Rethinking Transfer Traditions That No Longer Serve Students

As the holiday season officially kicks off with Thanksgiving and then we enter winter holidays territory, you may find yourself feeling what I think many people feel during this time of year…

Stressed. 

Often, that stress is rooted in what we feel like we have to do because it’s tradition. When I was growing up, this sentiment was perhaps the most obvious in my family during holiday meal prep. The hours we invested in shopping, multi-day meal planning, cooking, and cleanup usually left us feeling “as cuddly as a cactus” by the time we sat down for dinner.

But then, when I was in college, we had a collective family realization—we don’t actually have to do any of this. None of us enjoy cooking. None of us actually like turkey (in fact, we all have pretty different food preferences). What we do enjoy is spending time together as a family and reflecting on what makes us feel thankful. So, why don’t we just…go out to eat for holiday meals?

We did, and it was a total game-changer for our family that quickly became our new tradition.

Reevaluating the Traditions in Our Systems

This week, I have been thinking about the “traditions” of higher education, particularly related to transfer systems. Like the traditional holiday meals in my family, there are some transfer policies and practices that have remained in place not because they are the most effective or student-friendly, but because they are “what has always been done.” 

Because transfer pathways from 2-year to 4-year institutions serve as such a crucial access point to higher education for so many students, it is important to continuously examine our transfer policies and practices. Doing so allows us to identify those that are still serving students, as well as those that should be reimagined or eliminated entirely. As we enter the season of gratitude, my reflections on the “transfer traditions” I have encountered in my transfer work across the country are summarized here. 

Transfer Traditions to Keep

Keeping Faculty at the Center of Curricular Decisions 

Multiple institutional departments are involved in the transfer process (e.g. admissions, registrar, advising, etc.), but faculty should have the final say in decisions related to the curriculum. This includes designating degree requirements and determining course equivalencies in transfer.

To build upon this tradition, provide opportunities for cross-institutional faculty collaboration, particularly among 2-year and 4-year institutions. Transfer pathways work best when they are built in partnership, not as separate associate and bachelor degree programs that then must be pieced together (and likely result in lost credits for transfer students). 

Implementing State-Level Policies that Facilitate Efficient Transfer 

Education Commission of the States (2022) identifies four policies that support student transfer: common course numbering, transferable core of lower division courses, guaranteed transfer of an associate’s degree, and reverse transfer. These policies foster consistency across institutions and systems, making the transfer process easier for students to understand and navigate. 

State leaders and policymakers in states that have not implemented any of the four policies identified above should advocate for their adoption. Use quantitative and qualitative data related to transfer student outcomes to make the case for student-ready transfer policy reform.  

Creating Local Transfer Partnerships that Build Upon State- and System-Level Transfer Structures

There are numerous examples of strong regional transfer partnerships between 2- and 4-year institutions. In my home state of Florida, two examples that come to mind are Connect4Success at Florida International University and Direct Connect to UCF at the University of Central Florida. Partnerships like these provide community college students seeking to transfer with additional support throughout the transfer process (e.g. guaranteed admission, dedicated advising, and access to campus events and resources at both the 2-year and 4-year partner institutions), thereby increasing the likelihood that they will transfer successfully.

Institutions seeking to establish similar transfer partnerships should review their data to determine where the majority of their transfer students transfer from/to. Reach out to those institutions and explore the benefits both institutions will experience by streamlining and bolstering the transfer process in partnership. 

Transfer Traditions to Retire

Convoluted Transfer Pathways and Course Equivalency Processes 

Too often, students complete their associate degree and apply to transfer, only to find out that they didn’t take the right math course or their communications course won’t apply to their bachelor’s degree requirements (see The Two-Letter Word That Costs Transfer Students Billions by SRS CEO, Sarah Ancel). As a result, students end up wasting time and money on lost credits and repeated coursework. Misalignment between 2- and 4-year program requirements contributes to this issue, as does unclear and/or incomplete student-facing communications about transfer. 

What to do instead: Institutions should work with their regional transfer partners to create clear transfer pathway program maps that specify what courses a student needs to take, and in what sequence, to successfully transfer and have all of their credits apply toward bachelor’s degree requirements. Equip advisors with these maps and post them prominently on institution websites. This removes the guesswork from the transfer process for students. 

Institution-First Policies 

Policies that benefit the institution but penalize transfer students need to be reevaluated. This includes policies like excess credit hour surcharges, arbitrary limits on transfer credit, and institution-specific prerequisites with no course equivalencies. 

What to do instead: While there may have been valid reasons behind the initial implementation of these policies, institutions should review their policies from a transfer student-centered lens to see if enhancements can be made. Including current and prospective transfer students in the policy review and revision process will ensure institutional policymakers understand the implications of current and proposed policies on the transfer student experience. 

Putting the Onus on Students for Transfer Issues

In an environment of decreasing postsecondary funding, the impending demographic cliff and enrollment decline, and a collective questioning of the value of a college degree, higher education professionals are constantly being asked to do more with less (or to justify their work entirely). However, even in the midst of these stressful times, we have to be mindful not to put the onus on students when they experience issues in the transfer process (e.g. “Students just don’t understand how to transfer,” “they don’t take the right courses,” “they change their majors too often,” etc.). Many of the issues students experience are a reflection on the system, not a failure on the part of the student. 

What to do instead: Change the system, not the student. Rather than expecting students to adapt to the higher education systems we establish, redesign transfer systems so that they are easy to navigate and result in the maximum award of credit in transfer. 

Happy Holidays from SRS!

The question is not whether we should have traditions—it’s whether those traditions serve the people at the table. As my family and I prepare for our holiday dinner reservations, I wish you and yours a restful and restorative holiday season!