A Methodology for Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

Kelly Perez-Vergara, Mike Kramer, Kelly Patel and Martin Orlowski

2

Three main points

We talk a lot about transfer equivalencies and the need to increase transferability of courses, but we don’t know the extent of the problem.

The data is available, but the analysis is missing.

Without analysis, our interventions are based on intuition rather than evidence.

3

Background

Oakland Community College– Five campuses (Oakland County)– Headcount 2011-12 = 57,924

4

Introduction

• Community college priority: transfer & completion• Standard measures: transfer rates, subsequent

completion rates

5

Introduction

• Community college priority: transfer & completion• Standard measures: transfer rates, subsequent

completion rates• Doyle (2006) on subsequent completion rates– All credits = 82% – Some credits = 42%

• New measure: extent to which courses transfer

6

Purpose

To determine the extent to which courses transfer to four-year institutions in which a large number of our students transfer.

7

Methods: Receiving Institutions of Interest

• National Student Clearinghouse: subsequent enrollment

• StudentsSubmitted = 142,034Returned = 133,057 Hit rate = 93.68%

8

Methods: Receiving Institutions of Interest

• National Student Clearinghouse: subsequent enrollment

• StudentsSubmitted = 142,034Returned = 133,057 Hit rate = 93.68%

• Number of subsequent enrollments @ 4-year 2012 = 7,755

• Number of subsequent enrollment anywhere 2012 = 13,332

9

Results: Receiving Institutions of Interest

‘Tier 1’ InstitutionBaker CollegeCentral Michigan UniversityDavenport UniversityEastern Michigan UniversityMadonna UniversityMichigan State UniversityOakland UniversityUniversity of Detroit MercyUniversity of Michigan- Central CampusUniversity of Michigan- DearbornUniversity of Michigan- FlintUniversity of PhoenixWalsh CollegeWayne State UniversityWestern Michigan University

10

Methods: Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

• Courses: all, excluding courses related to occupational program & special topics/internship courses

• Michigan Transfer Network & institutional websites

11

Methods: Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

• Courses: all, excluding courses related to occupational program & special topics/internship courses

• Michigan Transfer Network & institutional websites

• Coding scheme– Equivalent course– General credit– No credit

12

Equivalent Course ExamplesTransferring From: Transferring To:

Subject Course Credits Subject Course Course Title CreditsGeneral Credit

Waived Credits

MAT 1100 4 MATH 100 Basic Algebra 4 0 0MAT 1580 MATH 143 Intro to Probability & Stats MAT 1150 3 MAT 140 Intermediate Algebra 3 1SLS 1100 2 ASL 113 ASL Fingerspelling 1 MAT 1540 4 MAT 111 College Algebra 3 1

Methods: Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

13

Methods: Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

General Credit ExamplesTransferring From: Transferring To:

Subject Course Credits Subject Course Course Title CreditsGeneral Credit

Waived Credits

MAT 1070 BUSG Business General Credit 3 N/AMAT 1540 4 MTH EL.NS MTH EL-NAT SCI 4 MAT 1210 MTH 100.0 General Credit MAT 2710 4 MAA 8888 MA Approved Elective 4 SLS 1001 2 AACR GEN General Credit 2 SLS 2150 4 ASL CRED ASL Credit 3 ANT 2750 3 HCT GE* Historical/Cultural Trads. 3

14

Methods: Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

No Credit ExamplesTransferring From: Transferring To:

Subject Course Credits Subject Course Course Title CreditsGeneral Credit

Waived Credits

MAT 1045 4 NO CRED No Credit 0 ARB 1530 ARB 1XX Validation by Proficiency Exam

15

Results: Transferability Rate of Courses

• Overall averages• Compare course rates– Within a discipline– Between disciplines– Based on course characteristics

16

Results: Overall averages

Average number of institutions that accept courses for credit

Number of Courses

Average # (%) of Institutions that Accept Courses for Any Credit

Average # (%) of Institutions that Accept Courses as Equivalent

CoursesAll courses 306 10 (69) 5 (36)

17

Results: Compare

course rates within a

discipline

18

Results: Compare course rates within a discipline

19

Results: Compare course rates between disciplines

Subset of disciplines

Discipline

Average % institutions

accepting for equivalent credit

# courses

German 77% 2Chemistry 68% 4Political Science 65% 4Philosophy 61% 5Music 25% 29Art 24% 38Journalism 20% 5Woodworking 13% 2Gerontology 10% 4Early Childhood Development 2% 6Mental Health/Social Work 2% 7

20

Results: Compare course rates by course characteristics

Average number of institutions that accept courses for credit

Number of Courses

Average # (%) of Institutions that Accept Courses for Any Credit

Average # (%) of Institutions that Accept Courses as Equivalent

CourseAll courses 306 10 (69) 5 (36)

GE courses 173 11 (73) 7 (47)

All other courses 133 10 (64) 3 (23)

21

Results: Compare course rates by course characteristics

• General education courses versus all others• Benchmark = 47% (equivalent credit)– Below = 199 courses– At or above = 107 courses

22

Results: Compare course rates by characteristics

Average number of institutions that accept courses for credit

Number of Courses

Average # (%) of Institutions that Accept Courses for Any Credit

Average # (%) of Institutions that Accept Courses as Equivalent

CoursesAll courses 306 10 (69) 5 (36)

GE courses 173 11 (73) 7 (47)

All other courses 133 10 (64) 3 (23)

MACRAO courses 113 12 (81) 8 (53)

All other GE courses 60 9 (59) 5 (35)

23

Results: Compare course rates by characteristics

Comparison of general education requirements at our institution and MACRAO requirements

Institutional General Education MACRAO

RequirementsMinimum #

credits RequirementsMinimum #

creditsCommunication/English 6 English 6Fine Arts/Humanities 3 Fine Arts/Humanities 8Mathematics/Science 3 Mathematics/Science 8Social Science 6 Social Science 8Physical Education 3

Total 21 Total 30

24

Conclusions

• Course transfer rates– Previously non-standard or anecdotal– New method adds reliability & validity• Focused interventions, change is measurable

25

Limitations

• NSC data limitations• Manual coding of transferability• Courses coded as no credit due to lack of

information • Credit applicable to degree requirements• Transferability changes more frequently than

we can update it

26

Future Directions

• Near future– Track progress for efforts to increase

transferability– Update information annually and compare– Utilize similar process for evaluating newly

proposed courses– Align our courses with what is offered at the 4

year colleges, in terms of 100 & 200 level courses

27

Future Directions

• Ultimately– Make this methodology obsolete by exchanging

standardized datasets with 4-year schools

28

Three main points

We talk a lot about transfer equivalencies and the need to increase transferability of courses, but we don’t know the extent of the problem.

The data is available, but the analysis is missing.

Without analysis, our interventions are based on intuition rather than evidence.

29

Questions?

krperezv@oaklandcc.edu