Transfer Student Task Force
UMKC
Co-chairs:
Virginia Miller, School of Education (January-December, 2011)
Wayne Vaught, College of Arts & Sciences (January-June, 2011)
Kati Toivanen, College of Arts & Sciences (July - December, 2011)
Members:
Susan Arreguin, JCCC
Debbie Beard, Financial Aid, UMKC
Sydney Rogers Beeler, A&S, UMKC
Becky Bergman, A&S, UMKC
Larry Bunce, Institutional Research, UMKC
Cheryl Carpenter-Davis, MCC
Amy Cole, Registration & Records, UMKC
Angie Cottrell, Student Affairs, UMKC
Sandy Gault, ISAO, UMKC
Sara Gillham, Admissions, UMKC
Jane Greer, A&S, UMKC
Judy Jellison, Nursing, UMKC
Steve LaNasa, Donnelly College
Lisa Minis, MCC
Whitney Molloy, SCE, UMKC
Gene Pegler, Bloch, UMKC
Lynda Plamann, SBS, UMKC
Tom Poe, A&S, UMKC
Lisa Power, Financial Aid, UMKC
Joe Seabrooks, MCC
Kami Thomas, Bloch, UMKC
W.C. Vance, Admissions, UMKC
Sue Vartuli, SOE, UMKC
Asia Williams, Bloch, UMKC
Project Managers
Jennifer DeHaemers, SAEM, UMKC
Cindy Pemberton, Provost's Office, UMKC
January - December, 2011
Context
As a component of the UMKC Strategic Plan implementation addressing Goal 1 (place student
success at the center), the Transfer Student Task Force was convened in January 2011 with the
following charge: This task force will work to develop a list of issues and concerns related to
seamless processes in transfer student recruitment, retention and bachelor’s degree
completion in a broad sense and to make recommendations on initiatives and solutions to the
issues and concerns.
The task force met beginning early in 2011 on the following dates throughout the year:
January 21
February 18
March 4
March 18
May 6
July 15
August 12
September 23
October 21
November 18
December 2
After initial broad fact-finding and data review, the task force divided into five focused
subgroups in July and initiated in-depth work that led to final recommendations that are
incorporated into this report. Additional documents available for review as background to the
report are agendas and minutes from all the meetings as well as two quarterly reports that
were shared with the UMKC Strategic Plan Implementation team.
General Recommendations
1. Establish an ongoing Transfer Student Oversight Committee.
Priority # 1: Critical
The Transfer Student Task Force worked diligently to identify many ways to ease the transition
for transfer students and to help them succeed at UMKC. The group recommends that this
broad representative body be turned into a new ongoing Transfer Student Oversight
Committee. Roles suggested for the Committee are:
2



Providing ongoing review and oversight of implementing the approved
recommendations in this report
Addressing new issues as they inevitably emerge
Providing a forum for the campus to voice concerns about transfer students
The group could convene quarterly, and a special e-mail address could be created for collecting
feedback and concerns from students, staff and faculty. Feedback/concerns would be reviewed
at meetings and addressed as deemed appropriate.
2. Hire a full-time Transfer Coordinator to be housed in the Transfer Center proposed by the
Student Success Center Committee.
Priority #1: Critical
Various recommendations in this report mention the need for a full-time position with
responsibilities for all aspects of the transfer student experience. Roles suggested for the
position are:









Providing staff support to the Transfer Student Oversight Committee
Overseeing the maintenance of transfer agreements
Overseeing the development of new transfer agreements. ISAO would continue to
provide coordination for the maintenance and development of international transfer
agreements.
Serving as an on-campus liaison with area feeder schools to UMKC relating to transfer
issues.
Providing guidance and support for the Director of New Student Programs (for
orientation and other programs) in programming related to transfer students
Serving as a resource in advising issues related to transfer students, both when they are
prospective students and when they join the UMKC community
Serving as the advocate for transfer students, conveying their value to UMKC
Working jointly with AU Life Coaches/Social Workers to meet transfer students’ basic
needs
Providing staff support to the Transfer Student Advisory Group
Transfer Student Issues Identified in Order of Importance
A summary list below groups recommmendations on the basis of their priority. The individual
recommendations are not ranked within the category, but are presented in the order they
appear later in the document in detail. In addition, the task force identified the following three
areas in most pressing need of attention:
1. Web site search engine and web navigation
3
2. Articulation Agreements
3. Orientation programming and the creation of a student check list
Priority # 1: Critical
• Maintaining Current Transfer Articulation Agreements between MCC, JCCC, and KCKCC, and
Others, p. 5
• Web Communication and Navigation: Major Maps and the UMKC Website, p. 8
• Mandatory Orientation vs. Voluntary Orientation, p. 9
• Staffing, p. 11
• Transfer Student Scholarship Opportunities, p. 16
• Access and Navigation to Admissions Web Page, p. 22
• UMKC Website Search Tool, p. 23
• Admitted Transfer Students Tab (website), p. 24
• Conveying the Value of Transfer Students (website), p. 24
• Addressing Students’ Basic Needs, p. 25
Priority # 2: Important
• Coordination of New Articulation Agreements, p. 6
• Maintaining Current UMKC Articulation Agreements for International Memoranda of
Understanding (MOU), p. 7
• Maintaining Current Course Equivalencies, p. 7
• Academic Advising during Orientation, p. 10
• Policies and Procedures for Creating a Student-Centric Environment for Transfer Students, p.
14
• Addressing Ongoing Transfer Student Needs, p. 28
4
Priority # 3: Helpful
• Online vs. On-Campus Orientation, p. 13
• Clarifying Transfer Terminology, p. 24
• Success is More than One Issue, p. 28
Subgroup Reports and Recommendations
I. Transfer Agreements, p. 5
II. Transfer Orientation, p. 9
III. Transfer Policies and Procedures, p. 14
IV. Transfer Student Website, p. 22
V. Transfer Student Success, p. 25
I. Transfer Agreements
Issue 1: Maintaining Current Transfer Articulation Agreements between MCC, JCCC, and KCKCC,
and Others
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: Articulation agreements exist, but may become outdated without regular
oversight.
Action 1:
Develop storage arrangement for prior articulation agreements.
Timeline: March 31, 2012
Responsible party: Student Affairs, Records and Registration
Resource implications: Staff time
5
Action 2:
Create a strategy for regularly approving and updating articulation agreements.
Timeline: Annually by June 30
Responsible party: Academic Units/Departments approve or update. Process currently
coordinated by Admissions and should transition to Transfer Center once operational.
Resource implications: A full-time person who has articulation as his/her sole
responsibility is needed. This staff member would also be in charge of aiding the process
of creating new articulation agreements.
Action 3:
Add valid dates and catalog year to all articulation agreements.
Timeline: Annually in conjunction with the University catalog updates
Responsible party: Verifying validity-Admissions, updating posted online agreementsRecords and Registration
Resource implications: Staff time, preferably assigned to a designated new articulation
position at UMKC
(Vice Chancellor’s Office sends a request to AU liaisons; these changes would be due
after catalog changes are due.)
Issue 2: Coordination of New Articulation Agreements
Priority # 2: Important
Action 1:
New articulation agreements should be coordinated by Admissions, and eventually the new
Transfer Center, as part of a University effort.
Timeline: As needed. Community College or AU will notify Admissions of new
agreement or update to existing agreement. Admissions will check across the University
to update other articulation agreements and see if additional AU’s would like to create
any new agreements when opportunities to do so arise.
Responsible party: Admissions, transitioning to Transfer Center once open
Resource implications: This effort would be best handled by a full-time person who has
articulation as his/her sole responsibility and is able to collaborate across AU’s to handle
as a university effort.
6
Issue 3: Maintaining Current UMKC Articulation Agreements for International Memoranda of
Understanding (MOU)
Priority # 2: Important
Current status: Articulation agreements for international Memoranda of Understanding are
not regularly updated.
Action 1:
Develop storage arrangement for prior articulation agreements.
Timeline: March 31, 2012
Responsible party: Records and Registration
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 2:
Create a strategy for regularly approving and updating articulation agreements.
Timeline: Annually by June 30
Responsible party: Academic Units/Departments, coordinated by ISAO
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 3:
Add valid dates and catalog year to all international articulation agreements.
Timeline: Annually in conjunction with the University catalog updates
Responsible party: Verifying validity-ISAO, updating online agreements, updating
posted online agreements-Records and Registration
Resource implications: Staff time
Issue 4: Maintaining Current Course Equivalencies
Priority # 2: Important
Current status: We have course equivalencies, and they are accessible through the website.
There is no systematic approach to updating them. They are updated when there is a need for
an individual course to be evaluated.
7
Action 1:
Verify UMKC’s current Top 10 feeder institutions for the purpose of U-Select.
Timeline: March 31, 2012
Responsible party: Records and Registration
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 2:
Update and add course equivalencies, course by course, in the database for UMKC’s Top 10
feeder institutions identified above for the purpose of U-Select.
Timeline: December 1, 2012
Responsible party: Initiated in Records and Registration, coordinated in Academic Units
by unit coordinators, evaluations made in Academic Departments by faculty. Records
and Registration updates all entries in the system upon recommendations from units.
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 3:
Course equivalency update/expansion plan is created based on the experience of evaluating the
Top 10 institutions in 2012. The cycle to consider would be every 5 years, and the updating
would be implemented regularly based on curricular designations (each UMKC
discipline/Department would be addressed every 5 years).
Timeline: May 1, 2013
Responsible party: Registration and Records, AU coordinators
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 4:
Course equivalency update/expansion plan initiated.
Timeline: December 1, 2013
Responsible party: Initiated in Records and Registration, coordinated in Academic Units
by unit coordinators, evaluations made in Academic Departments by faculty. Records
and Registration updates all entries in the system upon recommendations from units.
Resource implications: Staff time
Issue 5: Web Communication and Navigation: Major Maps and the UMKC Website
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: We have major maps, but some do not contain links to Departments where the
majors are housed. Most academic department pages do not contain links to Admissions
8
(inquiry forms) or the UMKC application form. Inquiry information from prospective students
investigating UMKC online is not being collected effectively, and online visitors are not easily
able to navigate between helpful resources.
Action 1:
Add department links to all Major Maps.
Timeline: March 31, 2012
Responsible party: Records and Registration
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 2:
Add links to Admissions page for New Students, Request Info link, and Apply to UMKC link from
each Department/College web page.
Timeline: March 31, 2012
Responsible party: Academic Units/Departments coordinated by Academic Unit
Recruitment Liaisons
Resource implications: Staff time
II. Transfer Orientation
Issue 1: Mandatory Orientation vs. Voluntary Orientation
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: Currently, UMKC does not require a new student orientation for transfer
students. However, we have seen a growing population of transfer students participating in
voluntary orientation sessions.
Our transfer students are welcomed by multiple entry points at the institution and are missing a
checklist or path of offices to visit, resources that all students should know, financial and
advising requirements, and more. Furthermore, survey data from Johnson County Community
College indicate that transfer students are interested in getting more engaged with the campus,
meeting students, and participating in campus tours.
9
As half of our entering students are transfer students, we are recommending the
implementation of a mandatory orientation program for transfer students.
Action 1:
Move from a voluntary to a mandatory orientation for transfer students.
Timeline: Decision made by March 31, 2012
Responsible parties: Office of Admissions; Office of Student Involvement; Division of
Student Affairs and Enrollment Management
Resource implications: Decision itself does not have implications
Action 2:
Adapt current model of transfer students’ orientation to focus intentionally on transfer needs
and offer it as a separate program from that for entering domestic freshmen.
Timeline: Targeted transfer program would be developed in 2012 and initiated in
Summer 2013.
Responsible parties: Office of Admissions; Office of Student Involvement; Division of
Student Affairs and Enrollment Management; Academic Units
Resource or budget implications: Resources and budget will be doubled if programs for
transfers and freshmen are not combined. This will necessitate increasing the fee
structure for orientations.
Action 3:
Create a checklist for transfer students to assist in the navigation of their matriculation to
UMKC.
Timeline: March 31, 2012
Responsible party: Office of Admissions
Resource implications: Staff time
Issue 2: Academic Advising during Orientation
Priority #2: Important
Current status: Academic advising during transfer orientations has been an issue over the past
two years. Anecdotal evidence suggests that students who have already received advising do
not engage, and sometimes do not even attend after checking in, with orientation. There is a
clear bifurcation between students who have not been advised versus those who have, and the
10
students who have not are much more participatory with the orientation sessions and
programs.
Action 1:
Place an orientation hold on all transfer student accounts until after an orientation session is
completed.
Action 2:
Hold spaces or sections for transfer students throughout the summer so class offerings are
available.
Action 3:
Transfer students only will engage in the advising sessions—family members will no longer be
allowed to participate in advising appointments. This action would also require programming
geared towards families during this advising time.
Action 4:
Require students to register in advance for orientation programs so advisors have proper
documentation and files for transfer students. If students are not registered, they would be
allowed to participate in the program but would need to come back for advising at a later date.
Action 5:
Train peer advisors to assist with general advising for Arts and Sciences. Each student would
see a professional staff advisor after meeting with the peer advisor.
Timeline: In partnership with the first issue, this initiative would be developed in 2012
and initiated for transfer students entering in Fall 2013.
Responsible parties: Office of Admissions; Office of Student Involvement; Registration
and Records; Academic Units
Resource or budget implications: Creation of a hold on student accounts (technology)
and personnel to be able to make exceptions for orientation holds.
Issue 3: Staffing
Priority #1: Critical
Current Status: As of Fall 2011, UMKC does not have a full-time position dedicated to
developing our new student programs. Over the past seventeen years, the Office of Admissions
11
and the Office of Student Involvement have partnered to spearhead orientation logistics,
registration, and program execution. During that time, the number of freshman students
participating in orientation has more than doubled and the number of transfer students
attending optional orientation sessions has nearly tripled. In August 2011, Student Involvement
was able to hire a Coordinator for Student Organizations and Orientation. However,
orientation is only half of this position’s responsibilities.
Action 1:
Create job descriptions for and hire a Director of New Student Programs and an Administrative
Associate who will be fully dedicated to making changes to the current orientation model.
Action 2:
Utilize additional staffing to help create a Parent and Family Council, Parents Weekend, and Fall
Orientation/Convocation.
Action 3:
Charge all incoming students a New Student Programs fee to pay for additional staffing (and
potentially a revenue source for University College). This fee would cover orientation costs (for
both transfer and freshmen students) and would be set in the range of $50-$75. Guests at the
orientations (a limit of 2) would pay an additional $25 each to cover their costs.
Action 4:
Cashiers and Collections Office will be responsible for charging the fee as part of overall fee
package, which would have the ability to be covered by financial aid.
Timeline: A new staffing model would be explored and hiring would take place in Spring
2012 to help develop new initiatives for freshman and transfer orientation.
Responsible parties: Office of Student Involvement; Division of Student Affairs and
Enrollment Management; Office of the Provost; Human Resources; Cashiers and
Collections Office
Resource or budget implications: This recommendation would look at adding two fulltime staff members which greatly affect the budget of the orientation program. The
recommendations we would like to implement would not be able to be implemented
with our current staff structure.
12
Issue 4: Online vs. On-Campus Orientation
Priority # 3: Helpful
Current status: Transfer students do not currently have an online orientation program.
Transfer students must voluntarily attend a transfer orientation offered once in the spring
semester or offered twice in the summer. The only online orientation offered by the University
for new students is through the International Student Affairs Office.
13
Action 1:
While on-campus is the preference for all transfer orientations, an online module can be
created for students who are admitted after orientation sessions are concluded for the
summer. UMKC would select an online orientation external vendor or create a home-grown
system.
Action 2:
Registration and Records would lock down the orientation site for students and would only
open it for students who were not able to attend an orientation on-campus. Director of New
Student Programs would approve exceptions as needed for extreme situations.
Action 3:
Implement an August 1st deadline for all first-time college and transfer students for fall
admission. This deadline will aim to avoid students missing on-campus orientation sessions
and to create a smoother entry into the University as well as less demand on departments and
advisors.
Action 4:
Students would still need to speak with an academic advisor, even if orientation was completed
in an online format.
Timeline: Develop or select in 2012; implement in Fall 2013.
Responsible parties: Registration and Records; Cashiers and Collections; Financial Aid;
Office of Admissions; Office of Student Involvement; Academic Units
Resource or budget implications: Resources would include the development of an
online orientation program (technology) and the personnel in order to create and
execute the online program.
III. Transfer Policies and Procedures
Issue 1: Policies and Procedures for Creating a Student-Centric Environment for Transfer
Students
Priority # 2: Important
Current status: There are concerns regarding how flexible and transparent we are with our
transfer students, including how we handle prospective students (visits and advising),
14
communication of policies (or lack of), and consistency in those policies and procedures among
campus offices and departments.
Best practices: See attached.
Recommendations for UMKC
Action 1:
Set policy on advising prospective transfer students: who will meet with them, to what extent
they will be advised, should they be “pre-screened” for their degree program. Determine who
will meet with them – AU or Transfer Center.
Timeline: May 1, 2012
Responsible party: Student Affairs
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 2:
Appoint liaisons between Academic Units and central administration as point of contact for
changes to policies and formalize communication of new policies.
Timeline: March 31, 2012
Responsible party: Student Affairs and Provost’s Office
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 3:
Document policy for creating and updating domestic articulation agreements.
Timeline: May 1, 2012
Responsible party: Admissions/ Transfer Center
Resource implications: Staff time
Action 4:
Incorporate policies that affect transfer students in the University Academic Policy Library:
specifically addressing concurrent enrollment requirements across campus, the transfer credit
appeal process and articulation agreement updates (where are the agreements held, how often
are they updated, etc.).
Timeline: December 1, 2012
Responsible party: Academic Policy Development Task Force/Student Affairs
Resource implications: Staff time
15
Issue 2: Transfer Student Scholarship Opportunities
Priority # 1: Critical
Current Status: UMKC considers students who have taken college courses after graduating
from high school as transfer students.
But, transfer scholarships are only awarded to transfer students who have at least 40
transferrable credit hours with a 3.0 gpa, or for the competitive transfer scholarships, who have
earned an Associate’s Degree with a higher gpa.
16
17
Chancellor’s Transfer Award is renewable with 2.75 UMKC and 24 credit hours per year
18
Curators Transfer Scholarship can be used with the Automatic Chancellor’s Transfer Award
Makes total transfer award $3000 if student is admitted by March 1
Renewable with 3.25 UMKC gpa and 24 credit hours earned per year
19
Phi Theta Kappa Scholarship can be used with Curators Transfer Scholarship and Chancellor’s
Transfer Award.
Makes total transfer award $2500 if used with Chancellor’s Transfer Award and $3500 if eligible
for all 3 transfer awards if student is admitted by March 1.
Phi Theta Kappa Scholarship is renewable with 3.0 UMKC gpa and 24 hours earned per year.
Best practices:
1. How do other 4-year institutions award transfer scholarships? See below:
Missouri 4 year schools:
UM-Columbia: http://financialaid.missouri.edu/types-of-aid/scholarships/transfer.php
 Requires Associate’s Degree for all transfer scholarships except ROTC and Alumni
Awards
20
Univ Central Missouri: http://www.ucmo.edu/sfs/explore/scholarships/tranferscholarships.cfm
 Requires 24 transferrable credit hours for most transfer scholarships
 Has transfer scholarships for both students transferring from community college and 4year schools
 Renewability for transfer scholarships is a higher gpa than UMKC—3.25 for most
scholarships
Missouri State Univ: http://www.missouristate.edu/FinancialAid/scholarships/transfer.html
 Eligibility requirements for transfer scholarships vary between the awards from 24, 30,
45 credit hours to the receipt of the Associate’s Degree
 Renewability for transfer scholarships is higher than UMKC-3.25-3.5 depending on the
award
Northwest Missouri State: http://www.nwmissouri.edu/finaid/Transfer2.htm
 Transfer scholarships all require 24 transferrable credit hours except the President’s
award that requires 42 credit hours.
 Renewability for transfer scholarships is higher than UMKC—3.3-3.5 depending on the
award
Missouri Western State: http://www.missouriwestern.edu/finaid/ScholarshipTransfer.asp
 Four-year transfer scholarships require 24 transferrable credit hours, community college
transfer scholarships require 60 transferrable credit hours but not an Associate’s degree
 Requires FAFSA completion for most academic scholarships
2. Do our peer 4-year institutions award transfer scholarships to students transferring
from 4-year schools?
Yes, usually based on at least 24 transferrable credit hours and a higher gpa than the 3.0
required by UMKC.
Recommendations for UMKC
Action 1:
Establish a scholarship for students transferring from a domestic 4-year institution with a
minimum of 24 transferrable credit hours. Evaluate current scholarship programs to determine
effect this will have on existing scholarship programs (ex. Chancellor’s Transfer Award). The
minimum GPA required for the scholarship, the number of current students who would qualify,
the loss of potential students missed due to lack of transfer scholarships, the recruiting
potential and the financial impact of this scholarship should be carefully evaluated.
Timeline: Approval by March 31, 2012 to go into effect Fall 2013
21
Responsible party: Student Affairs in conjunction with the Academic Units to approve
waiver scholarships
Resource implications: Change in printed materials, possible increase in
discount/waiver budget
IV. Transfer Student Website
Current status: Currently, the Transfer Student Website is housed within the Admissions
website. In survey conducted at a Campus Preview Day, most students were able to navigate
the website fairly easily, never exceeding three clicks to their desired destination. However, the
students did report that the “Search Tool” and the navigation back to the Admission homepage
were somewhat difficult. Overall, students were able to find their articulation agreements,
major maps, financial aid information, and advisors.
Students who were participating in the survey commented that they would not know what to
do once they were admitted (they missed the “next steps” tab). The Transfer Student Success
subgroup has also made the same observations. Additionally, the Transfer Student Success
subgroup has noted that Transfer Student website does not communicate the “value” that
transfer students have to the institution.
Best practices at aspirational peer institutions: The University of Missouri-Kansas City is in
good standing with its Admissions website in regards to Transfer. Among the Urban 21, UMKC’s
website is easily navigated and is straightforward, however, there is room for improvement.
Two universities stand out among our aspirational peers: Virginia Commonwealth and
University of Alabama- Birmingham. Both universities have direct access to transfer
equivalencies, degrees, a tab for admitted students, and convey a sense of value to the
institution.
Recommendations for UMKC
Issue 1: Access and Navigation to Admissions Web Page
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: Each departmental website is created within each unit. Some departmental
websites have links to the Admissions home page and some do not. In order for the website to
22
be accessible, “tabs” or “buttons” back to the Admissions homepage are important to add.
These should open in a new window or a tab leaving the department's page open in the
browser.
Action 1:
Links back to the Admissions homepage should be added to each Department page.
Timeline: May 31, 2012
Responsible party: Academic Departments
Resource implications: Academic Department staff time
Issue 2: UMKC Website Search Tool
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: UMKC’s Website Search Tool on the homepage is difficult to use, and search
results primarily present irrelevant information. Improving the functionality of the Search Tool
and creating more pertinent results would ease students’ ability to navigate the website.
Action 1:
Improve the effectiveness of the UMKC Search Tool.
Timeline: May 31, 2012
Responsible party: University Communications working with Office of Admissions
Resource implications: staff time and resources
Action 2:
Website Search Tool should be changed to include a box pop up with all terms related to
transfer within UMKC's website.
Timeline: May 31, 2012
Responsible party: University Communications working with Office of Admissions
Resource implications: staff time and resources
Issue 3: Transfer Agreements
Current status: Our Transfer Agreements from our area community colleges are easily
accessible; however they need to be updated on a frequent basis.
23
• Please see recommendations from the Transfer Agreements subgroup.
Issue 4: Admitted Transfer Students Tab
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: There is not a tab for newly admitted students on the Admissions website.
Upon admissions, students have specific steps and guidelines they should follow in order to
achieve success. To aid them in this process, there should be a link to the “next steps” in the
same area as the transfer requirements, agreements, etc.
Action 1:
"Next Steps" link added to the area of Transfer Agreements.
Timeline: May 31, 2012
Responsible party: University Communications working with Office of Admissions
Resource implications: staff time and resources
Issue 5: Conveying the Value of Transfer Students
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: UMKC’s Transfer website goes to a picture with link. Incorporating numbers of
transfers, quotes, or a mission for transfers could help convey the important role they play in
the student body. The message could be conveyed through quotes from faculty and transfer
students, videos with testimonials, and general statistics.
Action 1:
Incorporate message of value to the Transfer website.
Timeline: May 31, 2012
Responsible party: University Communications working with Office of Admissions and
the Office of Institutional Research
Resource implications: Website maintenance (low)
Issue 6: Clarifying Transfer Terminology
Priority # 3: Helpful
24
Current status: From institution to institution, terms for transfer students change. To ease
transfer and communication, a glossary of terms should be created for students to refer to, or,
ideally, a term will be connected to a word that is interactive on the website (i.e, when you
scroll over the word, the definition pops up.)
Action 1:
Create a glossary of terms and make it accessible on the website.
Timeline: May 31, 2012
Responsible party: University Communications working with Office of Admissions
Resource implications: Website maintenance (low)
V. Transfer Student Success
Issue 1: Addressing Students’ Basic Needs
Priority # 1: Critical
Current status: Our students have many challenges beyond academics that impact their success
and retention at UMKC. This supposition is borne out by research done by UMKC’s Institutional
Research office (through exit surveys that are routinely administered when students drop all
classes during a given semester and also some surveys that have been conducted when
students leave after a semester is over), showing that many of our students leave for personal
and/or financial reasons. Students’ basic needs impact everything in their lives, including their
choices in regards to academics.
Recommendations for UMKC
Action 1:
Students in each Academic Unit should have access to at least one employee whose sole or
partial responsibility is to serve in a supportive role for students’ basic needs. Support to hire
such an employee could come from the Academic Unit alone or require supplemental funds
from the campus.
Some existing models include a Life Coach or Social Worker, which could be a full-time
staff member (such as a Social Worker) or a part-time staff-member (such as a graduate
student working in this capacity as she or he completes a GRA/practicum through the
Social Work department’s Master of Social Work program or through the School of
25
Education’s Counseling and Guidance program). The person in this role would provide
initial help to a student, while also being a bridge to existing resources a student may
need on campus and in the greater community.
It is also suggested that that this group of Life Coaches, Social Workers, or Social
Work/Counselor practicum students meet at regularly scheduled intervals to discuss
common issues and trends and come up with ideas as to how to reach larger student
numbers, knowing that their group will most likely remain small due to limited
resources. It also needs to be noted that Financial Aid speaks with many students who
state they have to leave the University because of “life issues” and they too would like
to send these students to one of the Life Coaches, Social Workers or practicum students.
It might be possible to have one of these Life Coaches reside at the One Stop Shop.
Timeline: Each Academic Unit would have at least one employee to serve in this role by
FS2012; Academic Units would be encouraged to hire as many as are deemed necessary
to serve their student populations.
Responsible party: Provost’s Office to work with Deans from each Academic Unit;
Academic Units would hire the employees and supervise them.
Resource implications: Cost of staffing the positions, which could be paid for by the
individual Academic Unit or through a joint AU/campus pool of funds
Action 2:
The Academic Advisors should be trained in Academic Units on non-academic issues and
appropriate referrals to campus and community resources.
The Academic Advisors in each Academic Unit would also have some training to equip them to
handle first interactions with students on non-academic issues and appropriate referrals to
campus and community resources. This would entail formal training for campus-wide advisors
through the existing campus-wide Advising Forum and/or other professional development
opportunities.
Timeline: During the 2012/2013 academic year, training would be given in the Advising
Forum. Over time, further training could occur through a campus-wide advising training
program that is being recommended by the Advising Task Force.
Responsible party: Initially, the Advising Forum planning committee would plan to
incorporate this topic into the agenda of meetings for the 2012/2013 academic year
(probably incorporating training from existing staff/GRAs on campus who are in the
Social Worker/Life Coach role); ultimately, further training would be developed by the
26
person heading the campus-wide advising training program that is being recommended
by the Advising Task Force.
Resource implications: Training as part of the Advising Forum would only involve
existing staff time; further training and resources used would be at the discretion of the
person in charge of the campus-wide advising training program (that is being
recommended by the Advising Task Force).
Action 3:
Create an e-mail survey for transfers to identify their needs for services and campus
connections.
An email survey will be administered to transfer students (with questions initially generated by
Transfer Student Success subgroup and edited/approved by the greater Transfer Student Task
Force) by UMKC’s Institutional Research office, including questions addressing students’ basic
needs.
Timeline: Questions will be formulated and revised in time so that the survey can be
administered by IR in late January 2012.
Responsible party: List of questions will be created by the greater Transfer Student Task
Force. The email survey will be created and administered by IR.
Resource implications: Staff time in creating questions and administering survey.
Action 4:
Develop a one-credit-hour and/or three-credit-hour upper division mandatory course for
transfer students.
Student success is dependent upon a proper acclimatization and transition to UMKC. The
development of one or more upper division mandatory courses to help students transition and
acclimate to UMKC as well as set the expectations for critical thinking and writing should
be developed. The instructors need to be persons with a passion for student success,
not just anyone who has the time/need to teach a one-credit-hour course.
Timeline : As soon as possible
Responsible party and resource implications: Provost and Academic Deans.
This would be absorbed in each academic unit where they might implement three fiveweek courses across a semester or other suitable format. Another idea would be to
subsume the one hour into a three hour course pertinent and applicable to the major.
Another idea might be to make this a course that is taught by someone “chosen” by the
unit dean or designee to make teaching this class an honor.
27
Issue 2: Addressing Ongoing Transfer Student Needs
Priority # 2: Important
Action 1:
Establish a Transfer Student Advisory Group.
The purpose of this organization would be to address the unique issues of UMKC’s transfer
population. Having such a committee, which should consist of transfer students as members,
would show that the University does value this group of students, and it would be a vehicle for
communication and information. Currently we lack knowledge regarding this group of
students.
Timeline: The Transfer Student Advisory Group could be started as early as next
semester, but definitely for fall of 2012.
Responsible party: Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Office, Dean of Students and
Office of Student Involvement.
Resource implications: Low cost – high impact (should help with transfer shock).
Issue 3: Success is More than One Issue
Priority # 3: Helpful
Current status: The University has talked about transfer students for years and what more we
could/should do for them, and it is our hope that best practices will finally transpire at UMKC
for this special group of students. It is a large group, and it is the belief of the Transfer Student
Success subgroup that if all of the initiatives brought forth from this subgroup are carried out, it
will make this group of students successful and able to graduate in a timely manner.
Best practices: In many ways, these are the same as those for the incoming freshmen, only
often at a higher level. It is important to get transfer students here directly from their previous
institution so they don’t lose momentum to complete their degree. Their first contacts with
UMKC, their orientation and first-year experience, and a demonstrated climate of support can
be the “deal breaker” as to whether or not they remain.
28
Recommendations for UMKC
Action 1:
Student success begins with clearly defined and up-to-date articulation agreements.
These agreements need to be easy for the students to find, and transfer students need to know
they are accurate. Arriving on campus for an advisement meeting and learning that the plan
they followed was outdated and that they either took many unnecessary courses or would
need to take more courses is enough to lose the student.
Timeline/Responsible party and resource implications: Defined by the Transfer
Agreements subgroup
Action 2:
Student success means attending an orientation geared toward transfer students’ needs.
While they have already had a college experience, transfer students still need to learn the way
of doing things at UMKC in order to be successful. This would also be a good place to review
specific policies and procedures that relate to them and to show them where they can easily
find this information at a later date.
Timeline/Responsible party and resource implications: Defined by the Transfer
Orientation and Transfer Policies and Procedures subgroups
Action 3:
Student success is dependent on correct and easily accessible information on various websites
and accurate advising information.
It is this subgroup’s hope that when the Transfer Center in the Student Success Center is in
place and when the Transfer Coordinator is hired, there will be coordination among the various
sources of information so that transfer students always have consistent and accurate guidance.
Timeline/Responsible party and resource implications: Defined by the Website
subgroup and the Student Success Center Committee
Action 4:
Finding ways for transfer students to connect with each other would help students be
successful.
We know that freshmen who join and participate in organizations are better retained and
believe that the same would be true of transfer students. The transfer student group, however,
often comes to campus for class and leaves immediately after for work or family events.
29
Perhaps an online Blackboard community for transfer students might be an answer or a student
project in class might be another way to connect students. This is something that the Transfer
Advisory Group could discuss after trying to determine what this group really wants and needs.
Timeline: Ongoing
Responsible party: Transfer Advisory Committee and/or academic units
Resource implications: Minimal other than time spent connecting
30
Appendix
The tables and documents in the Appendix represent data and tools used by the Transfer
Student Task Force to carry out its work. They comprise background materials and are not
specifically referred to within the body of the task force report.
Top 15 Feeder Transfer Feeder Schools, FS 2010
p. 33
Characteristics of First-time Transfer Students
pp. 34-35
Comparison of Retention Rates between Transfer and Native
Full-time Students
pp. 36-37
Comparison of Retention Rates between Students Who Transferred in with a
Degree and Those Who Did Not Transfer in with a Degree
p. 37
Comparison of Retention Rates between Students Who Declared a Major
and Those Who Did Not Declare A Major
p. 38
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Two-year Institutions
p. 38
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Four-year Institutions
p. 38
Success of Full-time Native Students
p. 39
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Johnson County
Community College
p. 39
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Penn Valley
Community College
p. 39
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Longview
Community College
p. 40
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Maple Woods
Community College
p. 40
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from University of MissouriColumbia
p. 40
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Kansas City, Kansas
Community College
p. 41
31
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from University of Kansas
p. 41
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Missouri State University
p. 41
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from University of Central
Missouri
p. 42
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Northwest Missouri State
University
p. 42
Success of Full-time Students Transferring in with an Associate’s Degree
p. 42
Success of Full-time Students Transferring in with a Bachelor’s Degree
p. 43
Success of Full-time Students Transferring in without a Degree
p. 43
Success of Full-time Transfer Students Who Declared a Major
p. 43
Success of Full-time Transfer Students Who did Not Declare a Major
p. 44
Transfer Data Analysis (Fall 2007-Fall 2010)
pp. 44-45
Transfer Information Questionnaire
pp. 46-47
Importance of Factors Considered in Selecting an Institution (JCCC Sample)
p. 48
Rank Order of Methods for Receiving Information (JCCC Sample)
p. 48
Helpfulness of Orientation Components (JCCC Sample)
p. 48
A2S Cohort Enrollments
p. 49
A2S Cohort Enrollments, Full-time vs. Part-time
p. 50
32
Fall Semester 2010
Top 15 Schools UMKC Students Transferred From
These data were provided by the Office of Admissions.
School
Johnson County Community College
Longview Community College
Penn Valley Community College
Maple Woods Community College
University of Missouri-Columbia
University of Kansas
Kansas City Kansas Community College
University of Central Missouri
Blue River/Blue Springs Community College
Northwest Missouri State University
Kansas State University
Park College
Missouri State University
Ozark Technical College
Rockhurst University
Number of Students Enrolled at UMKC
201
130
123
115
78
47
45
40
37
33
28
25
22
17
17
Total: 1,443 students. 820 students representing 92 schools came from two year colleges. While
623 students representing 172 schools came from four year colleges/universities.
Percentage 2 year colleges: 57%
Percentage 4 year colleges/universities: 43%
33
Characteristics of First-time Transfer Students
These data were provided by Institutional Research; demographics of transfers as well as
retention and student success data were available to the task force as a series of tables.
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
702
502
58.3%
41.7%
730
506
59.1%
40.9%
842
600
58.4%
41.6%
884
666
57.0%
43.0%
10
41
0
0
128
39
679
33
0
274
0.8%
3.4%
0.0%
0.0%
10.6%
3.2%
56.4%
2.7%
0.0%
22.8%
11
44
0
0
171
69
759
25
0
157
0.9%
3.6%
0.0%
0.0%
13.8%
5.6%
61.4%
2.0%
0.0%
12.7%
11
53
10
3
191
60
937
26
24
127
0.8%
3.7%
0.7%
0.2%
13.2%
4.2%
65.0%
1.8%
1.7%
8.8%
4
54
12
0
220
86
935
21
21
197
0.3%
3.5%
0.8%
0.0%
14.2%
5.5%
60.3%
1.4%
1.4%
12.7%
869
335
72.2%
27.8%
926
310
74.9%
25.1%
1,080
362
74.9%
25.1%
1,176
374
75.9%
24.1%
538
19
56
189
98
30
128
6
63
77
44.7%
1.6%
4.7%
15.7%
8.1%
2.5%
10.6%
0.5%
5.2%
6.4%
579
21
66
175
73
24
112
5
92
89
46.8%
1.7%
5.3%
14.2%
5.9%
1.9%
9.1%
0.4%
7.4%
7.2%
722
15
73
158
110
28
114
2
131
89
50.1%
1.0%
5.1%
11.0%
7.6%
1.9%
7.9%
0.1%
9.1%
6.2%
794
18
89
187
96
23
130
3
136
74
51.2%
1.2%
5.7%
12.1%
6.2%
1.5%
8.4%
0.2%
8.8%
4.8%
1,157
47
96.1%
3.9%
1,181
55
95.6%
4.4%
1,337
105
92.7%
7.3%
1,410
140
91.0%
9.0%
Gender
Female
Male
Ethnicity
American Indian
Asian
Asian, Underrepresented
Pacific Islander
Black
Hispanic
White
Non-Resident International
Multi Racial
Unknown
Enrollment Status
Full-time
Part-time
Academic Unit
Arts & Sciences
Conservatory of Music & Dance
Biological Sciences
Management
Computing and Engineering
Dentistry
Education
Medicine
Nursing
Pharmacy
Major
Decided
Undecided
34
Characteristics of First-time Transfer Students, Continued
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
487
683
0
24
1
7
2
40.4%
56.7%
0.0%
2.0%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
536
677
0
20
1
1
1
43.4%
54.8%
0.0%
1.6%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
622
788
1
20
1
9
1
43.1%
54.6%
0.1%
1.4%
0.1%
0.6%
0.1%
657
866
3
23
1
0
0
42.4%
55.9%
0.2%
1.5%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
190
111
109
69
68
37
39
26
23
12
27
23
15.8%
9.2%
9.1%
5.7%
5.6%
3.1%
3.2%
2.2%
1.9%
1.0%
2.2%
1.9%
171
137
103
81
48
45
39
37
28
30
29
21
13.8%
11.1%
8.3%
6.6%
3.9%
3.6%
3.2%
3.0%
2.3%
2.4%
2.3%
1.7%
215
134
118
90
87
47
40
31
24
34
23
23
14.9%
9.3%
8.2%
6.2%
6.0%
3.3%
2.8%
2.2%
1.7%
2.4%
1.6%
1.6%
213
129
136
112
82
57
54
23
39
38
29
38
13.7%
8.3%
8.8%
7.2%
5.3%
3.7%
3.5%
1.5%
2.5%
2.5%
1.9%
2.5%
681
301
222
56.6%
25.0%
18.4%
737
305
194
59.6%
24.7%
15.7%
834
343
265
57.8%
23.8%
18.4%
923
367
260
59.5%
23.7%
16.8%
480
387
262
75
39.9%
32.1%
21.8%
6.2%
379
421
344
91
30.7%
34.1%
27.9%
7.4%
418
514
373
136
29.0%
35.7%
25.9%
9.4%
449
526
438
135
29.0%
34.0%
28.3%
8.7%
337
162
263
255
187
28.0%
13.5%
21.8%
21.2%
15.5%
275
169
308
286
198
22.2%
13.7%
24.9%
23.1%
16.0%
347
169
353
336
237
24.1%
11.7%
24.5%
23.3%
16.4%
367
179
335
397
272
23.7%
11.5%
21.6%
25.6%
17.5%
263
941
21.8%
78.2%
337
899
27.3%
72.7%
368
1,074
25.5%
74.5%
385
1,165
24.8%
75.2%
100
1,104
8.3%
91.7%
97
1,139
7.8%
92.2%
119
1,323
8.3%
91.7%
128
1,422
8.3%
91.7%
Transfer Institution Type
University/College
Community College
Technical College
Foreign Institution
Military
Other
Unknown
Transfer Institution
Johnson County CC
Penn Valley CC
Longview CC
Maple Woods CC
Univ. of Missouri-Columbia
Kansas City Kansas CC
University of Kansas
Missouri State University
Univ. of Central Missouri
NW Missouri State Univ.
Kansas State University
Blue River/Blue Springs CC
Transfer Institution Location
Missouri
Kansas
Other
Number of Hours Transferred In
0 to 30 Hours1
31 to 60 Hours
61 to 90 Hours
90+ Hours
Transfer GPA
0.00 to 1.99
2.00 to 2.49
2.50 to 2.99
3.00 to 3.49
3.50 to 4.00
Transferred in an AA Degree
Yes
No
Transferred in a BA/BS Degree
Yes
No
1
Students who transfer in with a Bachelor's (and in some cases an Associate's) Degree are entered into the Student System with 0 transfer hours.
35
Comparison of Retention Rates between Transfer and Native Full-time Students
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
Transferred from 2-yr School
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
482
423
385
87.8%
79.9%
498
443
388
89.0%
77.9%
577
513
436
88.9%
75.5%
361
304
250
84.2%
69.2%
410
363
302
88.5%
73.6%
484
425
365
87.8%
75.4%
914
821
698
89.8%
76.4%
974
866
721
88.9%
74.0%
979
883
733
90.2%
74.9%
Transferred from 4-yr School
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Native Students
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Comparison of Retention Rates between Transfer and Native Full-time Students
(Top 10 Feeder Schools)
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
Johnson County CC
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
142
121
112
85.2%
78.9%
132
115
105
87.1%
79.5%
153
140
123
91.5%
80.4%
63
54
52
85.7%
82.5%
88
77
68
87.5%
77.3%
84
77
63
91.7%
75.0%
80
73
63
91.3%
78.8%
75
69
64
92.0%
85.3%
97
88
75
90.7%
77.3%
52
46
40
88.5%
76.9%
62
57
52
91.9%
83.9%
75
66
59
88.0%
78.7%
53
50
42
94.3%
79.3%
37
34
31
91.9%
83.8%
72
65
61
90.3%
84.7%
Penn Valley CC
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Longview CC
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Maple Woods CC
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Univ. of Missouri - Columbia
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
36
Comparison of Retention Rates between Transfer and Native Full-time Students, Continued
(Top 10 Feeder Schools)
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
Kansas City Kansas CC
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
24
20
18
83.3%
75.0%
32
29
26
90.6%
81.2%
29
27
22
93.1%
75.9%
29
25
18
86.2%
62.1%
31
24
26
77.4%
83.9%
28
25
19
89.3%
67.9%
19
17
12
89.5%
63.2%
30
28
26
93.3%
86.7%
26
25
24
96.2%
92.3%
18
16
12
88.9%
66.7%
24
22
20
91.7%
83.4%
18
13
9
72.2%
50.0%
11
7
6
63.6%
54.5%
23
23
18
100.0%
78.3%
30
26
20
86.7%
66.7%
University of Kansas
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Missouri State University
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
University of Central Missouri
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
NW Missouri State University
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Comparison of Retention Rates between Students Who Transferred in with a Degree
And Those Who Did Not Transfer in with a Degree
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
Transferred in with an AA
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
167
157
146
94.0%
88.0%
219
203
190
92.7%
86.7%
252
234
212
92.9%
84.1%
42
37
27
88.1%
64.3%
48
43
40
89.6%
83.4%
61
54
45
88.5%
73.7%
662
554
478
83.7%
72.2%
662
579
478
87.5%
72.2%
767
666
558
86.8%
72.7%
Transferred in with a BA/BS
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Transferred in without a degree
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
37
Comparison of Retention Rates between Students Who Declared a Major
And Those Who Did Not Declare a Major
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
Decided
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
839
723
629
86.2%
75.0%
892
795
685
89.1%
76.8%
1,012
954
775
88.3%
76.6%
30
23
21
76.7%
70.0%
34
27
20
79.4%
58.8%
68
54
40
79.4%
58.8%
Undecided
Enrolled
Returned in Spring
Returned Next Fall
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Two-year Institutions
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
1
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
80
48
89
136
121
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
2.79
13.4
10.3
16.9%
10.1%
18.8%
28.7%
25.5%
62
47
109
117
150
12.8%
9.7%
22.5%
24.1%
30.9%
2.94
13.3
11.0
74
62
102
168
165
13.0%
10.9%
17.9%
29.4%
28.9%
2.94
13.4
11.1
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Four-year Institutions
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
58
42
66
80
105
2.84
14.0
11.1
16.5%
12.0%
18.8%
22.8%
29.9%
62
44
76
100
121
2.91
13.8
11.2
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
38
15.4%
10.9%
18.9%
24.8%
30.0%
48
57
93
122
153
2.97
13.7
11.3
10.1%
12.1%
19.7%
25.8%
32.3%
Success of Full-time Native Students
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
112
64
134
212
374
3.04
14.6
12.5
12.5%
7.1%
15.0%
23.7%
41.7%
139
94
131
250
344
2.97
14.4
12.1
14.5%
9.8%
13.7%
26.1%
35.9%
110
102
147
207
401
3.07
14.5
11.8
11.4%
10.5%
15.2%
21.4%
41.5%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Johnson County Community College
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
19
16
26
39
39
2.84
13.5
10.5
13.7%
11.5%
18.7%
28.1%
28.1%
20
8
30
33
38
2.90
13.4
10.8
15.5%
6.2%
23.3%
25.6%
29.5%
15
9
26
56
46
3.08
13.6
11.9
9.9%
5.9%
17.1%
36.8%
30.3%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Penn Valley Community College
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
17
6
8
15
17
2.56
13.1
9.2
27.0%
9.5%
12.7%
23.8%
27.0%
13
5
18
20
29
2.94
13.1
11.3
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
39
15.3%
5.9%
21.2%
23.5%
34.1%
12
11
13
23
24
2.89
13.5
11.0
14.5%
13.3%
15.7%
27.7%
28.9%
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Longview Community College
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
14
5
21
18
21
2.78
13.2
9.8
17.7%
6.3%
26.6%
22.8%
26.6%
7
7
18
14
28
3.04
13.0
11.3
9.5%
9.5%
24.3%
18.9%
37.8%
14
12
21
29
21
2.84
13.4
10.5
14.4%
12.4%
21.6%
29.9%
21.6%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Maple Woods Community College
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
9
5
7
13
17
2.84
13.6
11.0
17.6%
9.8%
13.7%
25.5%
33.3%
5
6
13
16
21
3.03
13.0
11.2
8.2%
9.8%
21.3%
26.2%
34.4%
8
9
16
19
22
2.96
13.2
11.1
10.8%
12.2%
21.6%
25.7%
29.7%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from University of Missouri-Columbia
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
3
10
14
15
11
2.90
13.8
11.9
5.7%
18.9%
26.4%
28.3%
20.8%
3
3
4
13
14
3.19
14.0
13.1
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
40
8.1%
8.1%
10.8%
35.1%
37.8%
2
10
15
20
23
3.11
13.8
12.3
2.9%
14.3%
21.4%
28.6%
32.9%
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Kansas City Kansas Community College
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
6
2
5
7
3
2.67
13.5
10.7
26.1%
8.7%
21.7%
30.4%
13.0%
4
10
6
9
3
2.86
13.5
11.1
12.5%
31.3%
18.8%
28.1%
9.4%
4
4
6
6
9
2.59
13.4
9.3
13.8%
13.8%
20.7%
20.7%
31.0%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from University of Kansas
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
4
1
5
4
12
3.02
14.7
12.2
15.4%
3.8%
19.2%
15.4%
46.2%
5
4
5
8
8
2.88
14.3
11.1
16.7%
13.3%
16.7%
26.7%
26.7%
1
5
4
6
11
3.12
13.8
11.9
3.7%
18.5%
14.8%
22.2%
40.7%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Missouri State University
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
4
2
3
5
5
2.92
14.1
11.3
21.1%
10.5%
15.8%
26.3%
26.3%
2
0
2
13
13
3.31
13.8
12.5
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
41
6.7%
0.0%
6.7%
43.3%
43.3%
0
2
4
12
7
3.23
14.0
13.3
0.0%
8.0%
16.0%
48.0%
28.0%
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from University of Central Missouri
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
2
2
3
4
7
3.00
14.4
11.3
11.1%
11.1%
16.7%
22.2%
38.9%
6
1
4
6
6
2.86
13.4
9.7
26.1%
4.3%
17.4%
26.1%
26.1%
4
3
1
6
4
2.61
14.1
9.8
22.2%
16.7%
5.6%
33.3%
22.2%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring from Northwest Missouri State University
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
4
1
4
0
2
2.29
12.7
8.6
36.4%
9.1%
36.4%
0.0%
18.2%
2
5
4
7
5
2.88
13.8
9.7
8.7%
21.7%
17.4%
30.4%
21.7%
4
2
8
6
9
2.88
13.4
11.5
13.8%
6.9%
27.6%
20.7%
31.0%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring in with an Associate’s Degree
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
14
21
31
45
54
3.00
13.4
11.1
8.5%
12.7%
18.8%
27.3%
32.7%
12
17
46
57
84
3.18
13.3
11.7
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
42
5.6%
7.9%
21.3%
26.4%
38.9%
18
29
31
75
96
3.15
13.3
11.5
7.2%
11.6%
12.4%
30.1%
38.4%
Success of Full-time Students Transferring in with a Bachelor’s Degree
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
1
3
5
10
21
3.34
14.5
13.5
2.5%
7.5%
12.5%
25.0%
52.5%
0
1
6
9
32
3.56
13.6
13.0
0.0%
2.1%
12.5%
18.8%
66.7%
2
1
4
19
33
3.47
13.7
12.9
3.4%
1.7%
6.8%
32.2%
55.9%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Students Transferring in without a Degree
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
126
68
122
171
161
2.74
13.6
10.4
19.4%
10.5%
18.8%
26.4%
24.8%
114
75
136
160
160
2.80
13.6
10.8
17.7%
11.6%
21.1%
24.8%
24.8%
106
92
165
198
194
2.84
13.6
10.9
14.0%
12.2%
21.9%
26.2%
25.7%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Success of Full-time Transfer Students Who Declared a Major
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
208
109
173
194
137
2.83
13.6
10.7
25.3%
13.3%
21.1%
23.6%
16.7%
166
124
211
216
157
2.94
13.6
11.2
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
43
19.0%
14.2%
24.1%
24.7%
18.0%
204
102
247
248
197
2.97
13.6
11.3
20.4%
10.2%
24.7%
24.8%
19.7%
Success of Full-time Transfer Students Who Did Not Declare a Major
Fall 2007
N
Fall 2008
%
N
Fall 2009
%
N
%
First Term
0.00 to 1.99 GPA
2.00 to 2.49 GPA
2.50 to 2.99 GPA
3.00 to 3.49 GPA
3.50 to 4.00 GPA
Average Overall GPA
Average Hours Attempted
Average Hours Earned
1
8
10
6
6
0
2.40
13.3
9.5
26.7%
33.3%
20.0%
20.0%
0.0%
8
8
12
4
0
2.56
12.9
8.8
25.0%
25.0%
37.5%
12.5%
0.0%
16
23
18
5
3
2.57
12.9
9.5
24.6%
35.4%
27.7%
7.7%
4.6%
Students that withdrew from all courses were removed from the analyses.
Transfer Data Analysis (Fall 2007-Fall 2010)
This analysis represents a summary of the data provided in the Institutional Research tables
presented above.
Demographics

Approximately 40% of our transfer students come from four-year institutions.

Approximately 55% of our transfer students come from community colleges.
o Johnson County Community College, Penn Valley Community College, Longview
Community College, and Maple Woods Community College are our four largest
feeders

Approximately one-fourth of our students come in with an Associate’s degree.

Less than 10% of our transfer students come in undecided on a major.

Transfer students make up 50% or more of the population for seven of the ten schools
that have undergraduate students.
Differences

No noticeable difference exists in terms of retention between transfer students and
native students.
44

Native students do achieve a higher first-term GPA than transfer students, especially
those from community colleges.

Native students also complete more hours.

Students that come in with an AA or BS degree are more likely to be retained than
students without a degree.

Students that come in with an AA or BS degree also achieve a higher first-term GPA and
complete more hours than students without a degree.

Students that come in with a major decided are more likely to be retained than students
without a major.

Students that come in with a major decided also achieve a higher first-term GPA and
complete more hours than students without a major.
45
Transfer Information Questionnaire
This questionnaire was administered to a group of potential transfer students currently at
Johnson County Community College. Data from the survey follow.
Please indicate how important each of the following are to you in terms of helping you decide whether to attend a
specific university of college (circle the number that most closely reflects your opinion). Then rank the three most
important informational areas overall, with 1 being the most important.
Not Important Not Very
At All
Important
Somewhat
Important
Very
Important
_____
Information about admission requirements
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about transferring credits
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about tuition and fees
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about financial aid/scholarships
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about academic support/advising
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about campus life
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about student organizations
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about housing (on-campus/off-campus)
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about the city where the school is located
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about parking on campus
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about athletics
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
_____ Information about other areas (please list below)
Please indicate any specific questions you currently need to have answered as you consider transferring to a fouryear institution in the future. (For example, how much is the application fee? What GPA do I need to get in? etc.)
46
Please rank order the following six methods of receiving information from an institution you are
considering transferring to in the future, with "1” being the most preferred method and “6” being the
least preferred method.
_____ Institution website
_____ Personal meeting with a representative of the institution
_____ Group meeting
_____ Phone call
_____ E-mail
_____ Other (please specify): ____________________________________________________
Four-year institutions often have orientation sessions available specifically for transfer students. Please
indicate how helpful each of the following orientation components would be to you (circle the number
that most closely reflects your opinion). Then rank the three most important orientation components,
with 1 being the most important.
Not Helpful
At All
Not Very
Helpful
Somewhat
Helpful
Very
Helpful
Tour of campus facilities (library, sports facilities,
performing arts center, etc.)
1
2
3
4
Tour of support services (academic support centers,
Financial aid, career services, etc.)
1
2
3
4
_____
Tour of department where you will be studying
1
2
3
4
_____
Information about/assistance with registering for
classes
1
2
3
4
Meeting with faculty representatives and academic
advisors
1
2
3
4
Showcase of student organizations
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____ Other (please list below)
What is the most important factor you will consider when choosing a 4-year institution and why?
47
Importance of Factors Considered in Selecting an Institution (JCCC Sample)
Not
Important
N
Important
Mean
Number
Ranked
Average
Rank
Admission requirements
31
6.5%
93.5%
3.5
13
1.7
Transferring credits
31
3.2%
96.8%
3.7
13
1.8
Tuition and fees
31
3.2%
96.8%
3.7
15
2.1
Financial aid/scholarships
30
6.6%
93.4%
3.6
10
2.7
Academic support/advising
30
13.3%
86.7%
3.2
3
2.0
Campus life
30
23.3%
76.7%
3.0
2
2.0
Student organizations
30
26.7%
73.3%
2.8
1
2.0
Housing (on-campus/off-campus)
30
36.7%
63.3%
2.7
0
0.0
City where the school is located
30
40.0%
60.0%
2.6
0
0.0
Parking on campus
30
53.3%
46.7%
2.5
0
0.0
Athletics
30
70.0%
30.0%
2.0
1
1.0
5
0.0%
100.0%
3.8
2
1.5
Other areas
Rank Order of Methods for Receiving Information (JCCC Sample)
N
Mean
Rank
Personal meeting
26
2.0
E-mail
26
2.7
Institution website
26
3.0
Phone call
26
3.4
Group meeting
26
4.2
6
4.2
Other
Helpfulness of Orientation Components (JCCC Sample)
N
Not
Helpful
Helpful
Mean
Number
Ranked
Average
Rank
Tour of campus
29
0.0%
100.0%
3.6
12
1.3
Tour of support services
29
3.4%
96.6%
3.6
12
2.5
Tour of department
29
6.9%
93.1%
3.7
13
1.8
Information about/assist with registering
28
7.1%
92.9%
3.5
6
2.3
Meet with faculty and advisors
27
3.7%
96.3%
3.5
4
2.8
Showcase of student organizations
27
22.2%
87.8%
2.9
1
2.0
3
0.0%
100.0%
3.7
0
0.0
Other areas
48
A2S Cohort Enrollments
These data were provided by Institutional Research as a complement to other data and to
determine how well UMKC is doing in relation to A2S parameters.
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Low Income
292
30.5%
295
29.3%
336
33.5%
438
38.3%
Non-Low Income
665
69.5%
712
70.7%
668
66.5%
706
61.7%
Underrepresented Minority
206
21.5%
226
22.4%
234
23.3%
256
22.4%
123
59.7%
121
53.5%
142
60.7%
168
65.6%
83
40.3%
105
46.5%
92
39.3%
88
34.4%
751
78.5%
781
77.6%
770
76.7%
888
77.6%
Low Income
169
22.5%
174
22.3%
194
25.2%
270
30.4%
Non-Low Income
582
77.5%
607
77.7%
576
74.8%
618
69.6%
Low Income
334
27.7%
368
29.8%
519
36.0%
618
39.9%
Non-Low Income
870
72.3%
868
70.2%
923
64.0%
932
60.1%
Underrepresented Minority
First-Time Freshman Students
Low Income
Non-Low Income
Non-Underrepresented Minority
First-Time Transfer Students
177
14.7%
251
20.3%
262
18.2%
310
20.0%
Low Income
87
49.2%
133
53.0%
146
55.7%
187
60.3%
Non-Low Income
90
50.8%
118
47.0%
116
44.3%
123
39.7%
1,027
85.3%
985
79.7%
1,180
81.8%
1,240
80.0%
Low Income
247
24.1%
235
23.9%
373
31.6%
431
34.8%
Non-Low Income
780
75.9%
750
76.1%
807
68.4%
809
65.2%
Non-Underrepresented Minority
49
A2S Cohort Enrollments, Full-time vs. Part-time
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Low Income
273
29.9%
281
28.9%
326
33.3%
422
38.1%
Non-Low Income
641
70.1%
693
71.1%
653
66.7%
687
61.9%
Underrepresented Minority
191
20.9%
211
21.7%
222
22.7%
243
21.9%
111
58.1%
112
53.1%
136
61.3%
160
65.8%
80
41.9%
99
46.9%
86
38.7%
83
34.2%
First-Time Freshman Students
Full-Time Students
Low Income
Non-Low Income
Non-Underrepresented Minority
723
79.1%
763
78.3%
757
77.3%
866
78.1%
Low Income
162
22.4%
169
22.1%
190
25.1%
262
30.3%
Non-Low Income
561
77.6%
594
77.9%
567
74.9%
604
69.7%
Low Income
19
44.2%
14
42.4%
10
40.0%
16
45.7%
Non-Low Income
24
55.8%
19
57.6%
15
60.0%
19
54.3%
Underrepresented Minority
15
34.9%
15
45.5%
12
48.0%
13
37.1%
12
80.0%
9
60.0%
6
50.0%
8
61.5%
3
20.0%
6
40.0%
6
50.0%
5
38.5%
28
65.1%
18
54.5%
13
52.0%
22
62.9%
7
25.0%
5
27.8%
4
30.8%
8
36.4%
21
75.0%
13
72.2%
9
69.2%
14
63.6%
Low Income
249
28.7%
286
30.9%
414
38.3%
490
41.7%
Non-Low Income
620
71.3%
640
69.1%
666
61.7%
686
58.3%
Underrepresented Minority
119
13.7%
183
19.8%
179
16.6%
229
19.5%
Low Income
60
50.4%
104
56.8%
116
64.8%
145
63.3%
Non-Low Income
59
49.6%
79
43.2%
63
35.2%
84
36.7%
750
86.3%
743
80.2%
901
83.4%
947
80.5%
Low Income
189
25.2%
182
24.5%
298
33.1%
345
36.4%
Non-Low Income
561
74.8%
561
75.5%
603
66.9%
602
63.6%
Part-Time Students
Low Income
Non-Low Income
Non-Underrepresented Minority
Low Income
Non-Low Income
First-Time Transfer Students
Full-Time Students
Non-Underrepresented Minority
Part-Time Students
Low Income
Non-Low Income
Underrepresented Minority
85
25.4%
82
26.5%
105
29.0%
128
34.2%
250
74.6%
228
73.5%
257
71.0%
246
65.8%
58
17.3%
68
21.9%
83
22.9%
81
21.7%
Low Income
27
46.6%
29
42.6%
30
36.1%
42
51.9%
Non-Low Income
31
53.4%
39
57.4%
53
63.9%
39
48.1%
277
82.7%
242
78.1%
279
77.1%
293
78.3%
58
20.9%
53
21.9%
75
26.9%
86
29.4%
219
79.1%
189
78.1%
204
73.1%
207
70.6%
Non-Underrepresented Minority
Low Income
Non-Low Income
50