Transcript Transfer and Articulation In Indiana The Community College Perspective Current State  TransferIN website assists students to identify Current State course applicability in multiple institutions  Core Transfer Library.

Transfer and Articulation In
Indiana
The Community College
Perspective
Current State
 TransferIN website assists students to identify
Current
State
course
applicability in multiple institutions
 Core Transfer Library delineates institutional
commitments to accept courses in transfer
 STAC (State Transfer and Articulation
Committee) works to develop transfer
agreements and practices
 Transfer in Indiana is primarily course by course
Transfer from Ivy Tech
Transfer from Ivy Tech
 Associate of Science (AS) is primary transfer
degree (first transfer in 1989)
 Associate of Applied Science (AAS) is primarily a
terminal degree with limited transfer options (except
course by course)
 Associate of Arts first offered in 2005 but very few
graduates
 512 distinct articulation agreements with different
65 college and university partners
Transfer from Ivy Tech
 Of Ivy Tech’s 57 programs, 74% have transfer
Transfer from Ivy Tech
agreements
– One agreement for Health Information Technology
– 135 agreements for Liberal Arts
– 55 different agreements in Business Administration
 Most university transfer agreements have been
limited to a single Ivy Tech campus and based
primarily on course-by-course transfer
Course Transfer Library (CTL)
 Ivy Tech offers 74 CTL courses
Transfer
(CTL)
 Course
85% of
CTL Library
courses
are accepted without
conditions
 15% have conditions
 Some CTL courses are accepted as
undistributed credit rather than direct
equivalents
 Actual implementation/compliance with CTL
agreements is not universal
What is Working
What is Working?
 Transfer opportunities have increased dramatically in past
four years (most activity in 2007)
 From FY 2004-5 to FY 2006-7, total transfers from Ivy Tech
increased by 133% (2,119 to 4,944)
 Model agreements have been established:
– AS in Nursing to BSN completion agreements
– AS to BS in Business Administration at IU-East
– AS to BS in Engineering Technology with Purdue,
statewide
– AS to BS in Education statewide agreements with IU and
Ball State (though very different paths
Principal Challenges
 Incredible complexity causing
– Confusion and uncertainty for students
– Uncertain process for student appeals
– Tens of thousands of hours to develop and maintain
hundreds of agreements
 Excessive variation in university curriculum, including no
common lower division general education core
– CHE position in Reaching Higher is to support a
common general education core to simplify transfer
Spanish Transfer Map
 12 different pathways – difficult for students and advisors
Spanish Transfer
Map
 Technical
core requirement
ranges from 6 to 20, while total credit hour
requirement varies from 62 to 70 credit hours
 Common required courses limited to 6 classes, although 75% will accept
14 of the same CTL courses to meet degree requirements
 Variance in mathematics high, ranging from requiring MATH 118 to
allowing most CTL math class
 Science – most variance in acceptance of CTL chemistry and least
amount in biology as a choice or requirement
 Outliers – two require or accept GEOG 207; one requires FIT 100; two
require CINS 101
 Regional campus agreements are different at both IU and Purdue
Additional Challenges
 Inconsistent implementation in transferring CTL
Additionalat
Challenges
courses
department level
 Course by course agreements result in 2+3
transfer, hidden prerequisites, lengthening time to
degree
 Few incentives (and actual disincentives) for
students to complete associate degrees prior to
transfer
Inconsistent Application of CTL
 Inconsistent
15 percent
exceptions
application
of CTLin CTL
 Even with university-level agreement,
departments do not always comply with CTL
agreements, (recent examples in Psychology,
Economics, Medical Terminology, Math)
 Problems and inconsistencies not regularly
referred to STAC for resolution
 No clear appeals process nor ombudsman
Incentives/Disincentives for
Incentives / Disincentives
Degree Completion
for
Degree Completion
 Departmental letters/communications advising
students not to complete degrees at Ivy Tech
prior to transfer
 Limited 2+2 guaranteed transfer agreements
 No preference in articulation, admissions, nor
scholarship availability for associate degree
completers upon transfer
Best Practices in High-Performing States
Best Practices in High-Performing States
 Statewide course catalogs, systems to inform students
regarding transfer
 Statewide core curriculum guaranteed in transfer (common
general education core)
 Statewide common course numbering or mandated
compliance with course applicability systems
 Designated ombudsmen for transfer and student-friendly
appeals process
 Incentives (admissions, transfer and scholarship aid) to
students to complete associate degrees prior to transfer
Ivy Tech Efforts to Simplify Transfer
Ivy Tech Efforts to Simplify Transfer
 Decreasing variation in program curricula and core
textbooks
 Establishing a common general education core curriculum
(Reaching Higher goal)
 Converting all transfer agreements to statewide
agreements that guarantee transfer of at least 60 credit
hours that meet degree requirements (no more 2+3
agreements)
 Encouraging degree completion prior to transfer
 Participating in data systems to track students and
evaluate transfer student performance
Overcoming Myths with Data
 Myths
– Community
college
courses
Overcoming
Myths
with
Data are less rigorous
– Community college faculty are less qualified
– Transfer students do not do well academically at fouryear institutions
 Rebuttal
– Improved data on community college transfer
performance
– State data systems to track performance of transfers
– Data necessary to create a culture that supports
effective and efficient transfer