The Issue:

Transfer student success remains one of the most persistent challenges in higher education.  Recent research has shown that, while approximately 80% of community college students aspire to transfer and earn a bachelor’s degree (CCRC, 2015), only 14% of students entering community college in fall 2013 completed a bachelor’s degree within six years (National Student Clearinghouse, 2020).  These numbers are reflected by the national narrative on college transfer, which is variably described as a costly maze, a broken pipeline, or as Inside Higher Ed (2017) would have it: “The Bermuda Triangle of Credit Transfer” where “…transferring students are abused.”  As alarming as these results are, the problem is not new, nor has it escaped the attention and resources of the higher education sector.  Yet student outcomes have shown little improvement.  The question is not whether transfer remains a problem, but why it persists to such a degree despite extensive efforts to address it.

Not just about completion; it’s about equity

Transfer student success is inherently an equity issue. Improving transfer programs, policies, and process will increase completion rates and increase equitable access to higher education. In fact, transfer disproportionally impacts those students from lower socio-economic backgrounds. When credits are ’lost‘ in the transfer process or students get off track with their academic program, they end up having to take more credits than non-transfer students at an institution. When this happens, it costs students more money and more time to earn their degree. For those students supported through state and/or federal aid, it can also cause them to exhaust their support before finishing the degree. Inevitably, the result is that many students simply drop out as they can’t afford the added costs or time away from the workforce. 

NASH believes that university systems play a foundational role in improving equitable experiences (or pathways) and outcomes for student transfers

NASH members believe that successful student transfer initiatives support equitable access to, persistence through and completion of high-quality degree programs, and across student populations and demographics.  It is a part of our commitment to our TS3 initiative.

We also believe in putting students at the center of all transfer policies and practices with the goal of moving the needle on completion equitably.

We contend that lack of success in the reform efforts is due to a fundamental misalignment between how policymakers think students should move through higher education and how students actually do move through higher education. Recent research has demonstrated that students move multi-directionally between sectors (with many transferring to community colleges) and that a majority of transfer students never complete an associate’s degree before transferring to a four-year institution. Yet, most efforts to “fix” transfer focus on developing static and rigid 2+2 articulation agreements between a single dyad of two institutions.

The movement of students, and their earned credits, between colleges is inherently a system issue. And, systems are the nation’s best bet for improving transfer at scale.

Articulation agreements between two institutions may help. But the reality is that — with thousands of such arrangements between colleges and universities nationwide – transfer environments remain complex, difficult for students to navigate, and ultimately up to the discretion of the campuses involved.  Articulation agreements are also labor intensive for faculty and administrators to create and maintain and such agreements rarely reflect how students actually navigate higher education.

NASH members believe that university systems play a foundational role in improving student transfer and removing structural barriers by: mobilizing their size and scale to coordinate and foster collaboration, pathways and portability of credits across campuses; using data and analytics with a particular focus on identifying and closing equity gaps and improving student outcomes; rethinking curricula and support for transfer students; and by taking advantage of policy-making and –informing capacities at multiple levels (institutional, system, state and state agency, and federal).