1 / 29

A Methodology for Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

A Methodology for Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses. Kelly Perez-Vergara, Mike Kramer, Kelly Patel and Martin Orlowski. 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.

blenda
Download Presentation

A Methodology for Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 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 • Students Submitted = 142,034 Returned = 133,057 Hit rate = 93.68%

  8. Methods: Receiving Institutions of Interest • National Student Clearinghouse: subsequent enrollment • Students Submitted = 142,034 Returned = 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

  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. Methods: Determining theTransferability Rate of Courses

  13. Methods: Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

  14. Methods: Determining the Transferability Rate of Courses

  15. Results: Transferability Rate of Courses • Overall averages • Compare course rates • Within a discipline • Between disciplines • Based on course characteristics

  16. Results: Overall averages

  17. Results: Compare course rates within a discipline

  18. Results: Compare course rates within a discipline

  19. Results: Compare course rates between disciplines

  20. Results: Compare course rates by course characteristics

  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

  23. Results: Compare course rates by characteristics

  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

More Related