Tracking Transfer Student
Progress
Alice van Ommeren
Senior Researcher
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office
Martha Ellis
Associate Vice Chancellor Community College Partnerships
University of Texas System
Christine Keller
Director of Research/VSA Executive Director
Association of Public & Land-grant Universities
Focus of Presentation
Tracking the progress and success of
students who transfer to a 4-year
institution to earn a bachelor’s
degree.
“Tracking Facts”
 Over 60% of 4-year college graduates attend
more than one institution
 Community colleges seen as access point and
pathway to a bachelor’s degree – but transfer
rates are low
 No standard, agreed upon way to track the
progress and success of transfer students
Larger Context and Relevance
 Obama administration goal of “highest degree
attainment in the world” within a decade
 870,000
to 1.06 million more degrees
 70% of high school students enroll in college, half
leave with a degree
 Transfer rates from community colleges to
universities very low
 To increase degree attainment must know more
about progress of transfer students
California Community Colleges
Alice van Ommeren
Research & Planning
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office
CCC Transfer Tracking System
 110 colleges, 72 districts, 2.5 million students
 Student, course and faculty/staff data
 Colleges submit end of term, since 1993-94
 Student identifiers allow for matching
 CCC
 CSU/UC
 National
Student Clearinghouse
Transfer Matching
 California Community Colleges
•
•
Vertical transfers
First-time freshmen
 CSU/UC match
•
Public system transfer
 NSC match
•
•
Private system transfers (non- and for-profits)
Out-of-State transfers (public and private
Transfer System Metrics
 Metric #1 - Volume of Transfers
 “How
many students with at least 12 units
transferred in year X from CCC’s to four-year
institutions?”
 Metric # 2 -Transfer Rates
 “Of
students with behavioral intent to transfer who
started in Year X, what % of them eventually
transferred in X number of years?”
Volume of Transfers
Segments
 California State University
 University of California
 Non-Profit Private 4-year
 For-Profit Private 4-Year
 Out-of-State (Public)
Approximate
~ 48,000 (51%)
~ 13,000 (14%)
~ 14,000 (15%)
~ 12,000 (13%)
~ 7,000 (8%)
Top For-Profit Transfer Schools
Frequency
Percent
8,868
73.5%
DeVry University California
855
7.1%
ITT Technical Institute
Academy of Art University
786
6.5%
544
4.5%
Ashford University
397
3.3%
Argosy University
155
1.3%
Capella University
116
1.0%
Grand Canyon University
116
1.0%
Walden University
76
0.6%
Strayer University
74
0.6%
University of Phoenix
Who goes where?
CSU
UC
Non
Profit
For
Profit
White
47.9% 43.0%
55.8%
41.0%
Black/Afr Am
5.7%
3.3%
9.5%
16.3%
Hispanic
26.9% 16.2%
21.3%
30.1%
Asian
19.5% 37.5%
13.4%
12.6%
Transfer Rate
Transfer Rate Definition
 Behavioral intent - 12 units & attempted
transfer Math or English
 Time to transfer - 6 years (10 is better)
Transfer Rate Results
 Average Statewide - 42%
 Highest College - 58%
 Lowest College - 13%
Transfer Rates Demographics
Ethnicity
 Asian - 56%
 White - 44%
 Hispanic - 31%
 Black - 36%
Other
 Age - lower rates for 25 plus
 Gender – same rates
Comparing Transfer Rates
Predictors of Transfer
 Bachelor attainment of the service area
 Percent of students over age 25
Transfer Rate Adjustments
 Expected and actual transfer rates
Peer Grouping of Transfer Rates
 Clusters colleges that are alike for comparison
Policy and Program Implications
Volume of Transfer
 Enrollment management
 Market share of private sector
 Flow of underrepresented students
Transfer Rates
 Program evaluation purposes
 Transfer initiatives
University of Texas System
Martha Ellis, Ph.D.
A s s o c i a t e Vi c e C h a n c e l l o r C o mmu n i t y C o l l e g e
Partnerships
State of Texas
 UT System
9 general academic
institutions
 6 health science centers
 195,107 students
 33% of all students
enrolled in academic
institutions
 67% of all students
enrolled in healthrelated institutions
 7 other university
systems in Texas

 50 Community College
Districts—Independent
 610,500 students
75% of the state’s
freshmen and
sophomores
 78% of all Texas
minority students in
higher education

Definitions
 Transfer student is one who has successfully
completed 30 SCH at another institution
 Texas
Higher Education Coordinating Board does
track by community college to university but student
unit tracking not available to institutions
 Core completer—completion of general education
hours at community college
 Associate Degree completer
UTS: Core Completers and GPA
UTA
UTAUS
UTB
UTD UTEP
UTPA
UTPB
UTSA
UTT
Totals
Core Curriculum
Completer
604
92
40
336
226
246
6
190
318
2058
GPA First Year: < 2.0
111
13
5
46
25
20
0
35
52
307
93
9
1
50
30
36
1
35
53
308
GPA First Year: 2.5 -2.9
128
14
5
69
35
50
0
30
64
395
GPA First Year: 3.0 - 3.49
122
26
15
97
61
68
1
40
87
517
GPA First Year: 3.5 >
GPA First Year UNK
142
8
30
0
14
0
65
9
67
8
67
5
4
0
47
3
50
12
486
45
GPA First Year: 2.0 - 2.49
UTS: Associate Degree Completers and GPA
UTA
Academic and Technical Degree
Transfers
GPA First Year: < 2.0
GPA First Year: 2.0 - 2.49
GPA First Year: 2.5 -2.9
GPA First Year: 3.0 - 3.49
GPA First Year: 3.5 >
GPA First Year UNK
UTAUS UTB
UTD
UTEP
UTPA
UTPB
UTSA
UTT
Totals
663
114
100
131
142
165
92
8
10
15
27
31
81
13
7
11
19
30
332
38
51
68
101
67
275
33
37
41
75
80
262
19
39
56
73
70
80
4
9
14
29
21
323
58
48
55
74
84
261
39
44
59
63
44
2369
326
345
450
603
592
11
1
1
7
9
5
3
4
12
53
UTS: Qualitative Research
 Focus Groups with successful community college transfer
students
Credit hours upon transfer
35%
Hours lost upon transfer
60%
30%
50%
25%
8-29 sch
20%
30-59 sch
40%
15%
60-66 sch
30%
10%
67-77 sch
20%
25-45 sch
5%
78-125 sch
10%
N/A
0%
0 sch
3-12 sch
13-24 sch
0%
Percentage Of students
Percentage of students
Demographics:
50 %male/female 46% 1st Generation
47%Hispanic, 38% White, 7% African American, 7% Asian
59% 18-24 yrs of age 41% 25 yrs and older
Transfer Students Speak
 Students say:
 Advising
is lacking at both cc and university
 Academically well prepared by cc for university
 Customer service needs to be improved in student
services
 Must be highly self motivated to navigate the system
 Recommendations:
 Use


transfer students as ambassadors,
Provide better information and utilize technology
Eliminate competitive attitudes between institutions
Policy changes
 Accountability report includes transfer enrollments
and graduation
www.utsystem.edu/OSM/accountability/2008/homepage.htm
 Associate Vice Chancellor for Community College
Partnerships
 Statewide initiative with UTS, Texas A&M University,
and Texas Association of Community Colleges
 Joint legislative platform
 Public awareness campaign Transfer101.org
www.transfer101.0rg
Challenges
 Student unit tracking data
 Comprehensive transfer action plans that include
sharing of student data
 Consistent information about state policies for core
curriculum
 Competition for students based on current funding
model and therefore reluctance to share
information
 Definitions and tracking beyond 1 year for GPA
National Examples
Christine Keller
Director of Research and Policy Analysis
Executive Director, Voluntary System of Accountability
Association of Public and Land-grant Universities
Other Measures of Student Progress
 Success & Progress Rate
 Voluntary
System of Accountability (VSA)
 National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) data
 Time-to-Degree
 APLU/Sloan Foundation Grant
 National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) data
 Community College Transfer Survey
 The Consortium for Student Retention Data
Exchange (CSRDE) - University of Oklahoma
Overview of NSC Database
 3,300 postsecondary institutions
 92% of U.S. enrollment - 16.4 million
students
 86 million current and historical records
 70% of degrees awarded in the U.S.
 StudentTracker provides mechanism to
combine institution data with NSC data for
variety of analyses and tracking
VSA Success & Progress Rate
 Developed as
alternative to IPEDS
graduation rate
 Focuses on student
success in higher
education system
 Tracks student progress across 2-year and 4-
year institutions using NSC data
 New cohort query available to all Student
Tracker users
Time-to-Degree
 Pilot project by APLU and NSC, funded by
Sloan Foundation
 Test common method for calculating
undergraduate time-to-degree using days
enrolled
 Combines NSC and institution data
 Benefits: comprehensive, comparable
Percent Time at Home Institution
by Admit Status
Admit Status
N
Time Period
Home
Institution
(mean)
All
Institutions
(mean)
% Time
at Home
Institution
Full-time
First-time
Students
4148
Years
Terms
Days
4.5
9.4
1042.8
4.9
10.2
1134.0
92%
Transfer
Students
1918
Years
Terms
Days
3.5
7.0
792.7
5.7
12.0
1345.5
59%
Transfer Students: Days at Home Institution
and Other Institutions
100%
90%
80%
538
488
428
580
70%
60%
Other
Home
50%
40%
30%
792
954
718
869
Midwest
East
Southeast
20%
10%
0%
Research
TTD by Admit Status & Pell Grant
Freshmen
Research
East
Southeast
1,300
1,200
1,225
1,222
Transfers
1,189
1,600
1,103
1,100
1,500
1078
1,518
1,479
1,416
1,400
1,000
973
1,300
1,200
900
Pell
No Pell
Research
East
Southeast
1,248
1,259
1,116
1,100
1,000
900
Pell
No Pell
Consortium for Student Retention Data
Exchange (CSRDE) - University of Oklahoma
 Voluntary data exchange among 500+ two-year
and four-year institutions
 Comparative benchmarking data on retention and
graduation by cohort
 2-year
cohorts: first-time full-time; first-time part-
time
 4 year cohorts: first-time full-time; first-time fulltime STEM, community college transfers
 Community College Transfer Survey tracks full-
and part-time cohorts with over 30 credit hours
Graduation Rates by Race/Ethnicity
Fall 2000-2006 Cohorts
113 four-year institutions
Two-Year
Three-Year
Four-Year
(2000-06)
(2000-05)
(2000-04)
Black
16.3%
38.0%
49.2%
Hispanic
21.0%
48.2%
60.2%
Asian
20.3%
48.8%
61.2%
White
22.4%
50.5%
62.2%
Hayes, R. (ED). (2009) CSRDE Community College Transfer Report: The Retention and Graduation
Rates of 2000-07 Community College Transfer Cohorts in 113 College and Universities
Questions?
Concurrent Session 1:
Follow up: Tracking
Student Progress
Advarado F
Alice van Ommeren
California Community College
Chancellor’s Office
avanommeren@cccco.edu
Martha Ellis
Associate Vice Chancellor Community
College Partnerships
mellis@utsystem.edu
Christine Keller
APLU Director of Research
VSA Executive Director
ckeller@aplu.org