News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
March 21
The “perfect 60” is that elusive combination of community college credits that would, without exception, transfer, counting toward general education and major requirements alike at a California State University campus.
For several years now, the CSU System has spearheaded the so-called Lower-Division Transfer Patterns (LDTP) by Major project, an effort to develop clear packages of 60 community college units that students could follow as road maps for transfer into specific majors. “What we want to do is make it impossible for someone to say when they went to the university, ‘Well, I took all this stuff at the community college and it didn’t count.’ Because if you followed the road map, it does count,” said Jim Blackburn, director of enrollment management services for the CSU Chancellor’s Office.
It is an exceptionally ambitious effort to tackle transfer of credit difficulties, especially given the two systems’ sizes. But it’s all easier said than done. The slow-moving, massive process has hit a few snags — not least, many say, because the 109 California community colleges themselves were insufficiently involved in the CSU initiative at its outset and because community college courses weren’t designed with only the CSU faculty’s standards in mind. In last spring’s cycle, CSU faculty reviewed 162 course outlines against predetermined “course descriptors” and accepted 99 as worthy of LDTP’s transfer-ready stamp of approval. In the cycle before that, faculty committees approved 615 of 1,271.
As that process is ongoing, CSU is now in early stages to pilot a potentially pathbreaking and potentially controversial initiative that takes the LDTP project one step further. Can the associate of arts degree — developed under the authority of community college faculty to further a wide variety of student goals — contain within itself that perfect bundle of CSU-approved courses for seamless transfer into particular majors?
“The beauty of this is that a student would not have to decide, ‘Well, do I want to complete the A.A. or do I want to get through the university as fast as I can?’” Blackburn said.
Degree of Control
Streamlining the transfer process from community colleges into universities is a major issue nationally. Despite the incredible numbers of articulation agreements between community colleges and four-year institutions throughout the country (including throughout California), stories abound of community college students who find themselves unable to transfer much of their lower-level coursework upon arriving at a university. As such, these students, who are often low-income and first-generation, can find themselves facing longer, tougher, and more expensive roads to graduation.
And many don’t even make it to the university — even students who initially intend to. A report from the Chicano Studies Research Center at the University of California at Los Angeles released last year, for instance, found that of every 100 first-time Latino students in the state, 75 enter community colleges — and only 7 of them will transfer (6 to CSU campuses).
Yet, upon entering community college, 40 percent of these students said they aspired to transfer to a four-year institution.
With numbers like those as their backdrop, many college leaders describe a crisis, an unease in transfer that needs creative solutions. And with the California Community College System having recently approved new regulations providing for associate degrees with broad areas of emphasis (an A.A. in science, for instance, instead of biology), Cal State leaders saw an opportunity to see if the A.A. degree itself could be fully transferable under the auspices of the LDTP project. The system made plans to pilot the concept on a local level, at the Northridge campus in southern California and East Bay in the north. The two hope to explore this possibility with nearby community colleges.
“It’s not an effort on our part to tell them what they should or shouldn’t do but simply to indicate what we believe to be the very best preparation for coming to the university,” said Blackburn, of the CSU System office.
“We’re all about facilitating, encouraging, perhaps persuading and then checking the results to see if it works” on a local level, added Keith Boyum, CSU’s associate vice chancellor for academic affairs.
“It’s got to start with embrace of the idea among community college partners. If they don’t see a way to serve community college students well by doing this, it won’t happen. Because they’re their programs, not ours.”
Well, that’s precisely the point, some in California community colleges say.
“Transfer involves two parties, and transfer is one mission of community colleges. So we have students who enroll in community colleges for a terminal purpose and students might be sitting next to them in the same classroom who are planning to transfer. So when our faculty are designing courses and programs, they try to be responsive to both of those needs,” said Linda Michalowski, vice chancellor for student services for the community colleges’ Chancellor’s Office.
“One of the concerns,” added Jeff Spano, dean of student services for the system, “is that our courses not only meet multiple purposes within our colleges but that they also transfer to multiple colleges.”
The bulk of California community college graduates who transfer move on to CSU, but a significant number do not. Generally speaking, Spano said, about 53,000 community college students transfer to CSU each year and 13,000 to the University of California System. Another 20,000 go elsewhere to any number of colleges.
“We encouraged them to work locally to see how they would match up,” Michalowski said of CSU’s plan to see if A.A. degrees could be a vehicle for the LDTP goals. “We didn’t see an instant match there, but said if they could make it work with specific campuses, they were welcome to try.”
Two Systems, With Student Interests at Stake
At CSU East Bay and Northridge, the sites of the proposed pilot projects, the initiative is in its earliest days.
The two institutions were chosen in part for the close relationships they maintain with neighboring community colleges. Northridge has identified several community colleges it would like to work with, but has not yet contacted them. Officials expect to do so in the next few weeks after they clarify their own proposal, said Cynthia Z. Rawitch, the associate vice president for undergraduate studies at Northridge. She declined to name the colleges identified.
East Bay is further along in the process. On Tuesday, the university had a meeting on the topic involving the president of Ohlone College, as well as an articulation officer from one other community college, said Carl Bellone, associate vice president of academic programs and graduate studies at East Bay (he likewise declined to name the second college since they’re earlier into discussions than in the case of Ohlone College. Ohlone’s president turned down an interview request).
“I think the hope is that if people in the state see a few models and it works and it seems easy to do that it will stimulate other community colleges to do the same,” said Bellone, who described Tuesday’s meeting in positive terms, though nothing is set in stone. “Of course it’s a big thing for community colleges because it means some curricular change in the way they organize A.A. degrees.”
“The tricky thing is it has major statewide implications,” said Jane Patton, vice president of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges and a member of the LDTP advisory committee. She expressed concern that the idea is being piloted on a local level before going through system-wide channels. “It’s not simply going to be a local venture. That, I’m sure, is not their intent.”
“If it is indeed a viable, workable idea, and if it will work on a large scale, then let’s talk. Let’s participate. We would be happy to explore ideas, but we really would like it to be collaborative,” Patton said. “Certainly facilitating transfer is something everyone wants to do and the tricky thing is how do you want to do it? Nobody is opposed to helping students transfer but what CSU sometimes doesn’t realize is, from our vantage point, students are moving in many directions and they’re transferring to many institutions.”
There are two systems and two sets of vested interests involved here, added Rawitch, of CSU’s Northridge campus. Their common hope, she said, is “that we can help students graduate in a more timely manner, but there are all the other things that mitigate against that.” At Northridge, 55 percent of transfer students graduate within three years of coming to the university, and 64 percent after four years.
“The real issue is how do we bring the community colleges on board so what they’re doing at the community colleges and what we’re doing at the system level make transfer seamless to students.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
I’m curious at looking ... would this be UMassOnline; UMass Amherst, UMass Boston, UMass Dartmouth, UMass Lowell, the state of Massachusetts requiring public colleges do this, or what Massachusetts? Does whatever Mass it is provide a “roadmap” to all CC administrators letting the CC administrators know which courses convert into what courses for all programs? Thanks!!Paul
Paul, Adult Ed Doct Candidate at Penn State, at 8:50 am EDT on March 21, 2008
There doesn’t seem to be any conversation around how the classes at both institutions could be best structured to prepare students for their careers of choice. For example, many of my university classes (in undergrad,’99, and graduate school,’05) were structured to teach us how to do academic work, but not to actually work well in the rest of the work world. To play devil’s advocate- do community colleges lose a practical edge to their teaching when they try to fit them to a university model? Wouldn’t it make more sense for the community colleges and the universities to work together to identify ways to update their classes to the 21st century, while simultaneously working on articulation?
MB, at 11:35 am EDT on March 21, 2008
My company works with two yeear and four year colleges in support of thier enrollment objectives. We have found that being a 3rd party in the credit transfer process has helped our students transfer in a seamless fashion. The most critical component of a smooth transfer is the articulation agreement. This document give the students and the schools a clear understanding of what does and doesn’t transfer.
Bob Barker, President at BEST LLC, at 11:55 am EDT on March 21, 2008
I’ve been involved in articulation issues between the CSU and community colleges for the better part of a decade. Before LDTP, there was IMPAC (The Intersegmental Major Preparation Articulated Curriculum), a five year effort on the part of the University of California, the California State University, and the community college system. We had representatives from all three segments of the state higher education system at all of our meetings.
We produced something called SciGETC. (Type SciGETC into Google to get a copy.) As far as I know, nothing happened after our five years of work. Then LDTP was initiated by the CSU system. I participated in the statewide LDTP biology meetings which essentially reproduced SciGETC. Then individual departments met to fit their individual programs into the statewide LDTP. Now the CSU is trying to review courses as you describe in your article.
I will almost certainly retire before any of these efforts are successful. I joined the project because I was dismayed at the number of transfer students who had completed 60 to 80 community college units who still needed three or four years of CSU schooling to complete a pre-medical, pre-dental, or pre-pharmacy degree. But after all these years of work, they still arrive in the same numbers as they always did. They also give up in the same numbers they always did.
One of the things your article did not mention is the fact that the current transfer curriculum still works for the arts, humanities, and social sciences. A student finishes a large general education curriculum in their first two years and can begin their major in their junior year. A science major has to begin their major their first semester or they cannot finish in four years. Science curricula are much more strictly sequenced than are the arts, humanities and social sciences. Fixing the science transfer curriculum was one of the main problems that drove IMPAC in the first place.
Thousands of students do complete a transfer science curriculum each year. But they are primarily white, second or third generation college students who have savvy course selection advice from parents or friends. The poor and minorities do not have access to this network and are the primary ones hurt by the current dysfunctional system.
The community college and university systems are doing their best to fix transfer problems but there are structural problems that can only be fixed by the state’s political leadership. Since California has repeatedly been declared ungovernable in the past few years, I am not optimistic.
Fred Schreiber, Professor at CSU Fresno, at 1:50 pm EDT on March 21, 2008
Thanks for your comments Fred!This is not just a concern for the CSU system, but as you mention, a tremendous concern for the CCC. Aligning courses and Articulation agreements with the CSU’s has been a major priority for our system along with vocational training, UC transfer, and workforce development. All in an open system. I agree that we may not reach this goal soon (history is not helpful in supporting an optimistic attitude), but we need to continue to work together to find an answer as California needs to offer this transition to the diverse student body that populates this state. Our job may be tougher than some other states, but I believe we are the creative forces to find the answer. Now if we can just find the budget to support this work!
Gail Conrad, Director DSPS at San Diego Community College District, at 5:05 pm EDT on March 21, 2008
There are a few problems with this seemingly unarguable project that are not covered in the article or (yet) the comments. The first is something one does not necessarily like talking about but must nonetheless: the differences between faculty at the CSU and the community colleges. The former have to have doctorates and an active research program; the latter, not necessarily. The point is important because the assumptions and the aims of preparation for major courses might differ significantly. A survey of British Literature course at one institution will be very different from that given at another, and even though the two courses may share a title and a number, they may have entirely different content. Second, readers unfamiliar with the CSU will likely not know that there is significant tension between “CSU central,” as it is known, and the individual campuses. The former want the CSU to be a franchise, with very little if any difference between the campuses. The latter want to pursue their individual identities. San Diego State University, for example, wants to emphasize research. San Jose State (I think) wants to become more of a liberal arts school. My point is that having a seamless transfer of credits from the CCs to the CSU does not take into account the very different kinds of institutions that make up the CSU. What might work for CSU Long Beach might not work for CSU San Marcos. Finally, there is the question of each department having the opportunity to train its majors as it sees fit. There is more at stake here than departmental autonomy, because even as this project seeks to take away the preparation for the major courses from the CSU, the various departments are still going to be “accountable” for the progress of the students. If lower-division courses are seamlessly transferred, how will this affect the assessment of how well we teach those students? Will the CSU be held accountable for someone else’s teaching? None of these issues are addressed, and they should be.
Anonymous, Professor at Somewhere CSU, at 5:05 pm EDT on March 21, 2008
The 109 California CCs each develop articulation agreements for each transfer course with each of the 10 UC and 23 CSU campuses. Community college students wanting to transfer must wade through this swollen river. CC faculty must consider differing requirements across the CSU and UC campuses when developing a course — frequently as basic as 3 versus 4 units of credit.
Making the current one-to-one articulation process “better” is good, but a bit like applying the proverbial bandage. Prior to attending CC students should be given guaranteed CSU/UC transfer-admission at a specific campus, with full course transfer if they followed a CSU/UC specified curriculum (approved from existing local CC courses). Asking the CCs to offer courses to meet the local CSU “ideal curriculum for a CC” (3, 4, or 5 unit course in____) means students will not be able to transfer to any other CSU or UC without having course articulation problems.
It also seems desirable to reduce the need for each CSU and UC to review course-level articulation agreements from 109 CCs and each CC to develop articulation agreements with 33 public universities within California. Perhaps agreeing to accept local CSU or UC articulation agreements for CC courses where UC to UC or CSU to CSU courses already are articulated.
Separating the discussion of CC course content and student learning from the discussion about the articulation and transfer process would seem to be an obvious step. However, getting faculty at each campus to agree to standardized course content, units, and sequence structure for the first two-years of college for all required courses and for a major seems unlikely (even within segments within one state).
Bob, at 5:25 pm EDT on March 21, 2008
Paul, Students who enter community colleges in Massachusetts and who sign a (non-binding) transfer compact, take a specified course of study and achieve a certain grade-point average upon graduation(and I don’t remember what it is; I live in a different state now) are guaranteed admission to any state college as a junior with a 10% tuition discount. I think a couple of specialized colleges, such as Mass Maritime, do not belong to the compact.
As your question was not clearly stated, I’m not sure I’ve answered it, but I’ve done my best.
Judith, at 9:25 pm EDT on March 21, 2008
California is to be commended for doing a better job than most states in addressing a range of issues in higher education, including transfer. However, I do wonder if our collective focus is misplaced in attempting to clear pathways for students who begin at cc’s with the intent of completing BA/BS degrees. Our continued preoccupation with the very notion of transfer, i.e., students taking lower division work at the cc and then going to the university, belies the actual swirling behavior of students. While we educators spend hours in meetings attempting to make the traditional transfer process work better, students with adequate system knowledge, support, and motivation dutifully go about crafting their own academic programs that, in many cases, bear no resemblance to the unnecessarily restrictive 2+2 model. For the past 10 years, Oregon has been experimenting with an alternate model which facilitates students’ free movement between Oregon State U and the Oregon community college. This “Degree Partnership Program” has had considerable success, and warrants attention elsewhere.
Bob Bontrager, Director at AACRAO Consulting, at 1:10 pm EDT on March 22, 2008
Anony questioned CCC faculty qualifications.
California Community College Chancellor’s Office: Minimum Qualifications Policy
http://www.cccco.edu/Portals/4/minimum_quals_jan2008.doc
Developed by California Faculty Senate and dept of ed., this process is probably the best in the country. Although local boards can make exceptions, they have to do so explicitly and officially, and within established policy parameters.
The comparison with Florida’s articulation is noteworthy: Florida has a statewide course numbering system that operates fairly efficiently. On the other hand, there are no *statewide* faculty preparation requirements at the community college level. This makes for interesting outcomes.
Both state systems, however, are failing to face the stealth issue of dual or concurrent enrollment, which is turning high schools into make-shift college campuses across the country.
This, I would assert, presents an even more alarming area of laxity, and threatens the integrity of lower-to-upper articulation.
The problem is that neither Florida nor California (see Minimum Qualifications) have necessary *statutory* links with dual enrollment and existing faculty standards. In Florida, the legislature lacks the will to follow California, and the new CC Chancellor is ignoring the problem.
It is easy to see why: the huge public school districts can lead the smaller CCs around by the nose, and the legislators know this. The consequences of allowing this kind of erosion to course integrity, however, demand that it be addressed.
Glen S. McGhee, Dir., at Florida Higher Education Accountability Project, at 5:50 am EDT on March 24, 2008
South Carolina went through this in the 90’s, I don’t see the big deal. As for questioning the credentials of Community College faculty, this is another example of academic discrimination; ie my degree is better than yours, or my university teaches English better than yours. Come on sentence structure and subject/verb agreement doesn’t change from CC to university level, at least not that I am aware of. I will say this, I was the transfer coordinator at a senior public university in South Carolina for twenty years and my research showed that students coming from the Community College did better than students who began at the senior university level. In addition, even though they had their sixty hours of transfer credit, most stayed on average six semesters, mainly because I think they wanted the whole university experience. I have that data somewhere if anyone wants it.
Martin, at 9:10 am EDT on March 24, 2008
If Higher Education Institutions and Faculty were less concerned about the quality of what otheres have or have not done and more concerned with the value added by their own processes then we could all serve our students in a more effecient mannor. It is my opinion that any student completing their AA, AS, or AAS should be awarded a minimum of 60 applicable hours toward the completion of their Bachelor Degree. It would then be the receiving institutions option to decide what value added courses need to be completed in the next 60 plus hours to complete the institutions Bachelor Degree. It takes Higher Education out of the traditional model of one size fits all and provides us an opportunity to be value added institutions which are responsive to the needs of our students. We need to concentrate on facilitating success for those that we serve rather than creating a broad chasm for them to have to traverse.
Larry N. Williams, Chancellor at Arkansas State University-Newopot, at 11:05 am EDT on March 24, 2008
“A report from the Chicano Studies Research Center at the University of California at Los Angeles released last year, for instance, found that of every 100 first-time Latino students in the state, 75 enter community colleges — and only 7 of them will transfer (6 to CSU campuses).”
What this doesn’t address are the extra-academic reasons for attrition — money, time, family support, illness, relocation, etc. We can’t assume that the attrition rate is soley or even primarily due to transfer and articulation problems.
Another CSU Professor, at 5:05 pm EDT on March 28, 2008
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Everest Institute is a world-class educational institution and a rapidly growing part of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. At ... see job
Everest Institute, a respected member of the Corinthian Colleges’ network of schools, is dedicated to helping students ... see job
Roger Williams University is one of the top ranked liberal arts universities in the Northeast and is an Equal Opportunity ... see job
Roger Williams University is one of the top ranked liberal arts universities in the Northeast and is an Equal Opportunity ... see job
The California State University, Northridge’s (CSUN) Director of Student Outreach & Recruitment seeks a Recruiter to ... see job
Angelo State University’s work environment is often described as an employee community. This applies to the work culture ... see job
SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY. Personal. Professional. Practical. An academic innovator opening tomorrow’s vistas to today’s ... see job
All applicants must apply online at: www.ccacjobs.com. The College’s ... see job
Walden University is an accredited graduate institution with a mission for social change, Walden is dedicated to high ... see job
Everest Institute, a respected member of the Corinthian Colleges’ network of schools, is dedicated to helping students ... see job
Massachusetts already does this. Why not ask them instead of re-inventing the wheel?
Judith, at 8:20 am EDT on March 21, 2008