The postsecondary education system is severely challenged by Academic Credit Portability both at the micro and macro levels. We are in a Catch-22 type dilemma. The underlying assumption on who has the responsibility to address the transfer process has generally rested with institutions. We expect every institution to provide better information on transfer policies and publish their course articulation agreements. We expect “feeder” schools (a.k.a. community colleges and other 2-year institutions) to prepare students for transfer to a baccalaureate institution and to guide their course selection accordingly.
Because institutions generally operate independently, the costs associated with transfer processing arise from the methods and procedures in enrollment and articulation. Traditional enrollment and registration processing assumes student and course data is internal, or within “the grasp of” systems managed by the institution. Transfer processing introduces a new wrinkle to this traditional model where data and methods to process rules and policies cross institution boundaries. Course data and prior academic progress is somewhat analogous to bank-account information, but today it is not as easily accessible.
At the macro level, some states have absorbed the transfer processing costs, which are concealed within the ever-increasing administrative budget of the state-funded institutions. The primary focus for improving transfer processing in a public-institution system is on making academic institutions accessible, open and transparent to the prospective student population. Once enrolled, student progress towards graduation has an impact on work-force development and tax revenues, and thus on the economy. Transfer outcomes can “bleed” across state lines, creating positive or negative flows of transfer students (“net migration”). This movement is challenging to states as they compete for the necessary human capital; to support their economic development objectives. Public institutions view the transfer of students and course credits differently than private and for-profit institutions, further complicating the equation.
The assumption that institutions can “go it alone” has been based on initiatives and new costs to help influence their policies and administrative practices. Some states have created common course numbering systems or attempted to build transfer policies for general education requirements. Others have created initiatives to develop transfer articulation agreements among collaborating institutions and to present “planning guides” to prospective students prior to their enrollment as transfers.
States and institutions are doing what they can to support transfers “in and out,” given access to tools they either build on their own or acquire. They often duplicate efforts, mapping course equivalencies and attempting to facilitate every transfer-student need, incrementally. The result: attempts to build ‘standalone’ or ‘regional’ solutions and to dedicate staff resources, further complicating processes and increasing costs. The intent is to make the process seamless and user friendly. However, the lack of process consistency, the lack of accurate data, the lack of a federated toolset to support collaboration, and a reluctance to tackle process improvements focused on serving both institutions and students make these investments counterproductive, because they are based on subjective, labor-intensive, and geographically-bound approaches.
The underlying assumption that institutions handle transfers “in and out” with internal processes is part of the problem. It is misleading to think that every institution has the resources and wherewithal to solve the transfer challenges they face internally, as well as the ones their student-consumers bring to them. Each institution’s education-mission framework is a lot like each country’s monetary policies, conversion rules, fees and methods of exchange; recognition of the complexities of inter-institution Academic Course Portability leads to the conclusion that we need a standard like the “international monetary fund” that equates courses in the context of their curriculums and/or learning outcomes.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Saturday, February 28, 2009
“Alma Mater” Is Being Replaced With “I Am Mobile”
Today, a majority of college students transfer at least once before earning their academic credential[1]. This is a phenomenon driven by fundamental changes in higher education. The high and ever-increasing cost of earning a degree is a factor; student preparation prior to enrollment is another. The unfulfilled expectations of students is yet another. We could develop a list of additional factors, but that is not the point of this paper. The student who graduates from high school and progresses through the first college they attend in four years—the “traditional college student”—is now the exception, not the rule. “Alma mater” is being replaced with “I am mobile.”
A large and growing number of students today typically compile academic credits from affordable junior colleges or community colleges (which may or may not result in a certificate or degree) or a growing array of online providers before attempting to transfer to, and graduate from, universities with a well-known brand. And, with the continued improvement in innovative, Web- accessible learning technologies -- from interactive gaming and simulation programs to automated guides -- geographic distances and institutional or international borders won’t matter anymore. Education is not, and has never really been, simply the result of going to classes and passing tests.
Courses that can satisfy graduation requirements can be offered by hundreds of institution “providers.” The growing number of course offerings and program opportunities delivered online will continue to shape how tech-savvy students use Internet resources to grasp and complete the requirements for the academic credentials they need, when they need them.
Today, however, there are significant obstacles limiting academic credit mobility. Twenty years ago, the banking system would only provide me with access to my account from their bank branches and tellers. Not until the advent of ATM’s and broad acceptance of my bank’s ‘debit’ card was I able to access my funds from any bank or financial institution. The ATM innovation has supported consumer mobility.
For today’s postsecondary students, the implication and implied warranty I call Academic Credit Mobility from the institutions they attend is as important as access to the checking and savings accounts managed by banks. Students represent tomorrow’s human capital and their academic credits are assets that help society monetize and leverage our past investment in learning. Let’s not inhibit Academic Credit Mobility. Let’s embrace it. Let’s recognize the need for this innovation, and utilize the best practices of business process improvement to overcome the obstacles; to support mobility from institution to institution and, eventually, from across the global postsecondary education enterprise.
[1] “The Road Less Traveled? Students Who Enroll in Multiple Institutions.” NCES Report 2005-157.
A large and growing number of students today typically compile academic credits from affordable junior colleges or community colleges (which may or may not result in a certificate or degree) or a growing array of online providers before attempting to transfer to, and graduate from, universities with a well-known brand. And, with the continued improvement in innovative, Web- accessible learning technologies -- from interactive gaming and simulation programs to automated guides -- geographic distances and institutional or international borders won’t matter anymore. Education is not, and has never really been, simply the result of going to classes and passing tests.
Courses that can satisfy graduation requirements can be offered by hundreds of institution “providers.” The growing number of course offerings and program opportunities delivered online will continue to shape how tech-savvy students use Internet resources to grasp and complete the requirements for the academic credentials they need, when they need them.
Today, however, there are significant obstacles limiting academic credit mobility. Twenty years ago, the banking system would only provide me with access to my account from their bank branches and tellers. Not until the advent of ATM’s and broad acceptance of my bank’s ‘debit’ card was I able to access my funds from any bank or financial institution. The ATM innovation has supported consumer mobility.
For today’s postsecondary students, the implication and implied warranty I call Academic Credit Mobility from the institutions they attend is as important as access to the checking and savings accounts managed by banks. Students represent tomorrow’s human capital and their academic credits are assets that help society monetize and leverage our past investment in learning. Let’s not inhibit Academic Credit Mobility. Let’s embrace it. Let’s recognize the need for this innovation, and utilize the best practices of business process improvement to overcome the obstacles; to support mobility from institution to institution and, eventually, from across the global postsecondary education enterprise.
[1] “The Road Less Traveled? Students Who Enroll in Multiple Institutions.” NCES Report 2005-157.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
