Off the Beaten Path: Can Statewide Articulation Support Students Transferring in Nonlinear Directions?

Students who transfer between colleges risk losing credits and decreasing their chances of degree completion. Despite emerging evidence regarding the effectiveness of articulation agreements to address this challenge, it is unclear if these policies support nonlinear transfer pathways—including lateral transfer between 4-year colleges or reverse transfer to 2-year colleges. I use propensity score weighting to examine a statewide articulation agreement in Ohio that established universal credit acceptance for coursework affecting all transfers. Comparing students who completed universally transferrable courses with those who did not, I find no measurable difference in degree attainment among reverse transfers. But there is a positive association with bachelor's degree attainment among lateral transfers, which the findings suggest is related to academic major persistence.

Opportunity for all? The differential impacts of North Carolina’s revised comprehensive articulation agreement by race/ethnicity

Transfer articulation agreements are employed by institutions of higher education and state legislatures alike to improve transfer efficiency between two-year and four-year institutions. These agreements often aim both to increase transfer rates and baccalaureate degree completion and to decrease time to degree. Studies exploring the efficacy of articulation agreements find that, despite being successful at decreasing the number of excess credits students earned at graduation and at increasing baccalaureate degree completion, these policies often increase time to degree. While there is considerable research on articulation agreements, few studies have examined the differential impact of these policies on students of Color who, prior literature has shown, experience barriers to realizing their baccalaureate degree aspirations. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the impact of North Carolina’s statewide articulation agreement varied by a student’s racial/ethnic identity when examining two-year post-transfer baccalaureate degree completion, time-to-degree completion, and excess credit accumulation.

Policy implementation as a tool for advancing equity in community college

This special issue examines the role of policy implementation in the community college context and the ways reforms are enacted to achieve or advance educational equity. In this introduction, we provide an overview of policy implementation, its current landscape within higher education, and the role it can and must serve for community colleges as a tool to advance equity efforts. The articles in this special issue provide a well-rounded overview of policy implementation efforts across various states and institutions. Authors examine promise programs, equity initiatives, articulation agreements, federally funded support programs, and race-conscious implementation. The community college context serves as a critical site of inquiry given that almost half of the undergraduate population is enrolled at a community college. Therefore, the following articles explore how to leverage policy implementation as a tool toward more equitable outcomes.

Exploring Influences of Policy Collisions on Transfer Student Access: Perspectives From Street-Level Bureaucrats

States and institutions increasingly rely on articulation agreements to streamline vertical transfer, although the effectiveness of those policies on transfer student outcomes remains unclear. To better understand this effectiveness, we explored a partnership between the College of Engineering at a mid-Atlantic research university and two community colleges located within the same state. We interviewed engineering faculty and academic advisors (i.e., the street-level bureaucrats who implement policy) to explore how an articulation agreement influences processes and policies related to coursework transfer. Our results revealed complexities in the implementation of the articulation policy as it collides with an enrollment management university policy that differs in purpose. Their collision has challenging implications for transfer students and for the faculty and advisors responsible for interfacing with those students.