Accreditation Myth-Busting

In overhauling our Transfer of Credit, Prior Learning and Articulation Agreements Policy and Procedures in 2022, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) busted through barriers that historically had hindered students from transferring their credits to a new institution. The commission’s efforts encourage institutions to more readily accept transfer credits and make every reasonable effort to earnestly evaluate credits from nontraditional avenues or awarding institutions that may have different accreditors, including accreditors in addition to those formerly known as regional.

Higher education looks different than it did a few decades ago, and MSCHE is working to help institutions navigate new routes for learning and translate these opportunities into improved student learning experiences. We must bust through misconceptions and myths around accreditors and transfer policies in order to impact student success. This is a call to action for institutions to help us raise the bar.

Myth #1: Institutions can’t change their transfer-of-credit policies to better evaluate prior learning because they will be out of compliance with their accreditors’ expectations. 

Myth busted: Accreditors focus on transfer policies to help, not hinder, student success and credentialing. MSCHE strives to keep its policies for institutions broad, accessible and nonprescriptive—and it is the same philosophy that allows institutions to tailor their own policies to their unique mission, goals and demographics. The commission provides guidance for institutions in documents like the Transfer of Credit, Prior Learning and Articulation Agreements Guidelines. Still, institutions ultimately have the discretion to set their own transfer policies within the broad framework provided by MSCHE. Institutions must minimize the loss of credit; however, MSCHE supports the liberal transfer of credit. Institutions can, and should, be generous.

Myth #2: Accreditors prevent institutions from accepting credits from certain sectors, types of institutions or modalities of learning and do little to facilitate credit transfer between institutions within their membership.

Myth busted: Institutions should consider a variety of factors when evaluating potential transfer credit and should not discriminate against particular institutional settings or modes of delivery. While the accreditation of the sending institution can be a helpful indicator, it should never be the sole determinant of transfer credit. Instead, the award of transfer credit should be based on course quality and equivalency, the comparability and applicability to the receiving institution’s programs and the student’s educational goals, and evaluation of what the student has learned. This is a long-standing philosophy of the commission, and it was incorporated into the revised Transfer of Credit, Prior Learning and Articulation Agreements Policy and Procedures to be more student-centered. Accreditors encourage institutions to develop clear and accessible transfer policies and articulation agreements that maximize consideration of earned credit to benefit students and help them reach their educational goals. This is at the heart of student-centered accreditation.

Myth #3: Accreditors force institutions to jump through hoops and collect more data on transfer credit policies simply to satisfy accreditor requirements.

Myth busted: Successful institutions are data-driven institutions. Transfer credit data is a critical piece to evaluating how policies and transfer agreements foster student success and, in turn, assist institutions with meeting their mission and goals. Institutions should collect, analyze and disaggregate data to examine how transfer policies are impacting all student populations. Understanding transfer credit data can help further reduce systemic inequities in higher education and drive decisions that create meaningful policy changes. This results in a more equitable student academic experience.

Myth #4: Accreditors are not incorporating faculty voices when looking at credit evaluation or guidance for institutions working on transfer of credit.

Myth busted: Faculty should have an active role in the transfer-of-credit process, as they serve both as content evaluators and student champions. Decisions about evaluating credit are most holistic when institutions broaden the range of voices involved in the transfer credit process by including faculty in the creation, implementation and evaluation of transfer-of-credit policies. Faculty and others engaged around transfer credit at institutions hold certain responsibilities that lend to student success. First, they must subscribe to meaningful evaluation, including of transfer credit data. Second, they must be trained to advise incoming and outgoing transfer students, including financial aid eligibility impact. Third, they must provide students with a range of appropriate support services that will aid in success. By engaging the subject experts, transfer-of-credit evaluation can be holistically reviewed and become even more student-focused. While accreditors appreciate the deference that will be afforded to decisions relating to transfer credit, students should also have clearly defined opportunities to request a review of any determination that has not maximized their credits.

The Role of the Accreditor in Championing Transfer-of-Credit Policies

Accreditors have an obligation to help institutions understand how best to create fair, equitable and transparent policies around transfer of credit. The peer-review process already lends to this. Because students have more opportunities than ever before to learn through nontraditional avenues or with one or many institutions, we should all commit to breaking down barriers and adapt the ways we evaluate, assess and determine the award for the work that students have completed.

Institutional policies that focus on clarity, consistency and transparency about expectations for awarding credit, while maximizing student credit where possible, will meet institutional accreditation expectations. The higher education community has a responsibility to bust open doors for students and their diverse learning experiences, not close them. Fair, equitable, transparent and student-centered transfer policies do just that and are part of the solution.