The Transfer Indicator - files.eric.ed.gov

1 DOCUMENT RESUMEED 345 806JC 920 290 AUTHORC ohen, Arthur Transfer Council on Education, Washington, Center for Academic Achievement AGENCYFord Foundation, New York, DATEFeb TYPEC ollected Works - Serials (022) -- Reports -Descriptive (141)JOURNAL CITT ransfer Working Papers; v2 n2 Feb 1991 EDRS PRICEMF01/PC01 Plus *College Credits; College Role; *College TransferStudents; Community Colleges; Definitions;*Educational Mobility; Higher Education; PriorLearning; *Research Methodology; *Research Problems; Transfer Policy; Two Year Colleges; *Two Year CollegeStudentsIDENTIFIERSC entel for the Study of Community Colls CA; *TransferRateWaSTRACTI nconsistencies in the definition of Transfer fromtwo-year to four-year institutions and in the calculation of thetransfer rate have given rise to incongruous findings. For example,one researcher in 1989 reported a Transfer rate of less than 12% forthe colleges in Illinois at the same time that the Chancellor'sOffice of the California Community Colleges found a Transfer rateexceeding 42% for the California colleges.

2 Taking into accountimperatives based upon the enrollment and Transfer patterns of thecolleges' heterogeneous student body, a consistent Transfer indicatorcan be achieved by defining potential Transfer students as all thoseentering in a given year who have no prior college experience, whostay at the community college long enough to complete at least 12college-credit units, and who take one or more classes at theuniversity within 4 years after original college entry. During fall1989, the Center for the Study of Community Colleges (CSCC) invitedresearchers from a broad sample of community colleges nationwide toprovide data according to this definition, and 47 institutions from16 states complied. The study revealed that just under 50% of thestudents entering with no prior college experience in the Fall of1984 had completed 12 or more units within the ensuing 4 years.

3 Ofthat group, 23% had taken classes at a university. In 1990, CSCC again asked the colleges to grovide data on their transfers, and 68complied; 48% of the students entering in fall 1985 with no priorcollege experience had earned at least 12 credits, and 24% of themhad transferred. (JMC)**Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made2*from the original document.**THE NATIONAL CENTERFOR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTAND Transfer "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BYJ .EatohTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC).-WORKING PAPERSVOLUME 2, NUMBER 2 FEBRUARY , ,MiliaimmEm=1".. "mowThe Transfer IndicatorbyArthur M. DEPARTMENT Of EDUCATIONO tttce M Education& Research and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)0 This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or oicianizafionoriginating itfAilinor changes have been made to 1mi:wovereproduction QualityPoints of view or opinions stated in Ms docu-ment do not necessarily represent officialOEM position or polityA PROGRAM OF THE AMERICAN COMM.

4 ON EDWA71 ONSPCWSORED BY THE FORD MUNDATIONThe National Center for Academic Achievement & Transfer (202)939-97152 BEST COPY ,IN/THE NATIONAL CENTERFOR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTAND TRANSFERWORKING PAPERSVOLUME 2, NUMBER 2 FEBRUARY mvMil&.mminiiiiiirMIIJ=1MI"..ramftvmINir viilWvvDefining a Transfer Indicator enablesthe community college to describeits achievements andquantify its successes inan understandable way. The following isan update of a presentationto the American Association of Communityand Junior Colleges' 1990 AnnualConvention. provides a compellingargument for the community college to beginand/or continue topursue research efforts as they focuson Transfer . Dr. Arthur M. Cohen is director of theCenteror the Study of Cornmwtity Colleges at theUniversity of California. Los Angeles. Heis anational scholar and leading researcheron issues related to community S Baton DirtxtrMMTThe Transfer IndicatorbyArthur M.

5 CohenThe community colleges ofAmerica provide five basic educativeservices for theirstudents-- preparation for tram ter, preparation for jobentty, literacy development,careerupgrading, and personai interestactivities. The emphasis placedon one or another of thesefunctions has shiftedover time and in different locales becauseof student interests andabilities, state policies and fundingpriorities, and patterns of institutionalleadership. But allthe services have remainedintact and most collegespursue them all with greateror PROGRAM OF THE AMERICANCOMM. ON EDUCATIONSPONSORED BY THE FORD MUNDATICNThe National Center forAcademic Achievement & Transfer (202)939-9715 How well are thecolltges doing? Attemptsto generate aplausible response stumble onissues of special-grouppolitics, philosophies ofeducation, theories ofhuman development,desired societaldirections, and other areasof interpretation.

6 How arethe colleges doingrelative to what?For which of theirmultiple constituencies?In which of their servicecomponents?Each of the colleges'educative services shouldhave its own achievementindicator. Andeach indicatorshould be based on aneasily understooddefinition, using data that arefeasiblycollected. To define anIndicator is not to deny theimportance of thecolleges' other is to help descrilxone of thefunctions, but to describeit so that it can bereadilyunderstood by the publicand is to offer a responseto the critics who. intheabsence of valid data,rely on their prejudices todeny the communitycolleges' importance. It isto help the professionalsin the colleges to besensitive to their Transfer RateIndioatorTransfer rates have beenreported from time to time,but no valid conclusions canbedrawn because thedata are too sparse, andthe definitions of Transfer arenot maintain data onthe number of theirstudents who Transfer .

7 Manycollege leaders fearthe untoward comparisonsthat are often made betweenthe progress of theirstudents and thosewho begin asfreshmen in the selectivefour-year , the collegesreceive fundingbased on the number ofstudents who take classes, not onthe number whocomplete programs or go onto further education;hence, there are no incentivesto organizesystems to produce the definitions of Transfer arenot a high schoolgraduate who takes asummer class at acommunity college beforeentering a university inthe fall a Transfer ? Is auniversity student whotakes classes at a localcommunity college a Transfer ?How many unitsmust a communitycollege student completebefore matriculating at auniversity to be called atransfer? How should thosestudents who stop outof the education systemfor a few yearsbefore transferring becounted? If the universitiesaccepted as transfers onlythose studentswho had completed associatedegree requirements, thedefinitional question wouldbe at leastpartially resolved.

8 But theissue of what to use asthe denominator incalculating a transferrate would remain inronsistent definitionsgive rise to incrediblydiverse (1989) reported a Transfer rateof less than 12 percentfor the colleges in Illinois atthe sametime that the Chancellor'sOffice of the CaliforniaCommunity Colleges (1989)found a transferrate exceeding 42 percentfor the California the two systems thatdisparate? Ofcourse not. Eachreporter used a differentmode of calculation. Flahertydivided the number ofstudents transferring to anIllinois college or university in1988 by the totalenrollment in"pre-baccalaureate programs" duringthe previous fall. TheChancellor's Office divided thenumber transferring in 1988-89by the "number ofCalifornia high school graduateswhoentered community collegesthree years prior to Transfer "(p. 12).Other ways of estimatingtransfer rates have been and Weiler (1989)surveyed the students who hadbeen enrolled in 28 colleges inspring term, 1988, butwho hadnot returned in the fall,and found that 26 percentof those who had taken six or morecredits atthe community college hadmatriculated at a four-yearcollege or university.

9 TheWashingtonState Board for CommunityColleges (1989) surveyed a sampleof bachelors degree recipientsand found that 48 percent hadtransferred credits from aWashington community Center for EducationStatistics analyzed the transcriptsof the students who hadparticipated in the NationalLongitudinal Study of the HighSchool Class of 1972 andestimated that 20 percent ofthose receiving bachelor'sdegrees had attended acommunitycollege at some time (Adelman,1987). Palmer (1986) listedseveral other single-collegeandstate-wide studies that hadsimilarly varinnt definitionsand data bases, hencewidelydifferent rates of "V for an IndicatorCan an acceptable Indicator of Transfer rates be developed? Thatseems a plausible taskif certain imperatives are attended to. The definition shouldnot use as its denominator allentrants, because that figure includes students who already have should not includeonly those students intending to Transfer , because dataon student intentions are unreliable.

10 Itshould not include only the students just out of high school,because many students stop out ofschooling and return to the community college when theyare older. It should not be based onstudents who take only academic courses, because occupationaleducation contributes manytransfers. It should not include only the full-time students,because part-time students accountfor two-thirds of the enrollment andmany of the should not include associatedegree recipients only, because most of the transfers doso without obtaining a degree from thecommunity college. It should not include sophomores only. because halfthe students transferbefore obtaining as many as 30 units at the community should the definition include? The denominatorshould include only thosestudents who take college-credit classes because most remedialand non-credit work is non-transferable.