventually attain a Bachelor s degree. Their chances of four-year degree completion improve steadily with gains of up to 60 credits roughly the equivalent of an Associate s degree before tapering off considerably with excess credits, a telltale sign of aimless course taking. 14 Moreover, there is evidence of modest economic benefits to earning additional credits at a community college. 15 These economic benefits are higher if students complete an Associate s degree before transferring. 16 Finally, considering the risks of failing to graduate with a Bachelor s once they successfully transfer, transfer students would be wise to earn an Associate s degree, which, on average, delivers higher returns in the labor market than only completing some college courses. 17 Outcome: States create incentives for students to complete Associate s degrees at the community college level before transferring to a four-year institution, and for baccalaureate-granting institutions and community colleges to support the completion of the Associate s degree. Options could include: Financial Incentives: States can reward baccalaureate-granting institutions for accepting transfer students with the Associate s degree (e.g., through weighted performance-based funding). The Virginia Community College System encourages students to complete the Associate s degree through its Two-Year College Transfer Grant. Students who complete the degree with a GPA of 3.0 or above receive $1,000 per year for up to three years at any four-year institution in Virginia (an additional $1,000 is awarded to students who study science, teaching, engineering, mathematics, or nursing). States can also develop financial aid policies designed to support Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 6

7 transfer. For example, Maryland awards $3,000 a year to students with family incomes below $95,000 who transfer from a two-year college to full-time enrollment in a four-year Bachelor s degree program with 60 units or an Associate s degree. 18 Academic Incentives: Several states have implemented 2 plus 2 policies, which ensure that students who complete an Associate s degree at a community college can enter a state four-year institution with rising junior status that research shows leads to greater four-year degree completion. For example, Florida s Statewide Articulation Agreement includes a 2 plus 2 policy that guarantees students who earn an Associate s degree from a Florida college can transfer all 60 credits to a state university and count those credits toward a Bachelor s degree. 19 #5: Develop technology platforms that enable students to map out their educational plans in the context of their career goals, expected timeline, and intended major. Why: Early and persistent in-person counseling and advising is critical to assisting students in identifying their needs and progress to transfer. However, given the resource challenges community colleges face, states can augment counseling and advising with a robust technology platform to allow students to plan and track their progress. For example, Arizona State University and Maricopa Community College created an extensive web portal to help students with transfer. The website lists phone and addresses for both ASU and Maricopa transfer staff who can assist students with the transfer process. Maricopa students can see online which two-year courses fulfill ASU s 100- and 200-level course requirements in their degree field. The Pathway Tracker allows students to track their progress toward completion and identify which courses they still need to finish, generated by live transcript data. The portal also outlines eligibility, provides information on financial aid, and gives students a checklist to help them evaluate their readiness. 20 Pennsylvania created a similar system that is statewide: the Pennsylvania Transfer and Articulation Center. 21 The Pennsylvania Transfer and Articulation Center (PA TRAC) is intended as a "one-stop shop" for transfer information related to Pennsylvania's statewide transfer and articulation system and the participating colleges and universities. PA TRAC is a free interactive site that provides tools and resources to easily identify courses and degrees that transfer to the participating colleges: Searchable databases to find transfer course equivalencies, transfer degrees, PA TRAC colleges, and more Explanation of statewide transfer policies such as the 30-Credit Transfer Framework and Statewide Program-to-Program Articulation College profiles and contact information Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 7

8 A college transfer events calendar Step-by-step instructions for transferring Outcome: States create technology platforms in conjunction with higher education institutions that allow students to plan and track educational progress and have access to resources to help them succeed. #6: Create a national transfer clearinghouse with a student unit record to track transfer students across state lines. Why: Improving transfer policy within states is imperative to helping more students succeed, but that is only one piece of the equation. Students are increasingly mobile, and rates of transfer to an institution of higher education in another state are increasing. Research by The National Student Clearinghouse suggests that nearly one in five transfers (18.5 percent) among students who started in two-year public institutions are out of state. 22 However, there is no systematic way to track these students. Implementing a new federal student unit record system and the development of a national transfer clearinghouse will assist all students who are seeking to transfer out of state and provide institutions and states with a more efficient system for tracking students. In addition, the clearinghouse will provide valuable data for assessing institutional effectiveness and assist in the development of state policy to better align educational and workforce development programs. Outcome: The federal government creates and implements a student unit record data system and develops a national transfer clearinghouse to which all states and Title IV participating institutions report and have access. #7: Support development of a learning-outcomes-based framework for transfer, both instate and cross-state. Why: Over one-third of all students who entered postsecondary education in the United States in 2003 transferred institutions at least once, and over half of those who transferred changed institutions more than once. As noted above, a significant number of those transfers were out of state. Even with comprehensive transfer agreements within states, student mobility among institutions and across state lines means that students can easily end up with a mix of courses that may or may not add up to the right courses for transfer, even though they may have the knowledge and competencies they need. Developing a set of learning outcomes that participating institutions will accept for transfer will allow students to demonstrate their preparation for transfer, even if there is not a course-for-course correlation as outlined in a traditional articulation agreement. For example, the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) has initiated work on an Interstate Passport system, which is a learning-outcomes-based framework for transfer with the goal of improving graduation rates, shortening time to Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 8

9 degree, and saving students money. The new framework focuses on the lower-division general education core, the common denominator among institutions concentrating on it as a whole, not on individual courses and allows for a cross-border match of outcomes-integrated general education cores for block transfer. 23 The initiative, led by interstate faculty teams and institutions, determines how to assess that students meet agreed-upon proficiencies. At the same time, the initiative seeks to eliminate the situation where students have to retake courses in subjects in which they are already proficient simply because they have transferred and the receiving institution only recognizes certain courses for credit. Outcome: The development of transfer agreements is based on learning outcomes that take into account students knowledge and competencies rather than simply basing transfer on student transcripts and course completion. CONCLUSION The principles outlined above all have the potential to improve transfer for community college students, particularly if states choose their route carefully, as we advocated in Driving the Direction of Transfer Pathways Reform. Before diving into transfer reform, states should pause and consider the right balance, in light of local context of incentives, convenings, and policies. However, these changes must be done comprehensively and not piecemeal, and will not be sufficient alone. Effective remedies need to be embedded in larger policy conversations, such as implementing comprehensive supports that put students on a stronger financial and academic footing, enabling more students to envision a baccalaureate degree in their future. Getting students to persist and complete is not a complex mystery. Well-resourced institutions with well-prepared students do so consistently. Cash-strapped community colleges, given the responsibility to educate growing populations of students with the greatest financial need, find ways to make this work and are experimenting with new solutions. City University of New York introduced a successful model the Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) initiative that results in significant increases in completion and transfer and that is now being adopted by other colleges and states. 24 Achieving the Dream is working with more than 20 community colleges in five states to introduce the Working Students Success Network helping students gain a strong financial footing while in community college and preparing the pathway to graduation and self-sufficiency. Given the need for a comprehensive look at transfer policy, an underpinning question becomes: how do we envision and integrate the strategies that make the most difference in helping community college students achieve their goals of continuing their education in the near term to earn baccalaureate and advanced degrees? The Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success will weave together the highest-leverage policy changes that can improve student success. Significantly increasing the percentage of students who earn baccalaureate degrees requires Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 9

10 integrating the work of this task force with the efforts of the task forces on policies to support pathways, developmental education redesign, and outcomes-based funding. JFF s charge, with your insights, experiences, and voices, is to ensure that the work of the four task forces is additive. Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 10

11 ENDNOTES 1 Mullin, C.M The road ahead: A look at trends in the educational attainment of community college students. Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges; Smith, M. (2010, December). Transfer and articulation policies [State notes]. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States; Mullin, Christopher. (2012). Transfer: An indispensable part of the community college mission. Washington, DC: AACC. 2 Horn, L. & Skomsvold, P Community college student outcomes: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute for Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. 3 Gross, B. & Goldhaber, D Community college transfer and articulation policies: Looking beneath the surface. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education; Jaschik, S. (2009, January 26). Articulation Isn t Enough. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from website Handel, S. & Williams, R. (2013). The promise of the transfer pathway: Opportunity and challenge for community college students seeking the baccalaureate degree. New York, NY: The College Board. 4 Kadlec, A. & Jyoti G Indiana Regional Transfer Study: The student experience of transfer pathways between Ivy Tech Community College and Indiana University. New York, NY: The Public Agenda. 5 Jenkins, D. & Fink, J What we know about transfer. New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center. 6 Hodara, M. & Rodríguez, O Tracking student progression through the core curriculum. CCRC Analytics. New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center. 7 Ibid. 8 Altstadt, D. with Schmidt, G. and Couturier, L.K Driving the direction of transfer pathways reform. Boston, MA: Jobs for the Future and Completion by Design. 9 Bailey, T.R., Jeong, D.W., & Cho, S.W Referral, enrollment, and completion in developmental education sequences in community colleges (CCRC Working Paper No. 15). New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center; Rutschow, E.Z. and Schneider, E Unlocking the gate: What we know about improving developmental education. New York, NY: MDRC. 10 Rutschow, E. Z. & Diamond, J Laying the foundations: Early findings from the New Mathways Project. New York, NY: MDRC. 11 Ibid. Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 11

12 12 Hossler et al Transfer & mobility: A national view of pre-degree student movement in postsecondary institutions. Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. 13 National Student Clearinghouse Research Center Snapshot Report 8 Degree Attainment: Outcomes of students who transferred from two-year to four-year institutions (four years after transfer). Herndon, VA: Author. 14 Crosta, P., Kopko, E Should you get an associate degree before transferring to a four-year school? CCRC Working Paper No. 70. New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center. 15 Belfield, C.R., Bailey, T.R The benefits of attending community college: A review of the evidence. Community College Review. Vol. 39, No Belfield, C.R The economic benefits of attaining an associate degree before transfer: Evidence from North Carolina. CCRC Working Paper No. 62. New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center. 17 Ibid. 18 Wellman, J State policy and community college baccalaureate transfer. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education and The Institute for Higher Education Policy. 19 Bautsch, B State policies to improve student transfer. Washington, D.C.: National Conference of State Legislatures. 20 Altstadt, D. op. cit. 21 Pennsylvania Statewide Transfer and Articulation Center. 2015). More information at website 22 Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Wakhungu, P.K, Yuan, X., & Harrell, A Transfer and mobility: A national view of student movement in postsecondary institutions, Fall 2008 cohort (Signature Report No. 9). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. 23 The Interstate Passport Initiative Boulder, CO: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. More information at website 24 Fain, P Living up to the hype. Retrieved from Inside Higher Ed website Policy Leadership Trust for Student Success: Credit Transfer 12