NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Statistical Analysis Report June 1997

Postsecondary Education Descriptive Analysis Reports

Transfer Behavior Among

Beginning Postsecondary

Students: 1989–94

Alexander C. McCormick

MPR Associates, Inc.

C. Dennis Carroll

Project Officer

National Center for Education Statistics

Data Series: BPS:90/94

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 97-266
iii

Foreword

This report is part of the Postsecondary Education Descriptive Analysis Reports (PEDAR)

series. The PEDAR series consists of reports that focus on postsecondary education policy issues,

taking advantage of a variety of education data sources, especially recently completed data

collections. Other reports in the series include: Undergraduates Who Work While Enrolled in

Postsecondary Education: 1989–90 (NCES 94-311); Characteristics of Students Who Borrow to

Finance Their Postsecondary Education (NCES 95-310); Minority Undergraduate Participation

in Postsecondary Education (NCES 95-166); Profile of Older Undergraduates: 1989–90 (NCES

95-167); Profile of Part-Time Undergraduates in Postsecondary Education: 1989–90 (NCES

95-173); Packaging of Undergraduate Student Financial Aid: 1989–90 (NCES 95-313); How

Low Income Undergraduates Financed Postsecondary Education: 1992–93 (NCES 96-161); and

Nontraditional Undergraduates: Trends in Enrollment from 1986 to 1992 and Persistence and

Attainment Among 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students (NCES 97-578).

This report describes patterns of multiple institution attendance and transfer by students

who first entered postsecondary education during the academic year 1989–90. The data were

drawn from the second follow-up of the 1990 Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS)

Longitudinal Study, conducted in the spring of 1994. The BPS sample was drawn from students

who participated in the 1990 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS), a nationally

representative cross-sectional survey of graduate and undergraduate students.

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the public access BPS:90/94

Data Analysis System (DAS). The DAS is a microcomputer application that allows users to

specify and generate their own tables from the BPS data. The DAS produces design-adjusted

standard errors necessary for testing the statistical significance of differences shown in the tables.

Additional information about the DAS, and how it may be obtained, is included in appendix C of

this report.

We hope that the information provided in this report will be useful to a wide range of

interested readers, and that the results reported here will encourage others to use the BPS data.

Pascal D. Forgione

Associate Commissioner

Data Development and Longitudinal Studies Group
v

Highlights

This report examines transfer behavior among students who began their postsecondary

education in academic year 1989–90, using the most current, nationally representative longitudinal

data on student progress through postsecondary education. Attendance patterns were examined

through 1993–94. The following summarizes some of the report’s key findings:

• Of students who began their postsecondary education in 1989–90, almost half (45

percent) had enrolled as undergraduates at more than one institution by 1994. One-third

had attended two institutions, and 12 percent had attended three or more institutions. Not

all students who attended more than one institution transferred, however.

• Thirty-five percent of all 1989–90 beginning postsecondary students had transferred by

1994.

• About one out of four students (28 percent) who began at a 4-year institution transferred:

16 percent to another 4-year institution, and 13 percent to a less-than-4-year institution.

1

• Among students who began at a 2-year institution, 43 percent transferred: 22 percent to a

4-year institution, 15 percent to another 2-year institution, and 5 percent to a less-than-2-

year institution.

1

• One-quarter of students who began at a less-than-two-year institution transferred: 6

percent to a 4-year institution, 12 percent to a 2-year institution, and 6 percent to another

less-than-2-year institution.

1

• Students who transferred from a 4-year institution were much more likely than other

transfers to enroll at the destination institution within 6 months of their departure from

the first institution (68 percent did so, compared with 10–18 percent of students who

transferred from a less-than-4-year institution). At the other extreme, nearly one-quarter

of transfers from a 2-year institution were out of school for more than 3 years, compared

with 2 percent of students who transferred from a 4-year institution.

• Almost all transfers from 4-year institutions (97 percent) transferred without earning any

credential. Among transfers from 2-year institutions, 78 percent transferred without a

credential, and almost all of the others (20 percent) completed an associate’s degree.

About two-thirds of transfers from less-than-2-year institutions transferred without

completing any credential, and the remainder completed a certificate.

 

1Details may not sum to totals dues to rounding and the exclusion of students who transferred to an institution of

unknown level (see table 4).
vi

Transfer from 4-year institutions

• Among students at 4-year institutions, those with grade point averages (GPAs) below

2.50 at the first institution were more likely than other students to transfer (36 percent

transferred, compared with 20–27 percent of students with higher grades).

• Dissatisfaction with any of the following factors (as reported in 1992) was positively

related to transfer from 4-year institutions: intellectual growth, teacher ability,

institutional prestige, and social life. Of these factors, students’ dissatisfaction with their

intellectual growth had a very strong correspondence to transfer: 63 percent of those who

were dissatisfied with their intellectual growth at the first institution transferred,

compared with 25 percent of students who found their intellectual growth to be

satisfactory. At private institutions, students who were dissatisfied with the prestige of

the institution were twice as likely to transfer as those who were content with the

institution’s prestige (54 versus 25 percent).

• The availability of various student services and students’ satisfaction with those services

were also related to transfer from 4-year institutions. Those reporting a lack of access to

job placement, job counseling, and personal counseling services were much more likely to

transfer than were students on campuses where such services were available. Among

students who used services such as job placement and academic, personal, and job

counseling, satisfaction with the experience was related to their likelihood of transfer.

• On average, students who transferred from a 4-year institution left 14 months after they

began, and took about 7 months off before enrolling at the destination institution.

Students who entered another 4-year institution (horizontal transfers) stayed at the first

institution longer than did those who entered a less-than-4-year institution (reverse

transfers), and they also took less time off before entering the destination institution.

• Among students who began at a 4-year institution, those who did not transfer were more

likely than horizontal transfers to have completed a bachelor’s degree by 1994 (63

percent of nontransfers had completed the degree, compared with 45 percent of

horizontal transfers). However, if one combines bachelor’s degree attainment and current

enrollment at a 4-year institution as a broad measure of persistence, the two groups have

similar persistence rates.

• Reverse transfer from a 4-year institution does not always signal a permanent

abandonment of bachelor’s degree plans: 22 percent of reverse transfers had either

completed a bachelor’s degree by 1994 or were enrolled at a 4-year institution.
vii

Transfer from public 2-year colleges to 4-year institutions

• One out of four community college students indicated in 1989–90 that they were working

toward a bachelor’s degree (prospective transfers). Of this group, 39 percent transferred

directly to a 4-year institution by 1994.

• Among community college students identified as prospective transfers, those who

enrolled full time in their first year were about twice as likely as those who enrolled part

time to transfer to a 4-year institution within 5 years (50 percent of full-timers

transferred, compared with 26 percent of part-timers).

• Among community college beginners who transferred to a 4-year institution, 65 percent

transferred without a degree. About one out of three completed an associate’s degree

before transferring.

• On average, community college beginners who transferred to a 4-year institution spent

about 20 months at the first institution. They often took a considerable amount of time

off between institutions, averaging 21 months.

• While one out of four community college transfers had received a bachelor’s degree by

1994, another 44 percent were still enrolled at a 4-year institution, for an overall

persistence rate of 70 percent. This is comparable to the persistence rate among students

who began at 4-year institutions and among 4-year horizontal transfers.

• The bachelor’s degree attainment rate was much higher among the minority of

community college transfers who completed an associate’s degree before transferring: 43

percent of associate’s degree completers had received a bachelor’s degree by 1994,

compared with 17 percent among those who transferred without any credential.
viii

Acknowledgments

Many people made important contributions to this report. At the U.S. Department of

Education, Dennis Carroll shepherded the project from preliminary planning through technical

review and adjudication, making valuable suggestions at every stage. Clifford Adelman offered

careful review and constructive criticism at several critical junctures, as well. Nabeel Alsalam,

Larry Bobbitt, and Paula Knepper reviewed preliminary findings, Ellen Bradburn provided

meticulous technical review, and Susan Broyles, Robert Burton, Daniel Goldenberg, and Kristen

Perry reviewed and commented on the final draft for the adjudication process.

Outside the Department of Education, members of the PEDAR Technical Review Panel

deserve special mention for their contributions. Zelda Gamson of the University of Massachusetts,

Janet Hansen of the National Academy of Sciences, Larry Litten of the Consortium on Financing

Higher Education, and Ken Redd of the National Association of Independent Colleges and

Universities provided helpful comments on the preliminary analysis plan; John Lee of JBL

Associates reviewed preliminary findings and made valuable suggestions that helped focus the

final report; and Kent Phillippe of the American Association of Community Colleges reviewed and

commented on the final draft.

At MPR Associates, Lutz Berkner, Laura Horn, and other members of the PEDAR research

group made valuable substantive contributions. Ellen Liebman demonstrated patience and

virtuosity in the complex programming tasks required for the analysis, and Vicky Dingler

produced the final data files. Andrea Livingston and Karyn Madden provided editorial support,

and Don Eike, Barbara Kridl, Mary Sukkestad, and Connie Yin provided vital production

support.
ix

Table of Contents

Foreword ................................ ................................ ................ iii

Highlights ................................ ................................ ................ v

Acknowledgments ................................ ................................ ...... viii

List of Tables ................................ ................................ ............ xi

List of Figures ................................ ................................ .......... xiv

Introduction ................................ ................................ .............. 1

Definition of Transfer................................ ................................ .... 1

Attendance at Multiple Institutions................................ ....................... 3

Overview ................................ ................................ ............... 3

Attainment at First Institution and Transfer by Students Who Attended Multiple

Institutions ................................ ................................ ........... 5

Overview of Transfer Activity ................................ ............................ 6

Origin and Destination of Transfer................................ ........................ 6

Timing of Transfer................................ ................................ ....... 8

Attainment Prior to Transfer ................................ ............................ 13

Transfer From 4-Year Institutions................................ ....................... 13

Who Transfers From 4-Year Institutions? ................................ ................ 15

Accounting for Transfer From 4-Year Institutions ................................ ........ 17

Where Did the Transfers Go? ................................ ........................... 19

What Proportion of Transfers Received Credit for Their Coursework at the First

Institution? ................................ ................................ .......... 24

What Happened to the Transfers, and How Did They Fare Relative to Students Who Did

Not Transfer?................................ ................................ ........ 25

Transfer From Public 2-Year Colleges to 4-Year Institutions............................. 27

Students’ Degree Goals................................ ................................ . 28

Overview of Transfer Activity Among Community College Beginners...................... 31

Attainment Before Transferring to a 4-Year Institution................................ .... 33

Timing of Transfer to 4-Year Institutions ................................ ................ 35

Transfer of Credit by Students Who Transferred to 4-Year Institutions..................... 36

What Became of Students Who Transferred to a 4-Year Institution? ....................... 38

Did Students Who Did Not Transfer Directly to a 4-Year Institution Eventually Attend

One? ................................ ................................ ................ 40

Analysis of Transfer After Controlling for Background Variation ........................ 42

Horizontal Transfer From 4-Year Institutions................................ ............. 42

Reverse Transfer From 4-Year Institutions ................................ ............... 44

Transfer From Community Colleges to 4-Year Institutions ................................ 44
x

Table of Contents—Continued

Summary ................................ ................................ ................ 47

Transfer From 4-Year Institutions ................................ ....................... 47

Transfer From Public 2-Year Colleges to 4-Year Institutions .............................. 48

References................................ ................................ ............... 49

Appendix A: Reference Tables................................ ........................... 51

Appendix B: Glossary ................................ ................................ ... 55

Appendix C: Technical Notes and Methodology................................ .......... 69
xi

List of Tables

Table Page

1 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students according to number of

institutions attended, by first institution type and degree expectations: 1989–94 ......... 3

2 Of 1989–90 beginning students who attended more than one institution, percentage

distribution according to degree attainment at first institution, by level of first institution:

1989–94 ................................ ................................ ........... 5

3 Among 1989–90 beginning students who attended more than one institution, percentage

who transferred by level of first institution, by number of institutions attended and

degree attainment at the first institution: 1989–94 ................................ ..... 6

4 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students according to transfer status and

level of transfer destination, by level of first institution: 1989–94 ....................... 7

5 Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred by level of first institution,

by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94 ........................... 9

6 Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred, percentage distribution according to

number of months enrolled at first institution prior to transfer, by selected student and

enrollment characteristics: 1989–94 ................................ ................. 10

7 Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred, percentage distribution according to

number of months between institutions, by selected student and enrollment characteristics:

1989–94 ................................ ................................ .......... 12

8 Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred, percentage distribution according to

degree attainment prior to transfer, by selected student and enrollment characteristics:

1989–94 ................................ ................................ .......... 14

9 Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred by

control of first institution, by selected student characteristics: 1989–90 ................ 16

10 Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred by

control of first institution, by satisfaction with aspects of the institution: 1989–94 ...... 18

11 Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions, percentage

distribution according to level of transfer destination, by selected student and

enrollment characteristics: 1989–94 ................................ ................. 22
xii

List of Tables—Continued

Table Page

12 Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred between 4-year institutions, percentage

distribution according to control of transfer destination, by control of first institution:

1989–94 ................................ ................................ .......... 23

13 Among 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions, average

GPA by level of transfer destination, by control of first institution and timing of transfer:

1989–94 ................................ ................................ .......... 23

14 Among 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions, average

number of months enrolled at first institution and average number of months between

institutions, by GPA and level of transfer destination: 1989–94........................ 25

15 Among 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions and attended

two institutions, percentage who transferred credits by level of transfer destination, by

control of first institution, GPA, and timing of transfer: 1989–94...................... 26

16 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions according

to 1994 enrollment and attainment status, by transfer status: 1989–94 ................. 26

17 Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage distribution

according to stated degree goal, by selected student and enrollment characteristics:

1989–90 ................................ ................................ .......... 29

18 Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage distribution

according to transfer status, by stated degree goal: 1989–94 .......................... 32

19 Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions with stated goal of a

bachelor’s degree, percentage distribution according to transfer status, by selected

student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94 ................................ ..... 34

20 Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions, percentage distribution according to degree attainment prior to transfer,

by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94 .......................... 35

21 Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions, average number of months enrolled at the first institution and average number

of months between institutions, by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–

94 ................................ ................................ ................ 36
xiii

List of Tables—Continued

Table Page

22 Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions and attended two institutions, percentage who transferred credits, by selected

student characteristics: 1989–94 ................................ .................... 37

23 Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions, percentage distribution according to attainment and enrollment outcomes

as of 1994, by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94 ............... 39

24 Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage who

ever stated working toward a bachelor’s degree, who ever attended a 4-year institution,

and who had attained a bachelor’s degree, by stated degree goal and transfer status:

1989–94 ................................ ................................ .......... 41

25 Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions with stated goal of a

bachelor’s degree, percentage who ever attended a 4-year institution and who had

attained a bachelor’s degree, by transfer status: 1989–94 ............................. 42

26 Among 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions, percentage who transferred

to another 4-year institution by selected characteristics, and this percentage after taking

into account the covariation of the variables in the table: 1989–94..................... 43

27 Among 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions, percentage who transferred

to a less-than-4-year institution by selected characteristics, and this percentage after taking

into account the covariation of the variables in the table: 1989–94..................... 45

28 Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage who

transferred to a 4-year institution by selected characteristics, and this percentage after

taking into account the covariation of the variables in the table: 1989–94 .............. 46

A1 Percentage distribution of beginning postsecondary students according to level and

control of first institution, by selected student characteristics: 1989–90 ................ 52

A2 Percentage distribution (in columns) of beginning postsecondary students according to

selected characteristics, by level and control of first institution: 1989–90............... 53

C1 Standard errors corresponding to table 5 ................................ ............ 75
xiv

List of Figures

Figure Page

1 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students according to number of institutions

attended, by first institution type: 1989–94 ................................ ........... 4

2 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students according to transfer status, by

level of first institution: 1989–94................................ ..................... 8

3 Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred, by

their satisfaction with various aspects of the first institution: 1989–94 ................. 20

4 Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred, by the

availability of various student services at the first institution: 1989–94 ................. 21

5 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who

transferred according to level of transfer destination, by grade point average in

1989–90: 1989–94................................ ................................ . 24

6 Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who had attained a

bachelor’s degree or were enrolled at a 4-year institution as of Spring 1994, by transfer

status: 1989–94................................ ................................ .... 27

7 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions

according to stated degree goal, by socioeconomic status: 1989–90 ................... 30

8 Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions

who transferred according to transfer status, by stated degree goal in 1989–90:

1989–94 ................................ ................................ .......... 33

9 Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to a

4-year institution, percentage who had attained a bachelor’s degree or were enrolled at

a 4-year institution as of Spring 1994, by attainment prior to transfer: 1989–94 ........ 40
1

Introduction

A recent report from the National Center for Education Statistics showed that patterns of

student persistence and attainment in postsecondary education look quite different when examined

relative to an individual institution versus the postsecondary education system as a whole: many

students change institutions before attaining a degree.2 This report extends and elaborates upon

those findings, analyzing undergraduate transfer behavior among first-time students in

postsecondary education by tracing their attendance patterns from academic year 1989–90, when

they first enrolled in postsecondary education, through academic year 1993–94. It uses the most

current nationally representative longitudinal data on student progress through postsecondary

education, the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:90/94). (Refer to

appendix C for a detailed description of the BPS data.)

This report first provides a general description of attendance at multiple institutions. Next, it

provides an overview of transfer activity across the population of beginning students. Two types

of transfer are then analyzed in detail: transfer out of 4-year institutions, and transfer from public

2-year institutions to 4-year institutions. Finally, three appendices are included for readers who

desire additional information. Appendix A presents percentage distributions of key populations

according to level and control of the base year sample institution, and also the distribution of

selected student characteristics within each type of institution. Appendix B contains a glossary

that provides detailed information about the characteristics presented in the tables. Appendix C

describes the data and statistical methods used in the report.

Definition of Transfer

Transfer can be defined as a transition between postsecondary institutions in which the

second institution (the destination, or receiving institution) typically grants the student credit for

coursework taken at the first institution (the origin, or sending institution). It is normally a oneway transition: students who transfer do not return to the first institution. Thus, temporary

enrollment at a second institution, followed by a return to the first, is not normally considered to

be a transfer.3

Transfer can be characterized with respect to the level of the origin and destination

institutions. Horizontal transfer occurs between institutions at the same level (for example,

between 4-year institutions), while vertical transfer involves a change of level (for example, from

a 2-year to a 4-year institution). Vertical transfer is sometimes described with respect to the

direction of transfer: forward transfer involves movement to a higher level institution, while

reverse transfer is movement in the opposite direction. (These may also be referred to as upward

and downward transfer.) Since the BPS data do not include information on whether particular

 

2L. Berkner, S. Cuccaro-Alamin, and A. McCormick, Descriptive Summary of 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students: 5 Years Later (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics, 1996).

3See B. Gose, “Double Dippers,” Chronicle of Higher Education (August 4, 1995): A27.
2

institutions awarded transfer credit, this aspect of transfer is not reflected in the operational

definition of transfer used in this report.4

For this report, the definition of transfer was based solely on the pattern of students’

enrollment: any transition from one institution to another that was not followed by a return to the

first institution was defined as a transfer.5 In addition, any transition from a less-than-4-year

institution to a 4-year institution was considered to be a transfer, even if a student subsequently

reenrolled at the first institution. This permits a broad definition of this important kind of vertical

transfer in order to capture all possible transfers to 4-year institutions and to avoid inappropriately

excluding bona fide transfers who may temporarily reenroll at the first institution.6

Students do not necessarily have to complete an associate’s degree to transfer from a 2-year

to a 4-year institution. Depending upon a particular institution’s or system’s transfer admission

practices, students may transfer with an associate’s degree, a certificate, or without any credential.

Consequently, completion of subbaccalaureate credentials was not considered in the operational

definition of transfer. However, students who completed a bachelor’s degree at their first

institution were not eligible for transfer, even if they subsequently enrolled elsewhere.

Three types of transitions were thus defined as transfers:

1) A student began at a less-than-4-year institution, left that institution with or without a

degree, enrolled at another less-than-4-year institution, and did not return to the first

institution;

2) A student began at a less-than-4-year institution, left that institution with or without a

degree, and enrolled at a 4-year institution (regardless of subsequent enrollment at the

first institution); or

3) A student began at a 4-year institution, left that institution without completing a

bachelor’s degree, enrolled at another postsecondary institution, and did not return to

the first institution.

Using this broad definition, certain students who might not normally be considered transfers

are included. For example, a student who enrolled at one institution for a semester, left school for

an extended period, and then enrolled as a first-year student at a different institution (without

transferring any credit for previous work), is classified as a transfer under this definition. Another

example is a student who completed a vocational certificate at a less-than-2-year institution and

subsequently enrolled at a 2-year or 4-year institution. Although such a transition may not involve

any transfer of credit, this definition considers students at 2-year and less-than-2-year institutions

as equally eligible for transfer.

 

4The BPS data do include a more general indication of whether a student transferred credits between any

institutions, and this is examined in the descriptive analysis of transfer patterns.

5

Thus it is possible that some students who looked like transfers as of 1994 will later return to the first institution.

6For example, this would include a student who transfers from a 2-year to a 4-year institution but subsequently

reenrolls at the first institution to complete additional credits.
3

Since the definition of transfer requires that a student cease enrollment at the first

institution, concurrent enrollment at two institutions does not constitute a transfer. Should a

student who had been concurrently enrolled cease enrollment at the first institution while

remaining enrolled at the second, then the transition may qualify as a transfer.

Attendance at Multiple Institutions

Transfer is, in effect, a special case of attendance at more than one institution. To set the

context for examining transfer, it is worthwhile to begin by examining the general phenomenon of

attendance at multiple institutions and its relationship to transfer.

Overview

Of students who began their postsecondary education in 1989–90, almost half (45 percent)

had enrolled as undergraduates at more than one institution by 1994. One-third attended two

institutions, and 12 percent attended three or more institutions (table 1). Concurrent enrollment at

Table 1—Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students according to number of institutions

attended, by first institution type and degree expectations: 1989–94

Two or more

Three

One Total Two or more

Total 54.6 45.4 33.6 11.8

Level and control of first institution*

4-year 52.9 47.1 33.0 14.0

Public, 4-year 53.7 46.3 33.3 13.0

Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 51.4 48.6 32.5 16.1

2-year 51.4 48.6 37.4 11.2

Public, 2-year 52.1 47.9 37.2 10.7

Private, not-for-profit, 2-year 33.2 66.8 42.9 23.9

Less-than-2-year 67.3 32.7 19.6 13.1

Public, less-than-2-year 73.1 27.0 17.8 9.2

Private, not-for-profit, less-than-2-year 36.7 63.3 29.2 34.0

Private, for-profit 72.6 27.4 22.3 5.1

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 73.9 26.1 23.3 2.8

Bachelor’s degree 49.9 50.1 36.6 13.6

Advanced degree 46.4 53.6 37.9 15.7

*Totals by level are limited to public and private, not-for-profit institutions.

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
4

more than one institution was relatively rare: over the 5 years under study, 7 percent of beginning

students exhibited such a pattern.7

The proportion of students attending more than one institution varied with the type of

institution first attended (figure 1). Students who began at public 2-year and public or private,

not-for-profit 4-year institutions were equally likely to attend more than one institution, with

about half (46–49 percent) doing so (table 1). Two out of three students who began

postsecondary education at private, not-for-profit 2-year institutions attended at least one other

institution, as did about one out of four students who began at public less-than-2-year institutions

and private, for-profit institutions.

Figure 1—Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students according to number of institutions

attended, by first institution type: 1989–94

4-year 2-year Lessthan-2-

year

Private,

forprofit

First institution type*

Three or more

Two

One

Number of

institutions

attended

Percent

*Distributions by level are limited to public and private, not-for-profit institutions.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

 

7U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
5

Attending multiple institutions was also related to students’ educational expectations.

Students who said in 1989–90 that they expected to attain a bachelor’s degree or higher were

twice as likely as those with lower expectations to have attended more than one institution by

1994 (50–54 percent versus 26 percent).

Attainment at First Institution and Transfer by Students Who Attended Multiple

Institutions

Attending more than one institution does not necessarily mean a student left without a

degree. An appreciable number of students who attended more than one institution completed a

degree at the first institution, before or after enrolling elsewhere (table 2). Of students who began

at a 4-year institution and attended more than one institution, about one-quarter (29 percent)

received a bachelor’s degree from the first institution. For most of these students, the additional

enrollment extended, augmented, or was incidental to their bachelor’s program at the first

institution.8

Table 2—Of 1989–90 beginning students who attended more than one institution, percentage distribution

according to degree attainment at first institution, by level of first institution: 1989–94

None Certificate Associate’s Bachelor’s

Total 71.2 3.9 12.2 12.8

Level of first institution

4-year 69.0 0.4 1.7 28.8

2-year 75.3 2.4 22.3 0

Less-than-2-year 52.3 47.7 0 0

NOTE: Details may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

As noted earlier, transfer is a special case of multiple-institution attendance. That is, a subset

of students who attended more than one institution qualify as transfers. This relationship is

depicted in table 3, which shows that 60 percent of 4-year beginners who attended more than one

institution transferred, as did about 90 percent of students who began at a less-than-4-year

institution and attended more than one institution.

 

8Out of the 29 percent who received a degree from the first institution, 25 percent had attended more than one

institution before receiving the degree—that is, they enrolled elsewhere and then returned to the first institution to

complete the degree. A small number had further undergraduate enrollment after receiving the bachelor’s degree

(U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up [BPS:90/94], Data Analysis System).
6

Table 3—Among 1989–90 beginning students who attended more than one institution, percentage who

transferred by level of first institution, by number of institutions attended and degree attainment

at the first institution: 1989–94

Less-thanTotal 4-year 2-year 2-year

Total 77.1 60.1 90.2 92.7

Number of institutions attended

Two 73.6 52.2 88.6 90.9

Three or more 87.3 78.7 95.6 97.5

Attainment at first institution

Did not attain 88.5 84.8 90.8 98.0

Attained, total 48.5 5.2 88.3 86.9

Certificate 85.9 — 83.2 86.9

Associate’s degree 87.6 — 88.8 —

Bachelor’s degree (*) (*) (*) (*)

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

*Not applicable. Students who attained a bachelor’s degree at first institution are not eligible for transfer (see text), and lessthan-4-year institutions do not award bachelor’s degrees.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Overview of Transfer Activity

Whereas the previous section examined students’ overall pattern of attendance at more than

one institution, this section looks at the subset of multiple-institution attenders whose transition

between institutions qualifies as a transfer, as defined at the beginning of this report. Although

students may transfer more than once, the following analyses of transfer are restricted to the first

transfer.

Thirty-five percent of all 1989–90 beginning postsecondary students transferred within 5

years of entering postsecondary education: 18 percent transferred to a 4-year institution, 13

percent to a 2-year institution, and 4 percent to a less-than-2-year institution (table 4).

Origin and Destination of Transfer

Students’ propensity to transfer and the destination of transfer varied somewhat with the

type of institution first attended (figure 2). About one out of four students (28 percent) who

began at a 4-year institution transferred: 16 percent entered another 4-year institution, and 13

percent entered a less-than-4-year institution, with most of them entering a 2-year institution

(table 4). Among students who began at a 2-year institution, 43 percent transferred: 22 percent to

a 4-year institution, 15 percent to another 2-year institution, and 5 percent to a less-than-2-year

institution. One-quarter of students who began at a less-than-2-year institution transferred:
7

Table 4—Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students according to transfer status and level of

transfer destination, by level of first institution: 1989–94

Transferred, by level of destination

Transferred

Transferred Transferred to less- Transferred,

Did not to to than- destination

transfer Total 4-year 2-year 2-year unknown*

Total 65.0 35.0 17.8 13.1 3.6 0.5

Level of first institution

4-year 71.7 28.3 15.6 11.6 1.0 0.1

2-year 57.5 42.6 21.8 14.6 5.4 0.8

Less-than-2-year 75.5 24.5 5.8 11.8 6.3 0.6

*A small number of students are known to have transferred but characteristics of the transfer destination could not be

determined.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

6 percent to a 4-year institution, 12 percent to a 2-year institution, and 6 percent to another lessthan-2-year institution. 9,10

Transfer was particularly common among students who began postsecondary education at a

private, not-for-profit 2-year institution (62 percent).11 Among students who began at a public 2-

year institution, about two students in five transferred (43 percent) (table 5).

Within each type of institution, transfer was related to certain student characteristics.

Among students who began postsecondary education at 2-year institutions, the likelihood of

transferring was directly related to their stated educational expectations in the first year: students

who expected to complete a bachelor’s degree or higher were two to three times more likely to

transfer than those who did not expect to complete at least a bachelor’s degree (half of those

expecting to complete a bachelor’s degree transferred, as did 59 percent of those expecting to

complete an advanced degree, compared with 23 percent of those who did not expect to complete

at least a bachelor’s degree) (table 5).

The relationship between students’ educational expectations and their socioeconomic

background has been well established. Thus, it is not surprising to find a relationship between

socioeconomic status (SES) and transfer behavior among 2-year college students that

corresponds to the findings for educational expectations: 60 percent of high-SES students at 2-

year colleges transferred, as did 40 percent of middle-SES and 25 percent of low-SES students.

 

9

Details may not sum to totals due to rounding and the exclusion of students who transferred to an institution of

unknown level (see table 4).

10Students completing a subbaccalaureate credential at the first institution are included among transfers.

11This group is a very small segment—about 2 percent—of the beginning population, however (appendix A, table

A1).
Figure 2-Percentage distribution of 1989-90 beginning students according to transfer status, by level of

first institution: 1989-94

Percent

80 -

70 - “

60 - -

Transfer status

50 - -

40 - -

30 - -

20 - -

10 --

0“

4-year 2-year Less-than-2-

year

Level of first institution

NOTE: The small number of students who transferred to an institution of unknown level is not represented.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Timing of Transfer

In addition to the mere fact of transfer, the timing of transfer is also of interest. First, did

students have substantial exposure to the first institution, or leave after just a few months?

Examining the duration of enrollment at the first institution provides an indication of the extent

of course taking at the first institution and the likely number of credits available for transfer.

Second, did the transfer follow an interruption in postsecondary attendance, or did students

change institutions without interrupting their educational progress? Examining how much time

elapsed between institutions reveals what proportion of students made an uninterrupted

transition, and what proportion took time off before resuming their education at a different

institution.
9

Table 5—Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred by level of first institution, by selected

student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94

Total 4-year 2-year Less-than-2-year

Total 35.0 28.3 42.6 24.5

Control of first institution

Public 36.6 28.1 42.7 25.9

Private, not-for-profit 33.0 28.7 62.4 56.8

Private, for-profit 26.0 — 32.1 22.4

Attainment at first institution1

Did not attain 45.3 51.9 42.7 31.3

Attained, total 17.1 1.6 42.0 19.3

Certificate 18.1 — 15.2 19.3

Associate’s degree 49.1 27.0 51.4 —

Bachelor’s degree ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 )

Grade point average 1989–90

Not reported 31.9 31.0 34.7 26.1

Below 2.50 40.8 35.5 45.9 19.5

2.50–2.99 38.9 26.7 59.7 17.1

3.00–3.49 31.2 20.7 42.1 22.9

3.50 or higher 28.0 20.1 36.0 24.5

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree322.3 30.3 22.5 19.7

Bachelor’s degree 41.9 33.7 49.1 31.2

Advanced degree 37.2 25.5 59.2 44.2

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 23.0 19.9 25.4 17.9

Middle 50% 35.1 29.8 40.2 24.7

Top 25% 39.2 28.2 57.8 40.3

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1

For those who attained more than one degree at the first institution, first degree attained.

2Not applicable. Students who attained a bachelor’s degree at first institution are not eligible for transfer (see text), and lessthan-4-year institutions do not award bachelor’s degrees.

3

Several factors may account for students at 4-year institutions who expect less than a bachelor’s degree: some may be working

on a subbaccalaureate credential (which some 4-year institutions offer) and not plan to continue their education; some may have

decided to leave school before completing a bachelor’s degree; and some may lack confidence that they will complete one.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Duration of enrollment at the first institution

About half of all students who transferred were enrolled at the first institution for up to 10

months; one-quarter were enrolled for 11–20 months; and the remainder (22 percent) spent more

than 20 months at the first institution before transferring (table 6).
10

Table 6—Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred, percentage distribution according to number of

months enrolled at first institution prior to transfer, by selected student and enrollment

characteristics: 1989–94

0–10 21 or

Total 0–5 6–10 11–20 more

Total 51.6 21.2 30.4 26.6 21.8

Level and control of first institution*

4-year 55.5 17.3 38.2 26.4 18.1

Public, 4-year 52.8 17.2 35.6 26.5 20.7

Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 60.8 17.5 43.3 26.2 13.0

2-year 46.3 20.6 25.6 27.1 26.7

Public, 2-year 46.0 20.6 25.4 26.4 27.6

Private, not-for-profit, 2-year 51.7 22.0 29.7 38.6 9.7

Less-than-2-year 68.9 49.3 19.6 25.9 5.3

Public, less-than-2-year 79.5 63.3 16.3 13.0 7.5

Private, not-for-profit, less-than-2-year — — — — —

Private, for-profit 69.6 36.2 33.3 23.9 6.6

Level of transfer destination

4-year 35.2 11.0 24.2 31.4 33.4

2-year 64.3 29.3 35.0 24.5 11.2

Less-than-2-year 80.0 39.3 40.8 14.1 5.9

Level of transfer origin and destination

4-year to 4-year 50.3 12.9 37.3 28.2 21.6

2-year to 4-year 24.9 8.8 16.1 32.9 42.2

Less-than-2-year to 4-year 56.2 30.9 25.3 42.7 1.2

4-year to 2-year 61.4 23.1 38.3 25.0 13.6

2-year to 2-year 65.7 32.2 33.5 23.7 10.7

Less-than-2-year to 2-year 68.5 38.4 30.1 27.6 3.9

4-year to less-than-2-year 63.7 18.7 45.0 18.0 18.2

2-year to less-than-2-year 82.1 38.1 44.0 12.8 5.1

Less-than-2-year to less-than-2-year 82.9 61.5 21.4 17.1 0.0

Attainment status at first transfer

None 59.3 24.5 34.8 24.9 15.9

Certificate 53.2 20.0 33.2 38.8 8.0

Associate’s degree 0 0 0 34.3 65.7

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 65.9 34.0 32.0 20.8 13.3

Bachelor’s degree 51.9 21.1 30.8 26.2 21.9

Advanced degree 46.0 17.7 28.3 28.7 25.3

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

*Totals by level are limited to public and private, not-for-profit institutions.

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
11

Students who transferred from 2- and 4-year institutions were equally likely to transfer after

10 months or less, with about half doing so. However, transfers from 2-year institutions were

more likely than those from other institutions to spend more than 20 months at the first institution

before transferring. This may reflect high rates of part-time attendance at 2-year institutions,

which slows the rate of credit accumulation.12 Also, there is a high rate of transfer within 10

months from private, for-profit institutions (70 percent), many of which offer programs lasting 1

academic year or less.13

The amount of time students spent at the first institution was also related to the destination

of transfer. Students who transferred to a 4-year institution were more likely than other transfers

to have spent more than 10 months at the first institution. Of students who transferred to a 2-year

institution, two out of three left the first institution after 10 months or less, as did 80 percent of

transfers to a less-than-2-year institution. Among transfers to a 4-year institution, about one-third

(35 percent) left the first institution within 10 months.

Time elapsed between institutions

Of students who transferred, about one-third (32 percent) entered the destination institution

within 6 months after leaving the first institution. About half of all transfers (54 percent) were out

of school for more than a year before continuing their education (table 7). Some of these students

attained a certificate or degree at the first institution, while others interrupted their studies before

receiving any credential (attainment prior to transfer is examined below).

Students who transferred from a 4-year institution were much more likely than other

transfers to enroll at the destination institution within 6 months of leaving the first institution (68

percent did so, compared with 10–18 percent of students who transferred from a less-than-4-year

institution). At the other extreme, fully half of students who transferred from a less-than-2-year

institution and one-quarter of transfers from a 2-year institution were out of school for more than

3 years, compared with 2 percent of students who transferred from a 4-year institution.14

The amount of time elapsed between institutions was also related to students’ educational

expectations. Students who said in 1990 that they expected to complete a bachelor’s degree or

higher were more likely than others to make the transition between institutions within 1 year or

less. For example, the transition took place within 6 months for 30–42 percent of students who

expected to complete a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared with 12 percent of students who

had lower degree expectations.

 

12Beginning students at public 2-year institutions were twice as likely as students at other institutions to be

enrolled part time in their first year (appendix A, table A2), and public 2-year institutions enrolled 89 percent of all

beginning students at 2-year institutions (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,

1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up [BPS:90/94], Data Analysis

System).

13U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995 Directory of Postsecondary

Institutions (Washington, DC: 1996). The rate of transfer within 10 months from public and private, not-for-profit

less-than-2-year institutions was equally high, but the less-than-2-year sector consists mainly of private, for-profit

institutions.

14Some of these students completed a subbaccalaureate credential at the first institution (table 8).
12

Table 7—Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred, percentage distribution according to number of

months between institutions, by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94

0–12 13 or more

37 or

Total 0–6 7–12 Total 13–24 25–36 more

Total 46.5 32.3 14.2 53.5 20.7 14.6 18.2

Level and control of first institution*

4-year 80.9 67.8 13.1 19.1 12.5 4.3 2.2

Public, 4-year 78.0 64.5 13.6 22.0 14.2 5.2 2.6

Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 86.8 74.6 12.2 13.2 9.1 2.6 1.5

2-year 29.8 14.2 15.6 70.2 26.0 20.6 23.7

Public, 2-year 30.3 14.6 15.7 69.7 26.4 19.8 23.5

Private, not-for-profit, 2-year 21.4 7.7 13.7 78.7 19.0 33.3 26.4

Less-than-2-year 29.1 18.4 10.7 70.9 12.2 7.2 51.5

Public, less-than-2-year 25.4 12.7 12.7 74.6 11.8 4.7 58.1

Private, not-for-profit, less-

 than-2-year — — — — — — —

Private, for-profit 19.0 10.3 8.7 81.0 20.5 19.2 41.3

Level of transfer destination

4-year 55.6 42.4 13.2 44.4 17.7 15.6 11.1

2-year 38.1 24.0 14.1 61.9 23.3 13.9 24.6

Less-than-2-year 37.4 17.0 20.4 62.6 22.5 12.7 27.4

Level of transfer origin and

 destination

4-year to 4-year 87.4 75.1 12.3 12.6 9.4 2.1 1.1

2-year to 4-year 37.1 23.0 14.1 62.9 23.3 24.4 15.3

Less-than-2-year to 4-year 33.7 25.5 8.2 66.3 8.2 5.4 52.7

4-year to 2-year 74.9 60.1 14.8 25.1 15.7 6.2 3.3

2-year to 2-year 16.1 2.1 14.0 83.9 28.7 18.7 36.5

Less-than-2-year to 2-year 16.6 4.8 11.8 83.4 22.3 17.5 43.7

4-year to less-than-2-year 52.2 48.4 3.7 47.8 22.6 17.4 7.8

2-year to less-than-2-year 37.1 10.5 26.5 62.9 25.3 12.9 24.8

Less-than-2-year to less-than-

 2-year 27.4 23.5 3.9 72.6 8.8 8.0 55.8

Attainment status at first transfer

None 50.0 35.6 14.4 50.0 19.2 11.3 19.5

Certificate 23.5 12.3 11.2 76.5 15.8 22.3 38.5

Associate’s degree 31.0 17.5 13.4 69.0 32.2 34.3 2.6

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 28.6 11.7 16.9 71.5 28.6 13.0 29.9

Bachelor’s degree 45.2 29.9 15.3 54.8 17.9 17.5 19.5

Advanced degree 54.5 42.0 12.5 45.5 20.7 12.3 12.5

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

*Totals by level are limited to public and private, not-for-profit institutions.

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
13

Attainment Prior to Transfer

Since the definition of transfer used in this report allows for completion of subbaccalaureate

credentials at the first institution, it is worthwhile to examine students’ attainment before

transferring. Overall, four out of five transfers (83 percent) changed institutions before completing

any credential (table 8). However, among students who transferred, attainment prior to transfer

varied considerably with institutional origin and destination.

Almost all transfers from 4-year institutions (97 percent) left without earning any credential.

Among transfers from 2-year institutions, 78 percent left without a credential, and almost all of

the others (20 percent) completed an associate’s degree. About two-thirds of transfers from lessthan-2-year institutions left without completing any credential, and the remainder completed a

certificate.

Differences in attainment before transfer were also related to the level of the destination

institution. While transfer before completing any credential was common among all transfers, it

was most common among those who transferred to less-than-4-year institutions (89–94 percent of

transfers to less-than-4-year institutions did not complete a credential at the first institution,

compared with 76 percent of transfers to 4-year institutions).

About one out of five transfers to a 4-year institution completed an associate’s degree

before transferring (21 percent, compared with 1–4 percent of transfers to other institutions).

One-third of students who transferred from a less-than-4-year institution to a 4-year institution did

so.

Certificate completion at the first institution was rare among transfers (4 percent). It

occurred more often among those who transferred to a 2-year institution than among transfers to

a 4-year institution (7 versus 3 percent).

Half of all students who transferred without receiving a credential from the first institution

made the transition within 1 year of their departure from the first institution (table 7). Students

who received a credential from the first institution were less likely to do so: about one-third of

transfers who completed an associate’s degree and one-quarter who completed a certificate

enrolled at the destination institution within 1 year (table 7).

Transfer From 4-Year Institutions

Most studies of student transfer behavior focus on transfer from community colleges to 4-

year institutions, a subject that this report addresses in the following section. There has been

relatively little systematic analysis of transfer from 4-year institutions on a national scale, at least

in part due to a lack of adequate data that track a nationally representative sample of entering
14

Table 8—Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred, percentage distribution according to degree

attainment prior to transfer, by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94

Associate’s

None Certificate degree

Total 83.2 4.2 12.5

Level and control of first institution*

4-year 97.3 0.7 2.0

Public, 4-year 97.1 0.5 2.5

Private, not-for-profit, 4-year 97.8 1.1 1.2

2-year 78.4 1.6 19.9

Public, 2-year 79.0 1.4 19.6

Private, not-for-profit, 2-year 68.2 5.9 25.9

Less-than-2-year 66.5 33.5 0

Public, less-than-2-year 76.7 23.3 0

Private, not-for-profit, less-than-2-year — — —

Private, for-profit 60.1 32.4 7.5

Level of transfer destination

4-year 76.1 2.5 21.4

2-year 89.4 6.5 4.1

Less-than-2-year 94.2 4.7 1.2

Level of transfer origin and destination

4-year to 4-year 96.9 0.6 2.4

4-year to less than 4-year 97.8 0.7 1.5

Less-than-4-year to 4-year 63.8 3.6 32.6

Less-than-4-year to less-than-4-year 87.0 8.7 4.3

Months enrolled at first institution

0–10 95.6 4.4 0

11–20 77.7 6.2 16.2

21 or more 60.7 1.6 37.8

Months between institutions

0–12 89.5 2.1 8.4

13 or more 77.8 6.1 16.2

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 80.8 13.6 5.6

Bachelor’s degree 81.7 2.8 15.6

Advanced degree 85.2 2.7 12.2

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 81.7 9.5 8.9

Middle 50% 82.4 4.9 12.7

Top 25% 84.4 2.5 13.2

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

*Totals by level are limited to public and private, not-for-profit institutions.

NOTE: Details may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
15

students across institutions—a deficiency that the BPS data collection effort was designed to

address. This section provides a detailed descriptive analysis of transfer from 4-year institutions,

asking the following questions:

• Who transfers from 4-year institutions?

• How is transfer related to undergraduate experiences?

• What kinds of institutions do students transfer to?

• How is the direction of transfer (horizontal or downward) related to undergraduate

experiences?

• What proportion of transfers received credit at the destination institution for their

coursework at the first institution?

• What enrollment and attainment outcomes were observed for students who transferred

from 4-year institutions, and how do they compare with those observed for students who

did not transfer?

The analysis presented in this section is restricted to students who first attended a public or

private, not-for-profit 4-year institution.15 Thus, throughout this section, private, not-for-profit 4-

year institutions are identified simply as private institutions.

Who Transfers From 4-Year Institutions?

As noted in the overview of transfer, about one-quarter of beginning students at 4-year

institutions transferred, and students attending public and private institutions were equally likely

to do so.

Students’ propensity to transfer did not appear to have much to do with their background

characteristics. Among the exceptions to this generalization, Asian/Pacific Islanders were half as

likely as students from other racial–ethnic groups to transfer out of the 4-year institution where

they began (14 percent, compared with 29–31 percent of others for whom a transfer rate could be

estimated) (table 9). Low-SES students were also less likely than others to transfer (20 percent,

compared with 29 percent among other students).

Although students who received financial aid at the first institution were less likely to

transfer than their counterparts who did not receive any aid, the difference in the two groups’

transfer rates is small and only exists at public institutions; aided and unaided students at private

institutions were equally likely to transfer. This difference probably reflects the lower transfer rate

among low-SES students noted above. Middle- and high-SES students—many of whom may have

received some form of financial aid—transferred at similar rates.

 

15Very few private 4-year institutions are operated as for-profit enterprises (U.S. Department of Education,

National Center for Education Statistics, 1995 Directory of Postsecondary Institutions (Washington, DC: 1996)).
16

Table 9—Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred by control of first

institution, by selected student characteristics: 1989–90

Private,

Total Public not-for-profit

Total 28.3 28.1 28.7

Gender

Male 30.5 30.6 30.3

Female 26.3 25.9 27.2

Race–ethnicity

Asian/Pacific Islander 13.6 11.2 19.4

Black, non-Hispanic 30.7 30.7 30.8

Hispanic 31.0 34.5 24.4

American Indian/Alaskan Native — — —

White, non-Hispanic 28.7 28.4 29.2

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 19.9 18.6 23.1

All others 28.8 28.7 29.0

Middle 50% 29.8 29.1 31.8

Top 25% 28.2 28.4 27.7

Received financial aid 1989–90

Did not receive aid 30.8 31.0 30.1

Received aid 26.3 25.0 28.2

Enrollment status 1989–90

Full-time 27.2 26.8 28.0

Part-time 38.7 38.8 38.5

Grade point average 1989–90

Not reported 31.0 30.0 32.7

Below 2.50 35.5 34.4 39.1

2.50–2.99 26.7 25.9 28.4

3.00–3.49 20.7 20.1 21.6

3.50 or higher 20.1 21.8 17.1

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Transfer was less common among full-time students than among those who attended part

time in their first year (27 percent of full-time students transferred, compared with 39 percent of

part-time students).
17

Accounting for Transfer From 4-Year Institutions

Why do students transfer from 4-year institutions? For some, transfer may indicate that they

are having academic difficulty at the first institution, while for others it may indicate that they are

dissatisfied with the institution. These factors may be related, of course: students who are

dissatisfied may not be motivated to do well, and students who do poorly may find cause to be

dissatisfied.

Indeed, students with grade point averages (GPAs) below 2.50 at the first institution were

more likely than other students to transfer (36 percent transferred, compared with 20–27 percent

of students with higher grades) (table 9). For students with low grades, this may reflect

involuntary departure from the first institution.

There is also evidence that transfer is related to students’ satisfaction with various aspects of

the institution where they began postsecondary education, as reported in 1992 (table 10).16

Dissatisfaction with any of the following factors was positively related to transfer:

• intellectual growth;

• teacher ability;

• institutional prestige; and

• social life (figure 3).

Students’ reported dissatisfaction with intellectual growth had a very strong correspondence

to transfer: 63 percent of those who were dissatisfied with their intellectual growth at the first

institution transferred, compared with 25 percent of students who found their intellectual growth

to be satisfactory. While dissatisfaction with institutional prestige was related to transfer at both

public and private institutions, the relationship was stronger at private ones, where students who

were dissatisfied with the prestige of the institution were twice as likely to transfer as those who

were content with the institution’s prestige (54 versus 25 percent). In addition, cost was a factor

at private institutions, where the transfer rate was somewhat higher among students who were

dissatisfied with the cost of attendance (30 versus 23 percent). When satisfaction with the five

attributes represented in figure 3 is combined into an overall index of satisfaction, transfer is found

to be more common among students who identified three or fewer attributes as satisfactory (of

whom 40 percent transferred) than among students who were satisfied with more than three

attributes (24 percent transferred).

 

16Because questions about satisfaction with the first institution were asked in the first BPS follow-up survey

(1992), many students reported on their satisfaction with the first institution after having transferred.
18

Table 10—Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred by control of

first institution, by satisfaction with aspects of the institution: 1989–94

Private,

Total Public not-for-profit

Total 28.3 28.1 28.7

Overall satisfaction with first institution

Low 39.7 37.2 43.5

All others 23.8 24.4 22.4

Moderate 25.3 26.1 24.0

High 22.6 23.3 20.2

Satisfaction with cost of attending

Not satisfied 27.7 25.0 30.4

Satisfied 26.6 27.5 23.4

Satisfaction with intellectual growth

Not satisfied 62.7 60.5 68.7

Satisfied 24.7 24.3 25.4

Satisfaction with institutional prestige

Not satisfied 39.4 34.8 53.5

Satisfied 25.2 25.5 24.6

Satisfaction with social life

Not satisfied 39.6 37.9 41.8

Satisfied 24.9 25.3 24.2

Satisfaction with teacher ability

Not satisfied 35.1 32.7 44.5

Satisfied 26.1 26.0 26.3

Satisfaction with academic counseling

Not available — — —

Did not use 35.4 40.5 24.5

Used, dissatisfied 31.6 31.2 32.8

Used, satisfied 23.4 21.2 27.6

Satisfaction with financial aid counseling

Not available — — —

Did not use 28.9 30.1 25.2

Used, dissatisfied 27.1 25.7 29.6

Used, satisfied 24.6 22.7 27.9

Satisfaction with job counseling

Not available 65.0 — —

Available 26.7 26.6 26.9

Did not use 31.9 31.1 34.0

Used, dissatisfied 31.6 33.0 28.9

Used, satisfied 20.5 20.1 21.3
19

Table 10—Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred by control of

first institution, by satisfaction with aspects of the institution: 1989–94—Continued

Private,

Total Public not-for-profit

Satisfaction with job placement services

Not available 44.3 35.1 56.6

Available 26.6 26.6 26.6

Did not use 31.2 30.8 32.2

Used, dissatisfied 26.5 26.6 26.4

Used, satisfied 16.0 15.6 16.5

Satisfaction with personal counseling

Not available 53.3 — —

Available 26.7 26.5 27.0

Did not use 26.9 27.4 25.8

Used, dissatisfied 39.9 36.3 45.8

Used, satisfied 24.3 23.5 25.6

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

The availability of various student services and students’ satisfaction with those services

were also related to the likelihood of transfer (figure 4). Those reporting a lack of access to job

placement, job counseling, and personal counseling services were much more likely to transfer

than were students on campuses where such services were available. Students who reported that

job and personal counseling were unavailable transferred at about twice the rate of students who

had access to those services. Among students who used job placement services and academic,

personal, and job counseling services, satisfaction with the experience was associated with their

likelihood of transferring (table 10).

Where Did the Transfers Go?

Among students who transferred from 4-year institutions, about half (55 percent) entered

another 4-year institution. The remainder were reverse transfers, entering a less-than-4-year

institution. Almost all reverse transfers went to a 2-year institution (table 11). Transfers from

private institutions were somewhat more likely than those from public institutions to enter another

4-year institution (61 versus 53 percent).

Among transfers, those who started college before age 20 were more likely than older

students to enter another 4-year institution (57 versus 39 percent). Horizontal transfer was also

more common among full-time students and students who received financial aid at the first

institution.
20

Figure 3—Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred, by their

satisfaction with various aspects of the first institution: 1989–94

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Intellectual

growth

Social life

Prestige

Teacher ability

Cost of attending

Percent who transferred

Satisfied

Not satisfied

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Students who transferred to another 4-year institution tended to gravitate toward public

institutions. Two out of three horizontal transfers from private 4-year institutions entered a public

institution, as did 82 percent of horizontal transfers from public 4-year institutions (table 12). The

pattern of movement from private to public institutions is consistent with the earlier finding of a

relationship between transfer and satisfaction with the cost of attendance at private institutions.

Horizontal transfer was much more common among students with at least a 2.50 GPA than

among students with lower grades (62–77 percent of transfers who had GPAs of at least 2.5

entered another 4-year institution, compared with 45 percent of students who had lower GPAs)

(figure 5). Students who entered another 4-year institution had GPAs averaging about 2.6, while

reverse transfers had GPAs averaging about 2.0 (table 13). While transfers from public institutions

had lower aggregate GPAs than those from private institutions, horizontal transfers
21

Figure 4—Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred, by the

availability of various student services at the first institution: 1989–94

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Job counseling

Personal

counseling

Job placement

Percent who transferred

Available

Not available

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

from each type of institution had comparable grades. Students who took more than a year off

between institutions had lower GPAs than students who entered the destination institution within

a year, and this was true for both horizontal and reverse transfers.

On average, students who transferred from a 4-year institution left 14 months after they

began, and took about 7 months off before enrolling at the destination institution (table 14).17

Horizontal transfers stayed at the first institution longer than did reverse transfers, and they also

took less time off before entering the destination institution.

 

17Averages can be influenced by extreme values, concealing distributional characteristics. To put these figures into

proper perspective, refer to the percentage distributions in tables 6 and 7.
22

Table 11—Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions, percentage distribution

according to level of transfer destination, by selected student and enrollment characteristics:

1989–94

Transferred

Transferred Transferred to lessto 4-year to 2-year than-2-year

Total 55.4 41.0 3.6

Gender

Male 56.1 41.1 2.9

Female 54.6 41.0 4.4

Race–ethnicity

Asian/Pacific Islander — — —

Black, non-Hispanic 54.0 35.7 10.3

Hispanic 53.1 40.7 6.1

American Indian/Alaskan Native — — —

White, non-Hispanic 55.4 41.9 2.7

Age as of 12/31/89

Under age 20 56.6 40.2 3.2

20 or older 38.8 52.0 9.2

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 57.8 35.4 6.7

Middle 50% 47.2 47.4 5.4

Top 25% 60.7 37.1 2.2

Control of first institution

Public 52.8 43.3 3.9

Private, not-for-profit 60.6 36.4 3.0

Received financial aid 1989–90

Did not receive aid 49.5 47.8 2.7

Received aid 60.6 34.9 4.5

Enrollment status 1989–90

Full-time 58.0 38.5 3.5

Part-time 39.9 57.9 2.3

Grade point average 1989–90

Not reported 48.4 47.6 4.0

Below 2.50 44.9 50.4 4.6

2.50–2.99 61.5 35.7 2.9

3.00–3.49 76.6 21.3 2.0

3.50 or higher 71.7 26.0 2.3

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

NOTE: Details may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
23

Table 12—Of 1989–90 beginning students who transferred between 4-year institutions, percentage

distribution according to control of transfer destination, by control of first institution: 1989–94

Transferred to Transferred to

Public 4-year Private 4-year

Total 76.4 23.6

Level and control of first institution

Public 4-year 81.8 18.2

Private 4-year 67.0 33.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Table 13—Among 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions, average GPA by

level of transfer destination, by control of first institution and timing of transfer: 1989–94

Transferred Transferred

Total to 4-year to 2-year

Total 2.35 2.59 2.03

Control of first institution

Public 2.28 2.59 1.92

Private, not-for-profit 2.51 2.61 2.33

Months enrolled at first institution

0–10 2.22 2.56 1.87

11–20 2.41 2.62 2.06

21 or more 2.64 2.64 2.69

Months between institutions

0–12 2.44 2.64 2.11

13 or more 1.93 2.26 1.72

NOTE: There were not enough students who transferred from 4-year to less-than-2-year institutions to produce reliable

estimates for any of the statistics reported in this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
24

Figure 5—Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who transferred

according to level of transfer destination, by grade point average in 1989–90: 1989–94

Grade point average

Transfer

destination

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

What Proportion of Transfers Received Credit for Their Coursework at the First

Institution?

Although the BPS data do not include information about the transfer of credit between

specific institutions, students who had attended more than one institution were asked a general

question about transfer of credit in each follow-up survey. For transfers who attended only two

institutions,18 this item can be used to assess transfer of credit between institutions. Among

horizontal transfers who attended two institutions, 89 percent transferred credits, as did about half

of reverse transfers (table 15).

 

18This group represents 63 percent of horizontal transfers, and 58 percent of reverse transfers (U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal

Study, Second Follow-up [BPS:90/94], Data Analysis System).
25

Table 14—Among 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions, average number of

months enrolled at first institution and average number of months between institutions, by GPA

and level of transfer destination: 1989–94

Average number

of months Average number

enrolled at of months

first institution between institutions

Total 13.7 7.2

Grade point average 1989–90

Not reported 13.2 8.7

Below 2.50 12.8 8.2

2.50–2.99 14.6 6.4

3.00–3.49 14.2 5.3

3.50 or higher 16.1 4.1

Level of transfer destination

4-year 14.7 5.7

Less-than-4-year 12.5 9.1

2-year 12.3 8.5

Less-than-2-year 13.9 15.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

What Happened to the Transfers, and How Did They Fare Relative to Students Who Did

Not Transfer?

Among students who began at a 4-year institution, those who did not transfer were more

likely than those who transferred to another 4-year institution to have completed a bachelor’s

degree by 1994 (63 percent of nontransfers had completed the degree, compared with 45 percent

of horizontal transfers) (table 16). However, if one combines bachelor’s degree completers with

those currently enrolled at a 4-year institution as a broad indicator of persistence toward the

degree (first column in table 16), the two groups have similar persistence rates (figure 6).

Reverse transfer does not always signal permanent abandonment of bachelor’s degree plans:

22 percent of reverse transfers had either completed a bachelor’s degree by 1994 or were enrolled

at a 4-year institution (12 percent had attained the degree, and 11 percent were enrolled).19

Although reverse transfers did not return to the first institution they attended, at least one out of

five made a subsequent transition to another 4-year institution.

 

19Details do not sum to total due to rounding (see table 16).
26

Table 15—Among 1989–90 beginning students who transferred from 4-year institutions and attended two

institutions, percentage who transferred credits by level of transfer destination, by control of

first institution, GPA, and timing of transfer: 1989–94

Transferred Transferred

Total to 4-year to 2-year

Total 72.8 88.5 55.5

Control of first institution

Public 68.3 86.3 50.7

Private, not-for-profit 83.6 92.6 70.5

Grade point average 1989–90

Not reported 62.9 82.5 48.8

Below 2.50 63.5 82.3 50.9

2.50–2.99 85.4 92.8 76.1

3.00–3.49 88.7 98.2 —

3.50 or higher 82.7 90.3 —

Months enrolled at first institution

0–10 65.5 82.7 52.0

11–20 83.6 97.2 58.4

21 or more 76.8 87.6 64.4

Months between institutions

0–12 80.3 91.0 61.7

13 or more 51.5 74.1 45.6

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

NOTE: There were not enough students who transferred from 4-year to less-than-2-year institutions to produce reliable

estimates for any of the statistics reported in this table.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Table 16—Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions according to 1994

enrollment and attainment status, by transfer status: 1989–94

Attained bachelor’s degree or

enrolled at a 4-year institution Enrolled at a

Attained Enrolled at less-thanbachelor’s a 4-year 4-year Not

Total degree institution institution enrolled

Total 67.8 53.3 14.5 2.7 29.5

Transfer status

Did not transfer 75.1 62.5 12.5 0 24.9

Transferred 49.3 29.9 19.4 9.5 41.2

To 4-year 71.4 44.7 26.7 1.8 26.8

To less-than-4-year 22.4 11.8 10.6 19.2 58.4

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
27

Figure 6—Percentage of 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions who had attained a bachelor’s

degree or were enrolled at a 4-year institution as of Spring 1994, by transfer status: 1989–94

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Did not

transfer

Transferred

to 4-year

Transferred

to lessthan-4-year

Transfer status

Enrolled at 4-year institution

Attained bachelor’s degree

Status as of Spring 1994

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Transfer From Public 2-Year Colleges to 4-Year Institutions

Public community colleges serve a wide range of educational purposes. One important

purpose is to provide a low-cost, flexible means for students working toward a bachelor’s degree

to complete their lower division requirements before transferring to a 4-year institution to

complete the degree. How effectively community colleges fulfill this purpose has been the subject

of considerable debate among scholars and policymakers.20 This section uses BPS data to examine

the extent of transfer to 4-year institutions by beginning students at public 2-year colleges.21

Students’ Degree Goals

 

20For a brief review of literature on the transfer function of community colleges, see T. Baker and W. Vélez,

“Access to and Opportunity in Postsecondary Education in the United States: A Review,” Sociology of Education

Extra Issue (1996): 82–101. For an extensive policy-oriented discussion, see K. Dougherty, “The Community

College at the Crossroads: The Need for Structural Reform,” Harvard Educational Review 61 (1991): 311–336.

21Throughout this section, the terms community college and public 2-year college are used interchangeably.
28

One difficulty in examining transfer from community colleges is how to identify students

who have transfer intentions at the outset. Community college advocates argue that it is

inappropriate to include all community college students when calculating transfer rates because

many never intend to transfer. In the analysis presented in this section, the population of

prospective transfers is defined narrowly, based on students’ responses to a base-year question

that asked them to specify the degree toward which they were working. This question allowed

students to specify any undergraduate degree, including one that they intended to receive at a

different institution. One out of four community college students indicated that they were working

toward a bachelor’s degree (table 17). In examining transfer rates, this report will focus on this

group as the population with clear transfer intentions (i.e., prospective transfers).22 When

presenting characteristics of students who did, in fact, transfer to a 4-year institution, however, all

such students will be included unless noted otherwise.

The virtue of this approach to identifying prospective transfers is that it permits a sharp

focus on students whose degree goal necessitates transferring to a 4-year institution. However, it

also excludes other students who may have had equally strong transfer intentions. For example,

there can be little doubt that the group of students who said that they were working on an

associate’s degree (54 percent of community college beginners) includes two subgroups: those

who did not have immediate plans to continue their education beyond an associate’s degree, and

those who intended to transfer to a 4-year institution after completing an associate’s degree. Since

these two groups of associate’s degree seekers cannot be separated, the only students who can be

identified as having clear transfer intentions are those who stated that their courses were leading

toward a bachelor’s degree—a subset of all who intend to transfer.23 This group nevertheless

includes students who were formally enrolled in an associate’s degree program at the first

institution: one-quarter of those classified by the institution as enrolled in an associate’s degree

program indicated that they were working toward a bachelor’s degree (table 17).

The relationship between students’ immediate degree goals and long-term educational

expectations is shown in table 17. Among students who expected that they would ultimately attain

a bachelor’s degree or higher, about one-third (34 percent) said they were working on a

bachelor’s degree, and 56 percent said they were working on an associate’s degree.24 By contrast,

5 percent of those who expected to attain less than a bachelor’s degree said they were

 

22Another method for identifying the pool of potential transfers that has been promoted, but is not feasible with the

BPS data, is based on credit accumulation (see E. Jones, ed., A Model for Deriving the Transfer Rate (Washington,

DC: American Association of Community and Junior Colleges, 1992)). While this approach excludes students who

enroll only briefly, it still includes students who may never intend to transfer.

23The distinction is further complicated by the fact that some articulation arrangements emphasize completion of

an associate’s degree for transfer admission, while others do not. In systems that emphasize the associate’s degree,

students who intend to transfer may be more likely to report that they are working toward an associate’s degree.

24It cannot be assumed that all students who expected to attain a bachelor’s degree had immediate transfer

intentions.
29

Table 17—Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage distribution according to

stated degree goal, by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–90

Not working

towards a Associate’s Bachelor’s

a degree Certificate degree degree

Total 7.3 13.0 54.3 25.5

Gender

Male 7.5 11.2 50.6 30.8

Female 7.1 14.7 57.8 20.5

Race–ethnicity

Asian/Pacific Islander — — — —

Black, non-Hispanic 2.7 16.1 62.0 19.3

Hispanic 9.3 10.8 47.3 32.7

American Indian/Alaskan native — — — —

White, non-Hispanic 7.7 12.7 56.1 23.5

Age as of 12/31/89

Under age 20 5.0 8.7 54.6 31.7

20 or older 11.2 20.2 53.6 15.0

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 7.3 25.8 50.7 16.2

Middle 50% 9.5 13.6 56.9 20.1

Top 25% 3.8 4.5 52.1 39.7

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 13.1 27.8 53.7 5.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher 4.1 5.7 56.0 34.2

Bachelor’s degree 4.0 6.4 59.4 30.2

Advanced degree 4.3 4.6 51.2 39.9

Enrollment status 1989–90

Full-time 2.4 8.8 60.1 28.7

Part-time 12.8 17.8 48.5 21.0

Degree program 1989–90 (institution-

 reported)

Associate’s degree 6.5 7.6 59.9 26.0

Undergraduate certificate 9.5 23.7 43.9 22.9

Other undergraduate program 8.2 25.6 43.0 23.3

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

NOTE: Details may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
30

working toward one, but they were just as likely as those with higher expectations to be working

toward an associate’s degree (54 percent).25

Certain community college beginners were more likely than others to be identified as

prospective transfers (i.e., to say they were working toward a bachelor’s degree). Students who

were under 20 when they started college were twice as likely as older students to say they were

working toward a bachelor’s degree (32 percent, compared with 15 percent of older students).

Moreover, high-SES students were twice as likely as others to have a bachelor’s degree goal (40

percent, compared with 16–20 percent of low- and middle-SES students) (figure 7). Men were

also more likely than women to state a bachelor’s degree goal (31 percent of men compared with

21 percent of women) (table 17).

Figure 7—Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions according to

stated degree goal, by socioeconomic status: 1989–90

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Bottom 25% Middle 50% Top 25%

Socioeconomic status

Degree goal

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

 

25The apparent contradiction between working toward a bachelor’s degree and expecting less may be interpreted as

reflecting some students’ lack of confidence that they will achieve their goal.
31

Finally, although there were no significant racial–ethnic differences in the percentage of

community college beginners working toward a bachelor’s degree, the large share of Hispanic

beginners who were working toward a bachelor’s degree (one-third) illustrates Hispanic students’

heavy reliance on community colleges as a point of entry into postsecondary education and

toward a bachelor’s degree. For example, 61 percent of Hispanic beginning students were

enrolled at community colleges, compared with 41–42 percent of non-Hispanic black and white

students, and among beginning students who expected to complete at least a bachelor’s degree,

59 percent of Hispanics were at a community college, compared with 37–40 percent of nonHispanic whites, blacks, and Asian/Pacific Islanders.26 A recent analysis of data from the National

Education Longitudinal Study (NELS:88) found that among 1988 eighth graders who had

enrolled in postsecondary education by 1994, half of Hispanic students first enrolled at a

community college, compared with about one-third of non-Hispanic whites, blacks, and

Asian/Pacific Islanders.27

Overview of Transfer Activity Among Community College Beginners

Overall, about one out of five community college beginners (22 percent) transferred to a 4-

year institution (table 18).28 However, among prospective transfers (students who were working

toward a bachelor’s degree), 39 percent transferred to a 4-year institution. This finding is

consistent with the logic of sample selection described above—that examining this group permits

a sharp focus on those with transfer intentions. It also shows that even when one defines

prospective transfers narrowly, less than half of such students had made a direct transition to a 4-

year institution within 5 years of college entry.29

While students who were working toward an associate’s degree were less likely to transfer

to a 4-year institution than those who were working toward a bachelor’s degree, they were much

more likely to do so than students who were working toward a certificate or who were not

working toward any credential (23 percent of those working toward an associate’s degree

transferred to a 4-year institution, compared with 2–9 percent of the other groups). This is

consistent with the interpretation that the group working toward an associate’s degree includes

both students who planned to transfer as well as students who did not intend to continue their

education past the associate’s degree (figure 8).

 

26U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

27A. Sanderson et al., National Education Longitudinal Study 1988–1994 Descriptive Summary Report: With an

Essay on Access and Choice in Postsecondary Education (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education,

National Center for Education Statistics, 1996).

28This figure is very close to the 21 percent “de facto transfer rate” found by Adelman in an analysis of

postsecondary transcript data for the National Longitudinal Study of the High School Class of 1972 (NLS:72)

(“Transfer Rates and the Going Mythologies,” Change (January/February 1988): 38–41).

29The possibility of “indirect transfer”—entering a 4-year institution after an intermediate transition to another

less-than-4-year institution—is considered at the end of this section.
32

Table 18—Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage distribution according to

transfer status, by stated degree goal: 1989–94

Transferred

Did not Transferred Transferred to lesstransfer to 4-year to 2-year than-2-year

Total 57.8 22.4 14.2 5.6

Degree goal 1989–90

None 65.6 8.7 17.3 8.4

Certificate 87.3 2.4 4.5 5.9

Associate’s degree 56.1 22.9 15.5 5.6

Bachelor’s degree 40.3 38.7 16.2 4.8

NOTE: Details may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Table 19 presents transfer outcomes for the subset of community college beginners who said

they were working toward a bachelor’s degree. Many of the differences among these small groups

are not statistically significant. That is, while some of the estimates of the proportion who

transferred in table 19 appear notably different, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that this

reflects a difference in transfer behavior in the population of beginning students rather than simply

among those in the BPS sample. (See appendix C for a detailed discussion of statistical

significance testing.)

Among prospective transfers, those who enrolled full time in their first year were twice as

likely as those who enrolled part time to transfer to a 4-year institution by 1994. It is unlikely that

this simply reflects the time needed to complete transfer requirements—since the study covers a

period of 5 years, it allows sufficient time for continuously enrolled half-time students to complete

the equivalent of 2 years of full-time attendance. However, to the extent that students who

transfer take a year or more off between institutions (see table 7), 5 years may not be enough time

to capture all transfer behavior among part-time students. It is nevertheless very likely that some

of the difference in transfer rates reflects higher stopout and dropout rates among part-time

students.30 It may also reflect a greater propensity of part-time students seeking a bachelor’s

degree to change their degree objective.

Prospective transfers who expected to complete an advanced degree also transferred at a

higher rate than did those who expected their highest attainment to be a bachelor’s degree.

 

30See L. Berkner, S. Cuccaro-Alamin, and A. McCormick, Descriptive Summary of 1989–90 Beginning

Postsecondary Students: 5 Years Later (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1996), and A. McCormick, S. Geis, and R. Vergun, Profile of Part-Time Undergraduates in

Postsecondary Education: 1989–90 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1995).
33

Figure 8—Percentage distribution of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who

transferred according to transfer status, by stated degree goal in 1989–90: 1989–94

Stated degree goal 1989–90

Percent

Transfer status

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Attainment Before Transferring to a 4-Year Institution

Among community college beginners who transferred to a 4-year institution, most (65

percent) did not complete a degree before transferring. About one out of three completed an

associate’s degree (table 20).

About half of transfers (46 percent) who had said that they were working toward an

associate’s degree completed this degree before transferring, twice as many as those who had said

they were working toward a bachelor’s degree. Transfers who were enrolled full time in their first

year were much more likely than part-timers to complete an associate’s degree before transferring

to a 4-year institution (41 versus 17 percent), and female transfers were more likely than their

male counterparts to have done so (44 versus 24 percent).31

 

31Among all community college beginners, full-time students were also more likely than part-timers to be working

toward an associate’s degree (60 versus 49 percent, table 17).
34

Table 19—Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions with stated goal of a bachelor’s

degree, percentage distribution according to transfer status, by selected student and enrollment

characteristics: 1989–94

Transferred

Did not Transferred Transferred to lesstransfer to 4-year to 2-year than-2-year

Total 40.3 38.7 16.2 4.8

Gender

Male 45.8 33.5 15.4 5.3

Female 32.4 46.0 17.4 4.1

Age as of 12/31/89

Under age 20 36.1 40.3 18.8 4.9

20 or older 55.7 32.9 6.8 4.6

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% — — — —

Middle 50% 46.5 35.9 16.3 1.4

Top 25% 32.5 44.7 16.1 6.8

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree — — — —

Bachelor’s degree or higher 35.8 42.3 17.7 4.2

Bachelor’s degree 44.5 35.7 17.2 2.7

Advanced degree 27.0 49.0 18.3 5.7

Enrollment status 1989–90

Full-time 34.6 49.5 12.7 3.2

Part-time 46.5 26.4 23.9 3.2

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

NOTES: Details may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding. The number of nonwhite students eligible for inclusion in this

table was too small to produce reliable estimates by race–ethnicity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
35

Table 20—Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions, percentage distribution according to degree attainment prior to transfer, by selected

student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94

Associate’s

None Certificate degree

Total 65.1 0.7 34.1

Gender

Male 74.7 1.2 24.1

Female 55.3 0.2 44.4

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% — — —

Middle 50% 62.4 0.2 37.4

Top 25% 68.1 1.3 30.6

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree — — —

Bachelor’s degree or higher 64.9 0.8 34.4

Bachelor’s degree 59.6 1.6 38.8

Advanced degree 69.9 0 30.1

Degree goal 1989–90

None — — —

Certificate — — —

Associate’s degree 52.8 1.2 46.0

Bachelor’s degree 77.6 0 22.4

Enrollment status 1989–90

Full-time 57.7 1.1 41.2

Part-time 83.1 0 16.9

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

NOTE: Details may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Timing of Transfer to 4-Year Institutions

On average, community college beginners who transferred to a 4-year institution spent

about 20 months at the first institution, roughly equal to the amount of time normally required for

a full-time student to complete lower division coursework (table 21).32 Students who completed

an associate’s degree before transferring tended to spend more time at the first institution than

students who transferred without any credential.

 

32As noted earlier, extreme values can cause the average to conceal distributional characteristics. Table 6 shows

that among transfers from community colleges to any institution, about one-quarter spent up to 10 months at the

first institution and one-quarter spent more than 20 months there.
36

The average number of months transfers spent at the first institution did not differ according

to enrollment status in the first year. One possible explanation for this finding is that part-timers

simply transferred fewer credits than did full-timers (for example, transferring in as sophomores

rather than as juniors). Another possibility is that part-timers who transferred increased their

course load soon after the first term.

Community college beginners who transferred to a 4-year institution often took a

considerable amount of time off between institutions, averaging 21 months (table 21).33 The

amount of time they took off between institutions did not appear to vary with other student or

enrollment characteristics, however.

Table 21—Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions, average number of months enrolled at the first institution and average number of

months between institutions, by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94

Average number

of months Average number

enrolled at of months

first institution between institutions

Total 20.2 21.4

Attainment status at first transfer

None 17.1 21.5

Certificate — —

Associate’s degree 26.0 21.4

Degree goal 1989–90

None — —

Certificate — —

Associate’s degree 22.1 22.2

Bachelor’s degree 18.2 20.6

Enrollment status 1989–90

Full-time 19.8 21.8

Part-time 20.7 20.0

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Transfer of Credit by Students Who Transferred to 4-Year Institutions

As in the analysis of transfer from 4-year institutions, a partial examination of transfer of

credit between institutions is possible by restricting the sample to transfers who attended only two

 

33About one-third of community college transfers to any institution made the transition within 1 year, and about

one-quarter took more than 3 years off (table 7).
37

institutions.34 Among community college students transferring to a 4-year institution who

attended two institutions, nine out of ten (89 percent) reported transferring credits between

institutions (table 22). Among high-SES students and students who completed an associate’s

degree before transferring, almost all (98 percent) transferred credits. This may reflect better

academic preparation, stronger academic performance, or greater compliance with transfer

requirements among such students, as well as other factors that might improve the chances that

their credits will transfer (for example, attendance at institutions that are more oriented toward

baccalaureate transfer, where appropriate academic advising may be more accessible and more

effective).35

Table 22—Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions and attended two institutions, percentage who transferred credits, by selected

student characteristics: 1989–94

Percentage who

transferred credits

Total 88.9

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% —

Middle 50% 84.4

Top 25% 97.6

Degree goal 1989–90

None —

Certificate —

Associate’s degree 85.6

Bachelor’s degree 93.3

Attainment status at first transfer

None 82.3

Certificate —

Associate’s degree 98.4

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

What Became of Students Who Transferred to a 4-Year Institution?

 

34This group represents 73 percent of all community college students who transferred to a 4-year institution (U.S.

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up [BPS:90/94], Data Analysis System).

35Previous research on transfer is illustrative in this respect. For example, Banks found that institutions with more

students who transfer with at least 12 credits tended to be located in high income areas in states with formalized

articulation systems that facilitate transfer (D. Banks, “Effects of Environmental Conditions on Student-Transfer

Activity,” Community College Journal of Research and Practice 18 (1994): 245–259). In an analysis of High

School and Beyond data, Lee and Frank found that the positive effect of socioeconomic background on transfer was

mediated by a variety of academic behaviors that are associated with transfer (V. Lee and K. Frank, “Students’

Characteristics that Facilitate the Transfer from Two-Year to Four-Year Colleges,” Sociology of Education 63

(1990): 178–193).
38

What had happened to transfers by the 1994 follow-up survey? Table 23 shows the

percentage who had attained a bachelor’s degree by 1994, and for those who had not attained the

degree, the percentage who were enrolled, by level of institution. While one out of four transfers

had received a bachelor’s degree by the time of the follow-up survey, another 44 percent were

still enrolled at a 4-year institution, representing an overall persistence rate of 70 percent (table

23, first column). This is comparable to the persistence rate among students who began at 4-year

institutions, and among 4-year horizontal transfers (table 16). Thus, while less than half of

prospective transfers made the transition to a 4-year institution (39 percent, table 19), those who

transferred did as well with respect to overall persistence as their counterparts who began at a 4-

year institution.36

The bachelor’s degree attainment rate was much higher among the minority of transfers who

had completed an associate’s degree before transferring: 43 percent of associate’s degree

completers had received a bachelor’s degree by 1994, compared with 17 percent among those

who transferred without any credential (figure 9). This difference cannot be attributed to different

rates of part-time enrollment or different amounts of time off between institutions: those factors

would merely alter the balance between the proportion who had attained and the proportion still

enrolled. However, the two groups had equivalent rates of current enrollment at a 4-year

institution (44–45 percent), and the percentage who had left postsecondary education was nearly

three times higher among students who did not complete any credential before. The higher

bachelor’s degree attainment rate among transfers who first completed an associate’s degree is

also consistent with the finding that associate’s degree completers were more likely to transfer

credits, which would accelerate degree completion (table 22). Students who transferred with an

associate’s degree may have been better prepared for the transition, or they may have encountered

fewer obstacles to continued progress.

 

36Beginners and horizontal transfers at 4-year institutions had higher rates of bachelor’s degree attainment,

however. This is consistent with higher rates of full-time attendance by 4-year beginners (appendix A, table A2),

and less time off between institutions by 4-year horizontal transfers (tables 14 and 21).
39

Table 23—Of 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to 4-year

institutions, percentage distribution according to attainment and enrollment outcomes as of

1994, by selected student and enrollment characteristics: 1989–94

Attained bachelor’s degree or

enrolled at a 4-year institution Enrolled at

Attained Enrolled at Enrolled at a less-thanbachelor’s a 4-year a 2-year 2-year Not

Total degree institution institution institution enrolled

Total 69.8 25.6 44.2 4.7 0 25.6

Gender

Male 68.4 21.0 47.4 8.5 0 23.1

Female 71.2 30.3 40.9 0.7 0 28.1

Age as of 12/31/89

Under age 20 72.2 26.0 46.2 3.9 0 23.9

20 or older — — — — — —

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% — — — — — —

Middle 50% 77.4 26.5 51.0 4.4 0 18.2

Top 25% 66.0 25.4 40.6 4.8 0 29.2

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s

 degree — — — — — —

Bachelor’s degree 68.1 31.5 36.6 7.8 0 24.1

Advanced degree 69.7 21.4 48.3 2.2 0 28.1

Degree goal 1989–90

None — — — — — —

Certificate — — — — — —

Associate’s degree 73.4 30.3 43.1 3.8 0 22.7

Bachelor’s degree 64.4 19.6 44.7 6.2 0 29.5

Attainment status at first

 transfer

None 60.5 16.9 43.5 7.2 0 32.4

Certificate — — — — — —

Associate’s degree 87.2 42.6 44.7 0 0 12.8

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

NOTES: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding. The number of nonwhite students eligible for inclusion in this table

was too small to produce reliable estimates by race–ethnicity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
40

Figure 9—Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions who transferred to a 4-year

institution, percentage who had attained a bachelor’s degree or were enrolled at a 4-year

institution as of Spring 1994, by attainment prior to transfer: 1989–94

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Did not

attain

Attained

associate’s degree

Attainment prior to transfer

Enrolled at 4-year institution

Attained bachelor’s degree

Status as of Spring 1994

Percent

NOTE: The number of students who had attained a certificate prior to transferring was too small to produce reliable estimates.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Did Students Who Did Not Transfer Directly to a 4-Year Institution Eventually Attend

One?

Since the analysis thus far has been restricted to the first transfer, the possibility remains that

some students found their way into a 4-year institution after an intermediate transition to a lessthan-4-year institution. This possibility can be addressed by examining the full record of

institutions attended over the 5 years covered by BPS:90/94. In addition, one can examine the full

record of stated degree objectives and bachelor’s degree attainment among community college

beginners.

As noted earlier, 26 percent of community college beginners stated in their first year that

they were working toward a bachelor’s degree (table 17). Over the full 5-year period, however,

38 percent said at some time that they were working toward a bachelor’s degree (table 24). Many

students who were not initially working toward a bachelor’s degree later took steps toward one.
41

For example, among students who initially said they were working toward an associate’s degree,

26 percent had attended a 4-year institution by 1994, and 24 percent had reported working

toward a bachelor’s degree by 1994 (table 24).

Table 24 shows that some students who were not identified as transfers or whose first

transfer was to a less-than-4-year institution (2 and 9 percent, respectively) had attended a 4-year

institution at some time by 1994, and a fraction of a percent had attained a bachelor’s degree by

1994.37

Among all community college beginners, the bachelor’s degree attainment rate after 5 years

was equal for those initially working toward an associate’s degree and those initially working

toward a bachelor’s degree (8 percent). The rate of 4-year institution attendance was higher

among those initially working toward a bachelor’s degree, however (45 versus 26 percent).

Some “indirect transfer”—that is, transfer to a 4-year institution after an intermediate

transfer to a less-than-4-year institution—occurred among students identified as prospective

transfers based on their stated degree goal in 1989–90. While 39 percent of prospective transfers

made a direct transition to a 4-year institution (table 19), 45 percent had attended a 4-year

institution at some time by 1994 (table 25). Among students who transferred to a less-than-4-year

institution, 17 percent subsequently enrolled at a 4-year institution. While 20 percent of direct

transfers had attained a bachelor’s degree by 1994, none of the other transfers had done so (table

25).

Table 24—Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage who ever stated

working toward a bachelor’s degree, who ever attended a 4-year institution, and who had

attained a bachelor’s degree, by stated degree goal and transfer status: 1989–94

Ever stated Ever attended Attained a

a bachelor’s a 4-year bachelor’s

degree goal institution degree

Total 37.8 25.4 6.3

Degree goal 1989–90

None 6.5 8.7 3.2

Certificate 3.0 2.5 0

Associate’s degree 23.6 25.6 7.8

Bachelor’s degree 100.0 44.8 8.1

Transfer status

Did not transfer* 18.2 2.0 0.2

Transferred to 4-year 91.7 100.0 25.6

Transferred to less-than-4-year 33.1 8.8 0.6

*The small number of students in this category who attended a 4-year institution or who attained a bachelor’s degree did so

while still enrolled at the first institution, and thus did not qualify as transfers.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

 

37Nontransfers who attended a 4-year institution or who attained a bachelor’s degree were simultaneously enrolled

at the first institution. Because they did not leave the first institution, they did not meet the criteria for transfer as

defined in this report.
42

Table 25—Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions with stated goal of a bachelor’s

degree, percentage who ever attended a 4-year institution and who had attained a bachelor’s

degree, by transfer status: 1989–94

Ever

attended Attained

a 4-year bachelor’s

institution degree

Total 44.8 8.1

Transfer status

Did not transfer* 6.8 0

Transferred to 4-year 100.0 19.6

Transferred to less-than-4-year 16.9 0

*Students in this category who attended a 4-year institution did so while still enrolled at the first institution, and thus did not

qualify as transfers.

NOTE: The number of nonwhite students eligible for inclusion in this table was too small to produce reliable estimates by

race–ethnicity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

Analysis of Transfer After Controlling for Background Variation

Thus far, the analysis of transfer behavior has examined the relationship between transfer

and individual student or enrollment characteristics, considering each characteristic one at a time.

Because these characteristics are related to one another—for example, older students are more

likely to attend part-time—this approach cannot reveal the unique relationship between each

characteristic and transfer behavior (that is, the relationship that exists apart from the confounding

influence of other variables). In this section, linear regression analysis is used to provide

information about how certain characteristics are related to transfer after controlling for a set of

other characteristics. Three different types of transfer are analyzed in this fashion: horizontal

transfer from 4-year institutions, reverse transfer from 4-year institutions, and transfer from public

community colleges to 4-year institutions. For more information about this methodology, refer to

appendix C.

Horizontal Transfer From 4-Year Institutions

Table 26 shows the results for an analysis of horizontal transfer from 4-year institutions. The

first column displays the unadjusted percentages—the percentages in each group who transferred

to another 4-year institution before controlling for the other variables in the table—and the second

column displays adjusted percentages for a hypothetical student with average values on the other

variables. The last row in each set of characteristics is the comparison group for significance

testing, and the asterisks indicate cases where the percentage in a column is significantly different

from that of the comparison group. For example, the percentage of older students who transferred

to another 4-year institution is significantly lower than among younger students, both before and

after adjusting for the other variables in the table.
43

Table 26—Among 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions, percentage who transferred to another

4-year institution by selected characteristics, and this percentage after taking into account the

covariation of the variables in the table: 1989–94

Unadjusted Adjusted WLS Standard

percentage1percentage2coefficient3error4

Total 15.6 15.6 15.3 1.7

Gender

Male 17.1 16.8* 2.2 1.0

Female 14.3 14.6 † †

Age as of 12/31/89

20 or older 9.7* 10.6* -5.5 2.4

Under age 20 16.1 16.1 † †

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 11.5 12.9 -1.1 2.9

Top 25% 17.0 16.9* 2.9 1.3

Middle 50% 14.1 14.0 † †

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 8.4* 10.7* -8.3 3.2

Advanced degree 14.6* 14.1* -4.8 1.2

Bachelor’s degree 18.5 19.0 † †

Control of first institution

Private, not-for-profit 17.4 16.6 1.5 2.3

Public 14.8 15.1 † †

Received financial aid 1989–90

Received aid 16.0 16.2 1.3 1.4

No aid 15.2 14.9 † †

Enrollment status 1989–90

Part-time 15.3 18.2 2.9 2.9

Full-time 15.7 15.4 † †

Grade point average 1989–90

Below 2.50 15.9 15.3 -0.9 1.2

3.50 or higher 14.2 15.1 -1.0 1.4

2.50–3.49 16.1 16.1 † †

Overall satisfaction with first institution

Low (0–3) 20.9* 21.9* 6.7 1.4

High (5) 11.9 13.0 -2.3 1.2

Moderate (4) 14.3 15.2 † †

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference category.

1

Unadjusted percentages are from the BPS:90/94 Data Analysis System.

2

See appendix C for an explanation of the adjustment procedure.

3Weighted least squares (WLS) coefficients were multiplied by 100 to match the percentage scale (see appendix C).

4

Standard error of WLS coefficient, adjusted for design effects and multiplied by 100 to match the percentage scale (see

appendix C).

NOTE: The last row in each group is the reference category for comparison (see appendix C).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
44

This analysis shows that adjusting for variation among these variables does little to change

the conclusions one would reach based on comparisons of the unadjusted percentages: horizontal

transfer was less likely among older students than younger students, and less likely among

students with educational expectations other than a bachelor’s degree (lower or higher) than

among those who expected their highest degree would be a bachelor’s degree; and horizontal

transfer was more likely among students who were relatively dissatisfied with their first institution

than among those who were moderately satisfied (table 26).

The analysis does show two additional characteristics are associated with transfer when

variation of the other variables has been taken into account: men were somewhat more likely than

women to transfer to another 4-year institution, and high-SES students were more likely than

middle-SES students to do so.

Reverse Transfer From 4-Year Institutions

Table 27 shows the results for an analysis of reverse transfer from 4-year institutions. In this

case, controlling for the other variables does not change the interpretation one would draw from

the unadjusted percentages. Reverse transfer was less common among both low- and high-SES

students than among middle-SES students; less common among students who expected to attain

an advanced degree than among those who thought their highest degree would be a bachelor’s;

and less common among students who received financial aid than among unaided students.

Reverse transfer was about twice as likely among students who were enrolled part-time in their

first year than among full-time students, and also among students who earned low grades in their

first year. Satisfaction with the institution was associated with reverse transfer as well as

horizontal transfer: those with low satisfaction were more likely to transfer. However, it is likely

that the nature of dissatisfaction was different for horizontal and reverse transfers.

Transfer From Community Colleges to 4-Year Institutions

Table 28 presents the results for transfer from community colleges to 4-year institutions.

This model differs from that used to analyze transfer from 4-year institutions in several important

respects. First, some of the variables included in tables 26 and 27 were not included because they

have little or no relevance to this model (for example, control of first institution). Second,

although one would normally want to control for achievement at the first institution when

analyzing transfer, it was not included in the model because GPAs were unavailable for about one

out of four community college beginners. Finally, the model includes students’ stated degree goal

because of its importance in the foregoing analysis of community college transfer.

Unlike the results for reverse transfer from a 4-year institution, these results show that

controlling for variation among these variables substantially alters the interpretation of how these

variables are related to transfer from a community college to a 4-year institution. Whereas the

unadjusted percentages show different rates of transfer to a 4-year institution for every variable

except gender, all but one of these differences disappears when one controls for variation among
45

Table 27—Among 1989–90 beginning students at 4-year institutions, percentage who transferred to a lessthan-4-year institution by selected characteristics, and this percentage after taking into account

the covariation of the variables in the table: 1989–94

Unadjusted Adjusted WLS Standard

percentage1percentage2coefficient3error4

Total 12.6 12.6 13.0 1.6

Gender

Male 13.4 12.7 0.1 0.9

Female 11.9 12.5 † †

Age as of 12/31/89

20 or older 15.3 11.6 -1.1 2.2

Under age 20 12.4 12.7 † †

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 8.4* 7.7* -7.8 2.6

Top 25% 11.0* 11.2* -4.2 1.2

Middle 50% 15.7 15.5 † †

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 21.0 18.1 4.1 2.9

Advanced degree 10.8* 11.6* -2.4 1.1

Bachelor’s degree 15.2 14.0 † †

Control of first institution

Private, not-for-profit 11.3 13.1 0.8 2.1

Public 13.2 12.3 † †

Received financial aid 1989–90

Received aid 10.4* 10.9* -4.0 1.2

No aid 15.5 14.8 † †

Enrollment status 1989–90

Part-time 23.1* 20.9* 9.1 2.6

Full-time 11.4 11.7 † †

Grade point average 1989–90

Below 2.50 19.5* 19.4* 10.7 1.1

3.50 or higher 5.6 6.9 -1.8 1.2

2.50–3.49 7.7 8.8 † †

Overall satisfaction with first institution

Low (0–3) 18.7* 18.2* 6.7 1.2

High (5) 10.6 10.9 -0.6 1.1

Moderate (4) 10.9 11.5 † †

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference category.

1Unadjusted percentages are from the BPS:90/94 Data Analysis System.

2

See appendix C for an explanation of the adjustment procedure.

3Weighted least squares (WLS) coefficients were multiplied by 100 to match the percentage scale (see appendix C).

4

Standard error of WLS coefficient, adjusted for design effects and multiplied by 100 to match the percentage scale (see

appendix C).

NOTE: The last row in each group is the reference category for comparison (see appendix C).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
46

the variables: only enrollment status retains an independent effect.38 The likelihood of transfer to a

4-year institution was nearly twice as high for full-time students than for students of comparable

gender, age, SES, educational expectations, and degree goals who were attending part-time.

Table 28—Among 1989–90 beginning students at public 2-year institutions, percentage who transferred to a

4-year institution by selected characteristics, and this percentage after taking into account the

covariation of the variables in the table: 1989–94

Unadjusted Adjusted WLS Standard

percentage1percentage2coefficient3error4

Total 22.4 22.4 32.6 6.6

Gender

Male 23.1 21.8 -1.2 4.7

Female 21.7 23.0 † †

Age as of 12/31/89

20 or older 8.0* 17.0 -8.8 7.1

Under age 20 31.3 25.7 † †

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 7.2* 16.1 -6.2 7.0

Top 25% 34.8* 26.3 3.9 6.1

Middle 50% 20.7 22.4 † †

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 3.4* 10.1 -13.3 6.8

Advanced degree 38.7* 32.9 9.5 5.8

Bachelor’s degree 26.8 23.4 † †

Enrollment status 1989–90

Part-time 12.6* 16.4* -12.3 6.2

Full-time 33.1 28.7 † †

Degree goal 1989–90

None or certificate 4.7* 15.8 -5.5 7.0

Bachelor’s degree 38.7* 29.9 8.5 6.7

Associate’s degree 22.9 21.4 † †

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference category.

1Unadjusted percentages are from the BPS:90/94 Data Analysis System.

2

See appendix C for an explanation of the adjustment procedure.

3Weighted least squares (WLS) coefficients were multiplied by 100 to match the percentage scale (see appendix C).

4

Standard error of WLS coefficient, adjusted for design effects and multiplied by 100 to match the percentage scale (see

appendix C).

NOTE: The last row in each group is the reference category for comparison (see appendix C).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.

 

38This illustrates why controlling for covariation among variables is useful: differences between the unadjusted

percentages can conceal interrelationships among several variables.
47

This finding suggests that administrators and policymakers concerned with the transfer

function must devote special attention to the needs of part-time students, who make up a majority

of the community college population.39 Areas in which part-time students may be at a

 

39For example, in academic year 1992–93 60 percent of community college students attended part

time (L. Horn and M. Premo, Profile of Undergraduates in U.S. Postsecondary Institutions:

1992–93, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics,
48

disadvantage include access to transfer-oriented classes that accommodate their work schedule,

access to faculty outside of class, and access to and quality of advising. Other areas that may be

equally important but less amenable to institutional intervention include access to child care and

support by family, friends, and employers.

Summary

This report presents a comprehensive analysis of undergraduate transfer behavior using the

most current, nationally representative longitudinal data on student progress through

postsecondary education. This information is potentially useful to state and federal policymakers

as well as administrators at postsecondary institutions.

Attendance at multiple institutions is a widespread phenomenon: nearly half of all first-time

beginning students in 1989–90 had enrolled elsewhere within 5 years. Not all instances of

multiple-institution enrollment represent transfers, however. At 4-year institutions, for example,

about half of beginning students enrolled elsewhere at some time, but only one-quarter

transferred.

Transfer From 4-Year Institutions

At 4-year institutions, transfer was related to academic performance, satisfaction with

selected aspects of the institution (particularly its contribution to their intellectual growth), and

the availability of and students’ satisfaction with certain services (particularly job and personal

counseling). Cost also appeared to be a factor in transfer from private institutions, and two out of

three students who transferred from private institutions entered public ones.

While the bachelor’s degree attainment rate was lower among horizontal transfers from 4-

year institutions than among students who did not transfer, the overall persistence rate was similar

for the two groups. The implication of this finding is that horizontal transfer may increase time to

degree without undermining persistence. Half of all horizontal transfers left the first institution

after 10 months or less. Three-quarters of horizontal transfers entered the destination institution

within 6 months of leaving the first institution; one out of eight entered later, but within a year;

and one-eighth took more than a year off between institutions.

About half of students who transferred from 4-year institutions were reverse transfers. Of

these, about one out of five had returned to another 4-year institution by 1994. Reverse transfer

was more common among older beginning students, part-time students, and students who did not

receive financial aid from the first institution. Reverse transfer was also more common among

students who had low grades in the first year.

Transfer From Public 2-Year Colleges to 4-Year Institutions

About one-quarter of beginning students at community colleges were identified as

prospective transfers: in their first year of college, they explicitly stated that they were working

toward a bachelor’s degree. Of this group, 39 percent had made a direct transition to a 4-year
49

institution by 1994, and another 6 percent entered a 4-year institution after an intermediate

transfer to another subbaccalaureate institution. Community college students who transferred to

4-year institutions had lower rates of bachelor’s degree completion relative to those who began in

a 4-year institution, but comparable rates of overall persistence toward the bachelor’s degree.

About one-third of community college transfers to 4-year institutions completed an

associate’s degree before they transferred. This group was much more likely than those who

transferred without any credential to have completed a bachelor’s degree by 1994.

In contrast with horizontal transfers from 4-year institutions, students who transferred from

a community college to a 4-year institution often stopped out for an extended period between

institutions. On average, they took almost 2 years off (21 months).

Prospective transfers who enrolled full-time in the first year were twice as likely as parttimers to transfer to a 4-year institution within 5 years. Even after controlling for a number of

other characteristics in a multivariate model, enrollment status in the first year remains strongly

related to the likelihood of transfer within 5 years.
50

References

Adelman, C. “ Transfer Rates and the Going Mythologies.” Change(January/February 1988):

38–41.

Baker, T. and W. Vélez. “ Access to and Opportunity in Postsecondary Education in the United

States: A Review.” Sociology of Education Extra Issue (1996): 82–101.

Banks, D. “ Effects of Environmental Conditions on Student-Transfer Activity.” Community

College Journal of Research and Practice 18 (1994): 245–259.

Berkner, L., S. Cuccaro-Alamin, and A. McCormick. Descriptive Summary of 1989–90

Beginning Postsecondary Students: 5 Years Later. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996.

Dougherty, K. “ The Community College at the Crossroads: The Need for Structural Reform. ”

Harvard Educational Review 61 (1991): 311–336.

Gose, B. “ Double Dippers.” Chronicle of Higher Education (August 4, 1995): A27.

Horn, L. and M. Premo. Profile of Undergraduates in U.S. Postsecondary Institutions: 1992–93.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,

1995.

Jones, E. (Ed.). A Model for Deriving the Transfer Rate. Washington, DC: American

Association of Community and Junior Colleges, 1992.

Lee, V. and K. Frank. “ Students’ Characteristics that Facilitate the Transfer from Two-Year to

Four-Year Colleges.” Sociology of Education 63 (1990): 178–193.

McCormick, A., S. Geis, and R. Vergun. Profile of Part-Time Undergraduates in Postsecondary

Education: 1989–90. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1995.

Sanderson, A., B. Dugoni, K. Rasinski, and J. Taylor. National Education Longitudinal Study

1988–1994 Descriptive Summary Report: With an Essay on Access and Choice in

Postsecondary Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National

Center for Education Statistics, 1996.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 1995 Directory of

Postsecondary Institutions. Washington, DC: 1996.
Appendix A: Reference Tables
52

Table A1—Percentage distribution of beginning postsecondary students according to level and control of

first institution, by selected student characteristics: 1989–90

4-year 2-year Less-than-2-year

Private Private Private Private

not-for- not-for- not-for- forPublic profit Public profit Public profit profit

Total 28.5 13.7 43.7 1.7 1.8 0.4 10.2

Gender

Male 28.5 14.4 46.1 1.5 2.0 0.4 7.2

Female 28.4 13.2 41.7 1.9 1.7 0.3 12.7

Age as of 12/31/89

Under age 20 35.9 17.5 37.3 2.0 1.2 0.1 6.1

20 or older 8.8 3.7 60.8 1.0 3.7 1.1 21.0

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 11.4 4.8 56.0 1.1 4.1 0.8 21.8

Middle 50% 24.7 9.5 49.0 2.0 2.0 0.5 12.4

Top 25% 39.0 21.8 33.3 1.7 0.9 0.0 3.4

Race–ethnicity

Asian/Pacific Islander 36.2 14.6 43.3 0.5 0.1 0.4 5.1

Black, non-Hispanic 26.7 9.3 40.7 1.8 1.1 0.3 20.2

Hispanic 15.7 8.3 61.2 0.7 0.4 0.8 13.0

American Indian/

 Alaskan Native 16.2 13.1 48.6 0.8 0.3 0.0 21.1

White, non-Hispanic 29.6 14.8 42.4 1.9 2.2 0.3 8.9

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a

 bachelor’s degree 4.8 1.8 56.7 2.0 6.2 0.7 27.8

Bachelor’s degree 29.4 11.3 49.5 2.1 0.6 0.3 6.8

Advanced degree 41.4 22.8 30.2 1.5 0.2 0.2 3.8

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
53

Table A2—Percentage distribution (in columns) of beginning postsecondary students according to selected

characteristics, by level and control of first institution: 1989–90

4-year 2-year Less-than-2-year

Private Private Private Private

not-for- not-for- not-for- forTotal Public profit Public profit Public profit profit

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Gender

Male 46.0 46.5 48.6 49.0 40.8 50.7 48.7 33.1

Female 54.0 53.5 51.4 51.0 59.2 49.3 51.3 66.9

Race–ethnicity

Asian/Pacific Islander 4.0 4.8 4.0 3.7 1.0 0.2 4.3 1.9

Black, non-Hispanic 8.8 8.6 6.2 8.5 9.4 5.5 6.9 18.2

Hispanic 7.6 4.4 4.8 11.1 3.2 1.5 17.7 10.2

American Indian/

Alaskan Native 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 1.4

White, non-Hispanic 78.8 81.9 84.4 75.9 86.2 92.8 71.1 68.4

Age as of 12/31/89

Under age 20 72.3 91.5 92.7 61.9 84.2 45.8 16.5 43.5

20 or older 27.8 8.5 7.4 38.1 15.8 54.2 83.5 56.5

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 14.7 5.8 5.1 18.6 9.3 32.7 33.9 31.2

Middle 50% 45.7 39.5 31.6 51.1 52.0 48.4 63.1 55.6

Top 25% 39.7 54.7 63.3 30.3 38.7 19.0 3.0 13.2

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a

 bachelor’s degree 21.9 3.6 2.8 29.0 24.0 81.4 43.9 60.3

Bachelor’s degree 35.9 36.0 28.7 41.1 41.0 13.5 30.8 23.9

Advanced degree 42.1 60.3 68.5 29.9 35.1 5.1 25.3 15.8

Received financial aid

 1989–90

Received aid 45.7 48.5 72.3 27.8 57.7 47.0 84.5 77.7

No aid 54.3 51.6 27.7 72.2 42.3 53.0 15.5 22.3

Enrollment status 1989–90

Full-time 70.4 88.9 94.2 48.5 87.0 74.0 74.8 86.2

Part-time 29.6 11.1 5.8 51.5 13.0 26.0 25.2 13.8

Grade point average 1989–90

Not reported 25.3 14.9 19.4 25.7 31.2 77.1 79.6 45.4

Below 2.50 30.5 36.0 24.6 34.6 29.0 6.8 7.8 11.6

2.50–2.99 14.5 20.1 20.5 11.3 17.8 5.3 5.5 7.5

3.00–3.49 15.6 16.5 19.9 15.9 11.0 4.7 6.1 10.7

3.50 or higher 14.2 12.5 15.6 12.5 11.1 6.2 1.0 24.8

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary

Students Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.
55

Appendix B

Glossary

This glossary describes the variables used in this report. These items were taken directly from

the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study Second Follow-up Data Analysis System

(DAS), an NCES software application that generates tables directly from the BPS:90/94 data files. A

description of the DAS files can be found in appendix C. The variables are organized in alphabetic

order by label used in the tables. BPS:90/94 variable names are indicated to the right of each label.

Glossary Index

Age as of 12/31/89 ................. 56

Attainment at first institution .......... 56

Attainment status at first transfer....... 56

Control of first institution ............ 57

Control of transfer origin and

 destination ...................... 57

Degree goal 1989–90 ............... 58

Degree program 1989–90 (institution-

 reported) ....................... 58

Enrollment and attainment status

 as of 1994 ...................... 58

Enrollment status 1989–90 ........... 59

Ever attended a public or private, not-for-

 profit 4-year institution............. 59

Ever stated working toward a bachelor’s

 degree ......................... 59

Gender .......................... 59

Grade point average 1989–90 ......... 60

Highest degree expected 1989–90 ...... 60

Level and control of first institution..... 60

Level of first institution .............. 61

Level of transfer destination .......... 61

Level of transfer origin and destination . . 62

Months between institutions .......... 62

Months enrolled at first institution ..... 62

Number of institutions attended ....... 62

Overall satisfaction with first institution . 63

Race–ethnicity .................... 63

Received financial aid 1989–90........ 64

Satisfaction with academic counseling... 64

Satisfaction with cost of attending ..... 64

Satisfaction with financial aid

 counseling ...................... 64

Satisfaction with institutional prestige... 65

Satisfaction with intellectual growth .... 65

Satisfaction with job counseling ....... 65

Satisfaction with job placement services . 65

Satisfaction with personal counseling ... 65

Satisfaction with social life ........... 65

Satisfaction with teacher ability........ 66

Socioeconomic status............... 66

Transfer status .................... 66

Transferred credits ................. 67
56

Age as of 12/31/89 AGE

This is a continuous variable that was aggregated to the following categories:

Under age 20 Student was younger than age 20 as of 12/31/89.

20 or older Student was older than age 20 as of 12/31/89.

Attainment at first institution DEGREEFS

Degree attained, if any, at the first institution attended. For students who attained more than one

degree at the first institution, first degree attained.

None/Did not attain Student did not attain any degrees at the first

institution.

Certificate Student attained a certificate or other formal award

at the first institution.

Associate’s degree Student attained an associate’s degree at the first

institution.

Bachelor’s degree Student attained a bachelor’s degree at the first

institution.

Attainment status at first transfer TRAN1ATT

Student’s attainment status at the time of first transfer.

None Student did not attain before transferring.

Certificate Student attained a certificate before transferring.

Associate’s degree Student attained an associate’s degree before

transferring.

Positive values on this variable were also used to indicate the percentage of students who ever

transferred during postsecondary education.
57

Control of first institution OFCO8990

Control of the base year sample institution.

Public A postsecondary educational institution operated by

publicly elected or appointed school officials in

which the program and activities are under the

control of these officials and that is supported

primarily by public funds.

Private, not-for-profit A postsecondary educational institution that is

controlled by an independent governing board and

incorporated under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal

Revenue Code.

Private, for-profit A postsecondary educational institution that is

privately owned and operated as a profit-making

enterprise. These institutions include career colleges

and proprietary institutions.

Control of transfer origin and destination TRANCTL

For students who transferred, this variable indicates the control of the institutions of origin and

destination (first transfer).

From public to public Student transferred from one publicly controlled

institution to another.

From private to public Student transferred from a private, not-for-profit

institution to a publicly controlled institution.

From public to private Student transferred from a publicly controlled

institution to a private, not-for-profit institution.

From private to private Student transferred from one private, not-for-profit

institution to another.

Note: This variable was used only with respect to transfer from 4-year institutions. Transfers

involving private, for-profit institutions were not represented.
58

Degree goal 1989–90 GOAL8990

Type of degree student reported working toward, if any, at the base year sample institution in

academic year 1989–90.

Not working towards a degree Student did not report working toward any formal

award.

Certificate Student reported working toward a certificate or

formal award other than an associate’s or bachelor’s

degree.

Associate’s degree Student reported working toward an associate’s

degree.

Bachelor’s degree Student reported working toward a bachelor’s

degree.

Degree program 1989–90 (institution-reported) PROGTYP

Type of program undergraduate was enrolled in during the 1989–90 academic year reported by

the base year sample institution.

Associate’s degree Student was pursuing an associate of arts or 

associate of sciences degree.

Undergraduate certificate Student was pursuing a certificate or other formal 

award other than an associate’s or bachelor’s 

degree.

Other undergraduate program Student is not in any of the above programs.

Note: This variable was only used in tables restricted to students who began at a public, 2-year

institution.

Enrollment and attainment status as of 1994 ATTENRST

Attained bachelor’s degree Student had attained a bachelor’s degree as of spring

1994.

Enrolled at a 4-year institution Student had not attained a bachelor’s degree but was

enrolled at a 4-year institution as of spring 1994.

Enrolled at a 2-year institution Student had not attained a bachelor’s degree but

was enrolled at a 2-year institution as of spring

1994.
59

Enrolled at a less-than-2-year Student had not attained a bachelor’s degree but

institution was enrolled at a less-than-2-year institution as of

spring 1994.

Not enrolled Student had not attained a bachelor’s degree and

was not enrolled as of spring 1994.

Enrollment status 1989–90 ATTEND

Intensity of enrollment in the sampled term of the survey year (fall 1989 for most students), as

reported by the base year sample institution.

Full-time Student was enrolled full time according to the 

institution’s definition of full-time enrollment during

the fall.

Part-time Student was enrolled less than full time according to

the institution’s definition of less than full-time 

enrollment during the fall.

Ever attended a public or private, not-for-profit 4-year institution EVER4YR

Positive values on this variable were used to identify the percentage of students who reported

ever attending a public or private, not-for-profit 4-year institution.

Ever stated working toward a bachelor’s degree PERABA

Positive values on this variable were used to identify students who had said they were working

toward a bachelor’s degree at any time through spring 1994.

Gender H_GENDR

Male

Female
60

Grade point average 1989–90 GPA

Cumulative grade point average (GPA) at the base year sample institution over the 1989–90

academic year, as reported by the institution. The most recent GPA was used if the cumulative

GPA was not available.

Not reported Student’s GPA was not reported.

Below 2.50

2.50–2.99

3.00–3.49

3.50 or higher

Note: It is possible that students for whom GPAs were not reported may not be randomly

distributed across the GPA scale, thus causing a slight bias among reported GPAs.

Highest degree expected 1989–90 ASPIRE

Highest level of education that the student expected to complete. Recoded from the student’s

reported educational expectations in the base year survey.

Less than a bachelor’s degree Student expected to earn less than a bachelor’s

degree.

Bachelor’s degree Student expected to earn a bachelor’s degree, but

not an advanced degree.

Advanced degree Student expected to earn a master’s, doctoral, or

first professional degree.

Note: In some tables, the last two categories were aggregated as “bachelor’s degree or higher.”

Level and control of first institution OFCO8990

Level and control of the base year sample institution.

4-year An institution that offers 4-year baccalaureate

degrees. These institutions may or may not also

offer master’s, doctoral, or first professional degrees

in one or more programs as the highest degree 

awarded.

Public Public, 4-year institution.

Private, not-for-profit Private, not-for-profit, 4-year institution.
61

2-year An institution whose program of study results in an

award or degree below the baccalaureate level, and

is at least 2 years but less than 4 years in duration. 

These institutions include many community and

junior colleges.

Public Public, 2- to 3-year institution.

Private, not-for-profit Private, not-for-profit, 2- to 3-year institution.

Less-than-2-year An institution whose normal program of study is

less than 2 years in duration.

Public Public, less-than-2-year institution.

Private, not-for-profit Private, not-for-profit, less-than-2-year institution.

Private, for-profit Private, for-profit institution. Includes all levels.

Note: In tables that aggregate this variable by level with subcategories for control, totals by level

are limited to public and private, not-for-profit institutions.

Level of first institution OFCO8990

Level of the base year sample institution. Aggregates public, private not-for-profit, and private

for-profit institutions according to level. See Level and control of first institution for definitions

of levels.

4-year

2-year

Less-than-2-year

Level of transfer destination TRANTO

For students who transferred, level of the destination institution (first transfer). Aggregates public,

private not-for-profit, and private for-profit institutions.

4-year

2-year

Less-than-2-year

Level of transfer origin and destination TRANLVL
62

For students who transferred, indicates the level of origin and destination institutions (first

transfer). Aggregates public, private not-for-profit, and private for-profit institutions.

4-year to 4-year

2-year to 4-year

Less-than-2-year to 4-year

4-year to 2-year

2-year to 2-year

Less-than-2-year to 2-year

4-year to less-than-2-year

2-year to less-than-2-year

Less-than-2-year to less-than 2-year

Months between institutions TRAN1GAP

For students who transferred, elapsed time between last enrollment at origin (base year sample

institution) and first enrollment at destination institution (first transfer). Set to zero if enrollment

overlapped.

Months enrolled at first institution TRAN1MOS

For students who transferred, months enrolled at the base year sample institution prior to transfer.

Months were not necessarily consecutive.

Number of institutions attended NINSTOT

Count of number of institutions attended during the period of analysis. Includes simultaneous or

temporary enrollment at more than one institution as well as transfers.

One Student attended one postsecondary institution.

Two Student attended two postsecondary institutions.

Three or more Student attended more than two postsecondary

institutions.

Overall satisfaction with first institution SATISFYN
63

Number of aspects of the base year sample institution that the student reported being somewhat

or very satisfied with, from among the following items asked about in the first follow-up survey:

cost of the institution, prestige of the institution, teacher ability, social life, and intellectual

development. Ranges from 0–5; collapsed into 3 categories based on the empirical distribution to

produce categories of roughly equal size.

Low Student reported being somewhat or very satisfied

with three or fewer aspects of the institution.

Moderate Student reported being somewhat or very satisfied

with four aspects of the institution.

High Student reported being somewhat or very satisfied

with five aspects of the institution.

Race–ethnicity BPSRACE

Asian/Pacific Islander A person having origins in any of the original

peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian

Subcontinent or Pacific Islands. This includes people

from China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands,

Samoa, India, and Vietnam.

Black, non-Hispanic A person having origins in any of the black racial

groups of Africa, not of Hispanic origin.

Hispanic A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central

or South American or other Spanish culture or

origin, regardless of race.

American Indian/Alaskan Native A person having origins in any of the original

peoples of North America and who maintains

cultural identification through tribal affiliation or

community recognition.

White, non-Hispanic A person having origins in any of the original

peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East

(except those of Hispanic origin).
64

Received financial aid 1989–90 AID8990

Indicates whether student received non-family financial aid at the base year sample institution.

Did not receive aid Student did not receive non-family financial aid from

any source.

Received aid Student received non-family financial aid from any

source; including federal, state, institution, and other

sources, during the academic year.

Satisfaction with academic counseling SATNACNS

Indicates availability and, where available, student use of and satisfaction with academic

counseling at the base year sample institution (asked in the first follow-up survey).

Not available Student reported that this service was not available

at the institution.

Available Student reported that this service was available

(includes students who did and who did not use the

service).

Did not use Student did not use this service.

Used, dissatisfied Student used this service and reported being

somewhat or very dissatisfied with it.

Used, satisfied Student used this service and reported being

somewhat or very satisfied with it.

Satisfaction with cost of attending SATNCOST

Indicates whether student was satisfied with the cost of the base year sample institution (asked in

the first follow-up survey).

Not satisfied Student reported being somewhat or very

dissatisfied with this aspect of the institution.

Satisfied Student reported being somewhat or very satisfied

with this aspect of the institution.

Satisfaction with financial aid counseling SATNFCNS

Indicates availability and where available, student use of and satisfaction with financial aid

counseling at the base year sample institution (asked in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with academic counseling.

Satisfaction with institutional prestige SATNPRES
65

Indicates whether student was satisfied with the prestige of the base year sample institution (asked

in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with cost of attending.

Satisfaction with intellectual growth SATNINTL

Indicates whether student was satisfied with his or her intellectual growth at the base year sample

institution (asked in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with cost of attending.

Satisfaction with job counseling SATNJCNS

Indicates availability and where available, student use of and satisfaction with job counseling at

the base year sample institution (asked in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with academic counseling.

Satisfaction with job placement services SATNJOBP

Indicates availability and where available, student use of and satisfaction with job placement

services at the base year sample institution (asked in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with academic counseling.

Satisfaction with personal counseling SATNPCNS

Indicates availability and where available, student use of and satisfaction with personal counseling

at the base year sampling institution (asked in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with academic counseling.

Satisfaction with social life SATNSOCL

Indicates whether student was satisfied with the social life of the base year sample institution

(asked in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with cost of attending.
66

Satisfaction with teacher ability SATNTEAC

Indicates whether student was satisfied with teacher ability at the base year sample institution

(asked in the first follow-up survey).

For categories, refer to Satisfaction with cost of attending.

Socioeconomic status SESPERC

Composite variable combining parents’ educational attainment and occupational status, dependent

student’s family income, and the existence of a series of material possessions in respondent’s

home.

Bottom 25% Socioeconomic status fell at or below the 25th

percentile.

Middle 50% Socioeconomic status fell between the 25th

percentile and the 75th percentile.

Top 25% Socioeconomic status fell at or above the 75th

percentile.

Transfer status TRANTO

Indicates whether or not a student transferred and, for those who transferred, the level of the

destination institution (first transfer).

Did not transfer Student did not transfer.

Transferred to 4-year Student transferred to a 4-year institution.

Transferred to less than 4-year Student transferred to a 2-year or less-than-2-year 

institution.

Transferred to 2-year Student transferred to a 2-year institution.

Transferred to less than 2-year Student transferred to a less-than-2-year institution.

Transferred to unknown Students transferred but characteristics of the

destination institution could not be determined.

Notes: The last category is excluded from most tables and distributions. It is included in table 4 to

provide a consistent total percentage who transferred. It can be obtained in the Data Analysis

System by first filtering for those with valid values for TRAN1ATT (0-3). The remaining cases

with missing values on TRANTO are those for whom the destination characteristics are unknown.

Transferred credits CREDTRAN
67

For students who attended more than one institution, indicates whether a student transferred

credits between any institutions.
69

Appendix C

Technical Notes and Methodology

Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study

The need for a nationally representative database on postsecondary student financial aid

prompted the U.S. Department of Education to initiate the National Postsecondary Student Aid

Study (NPSAS), a cross-sectional survey conducted every 3 years starting in 1987. The NPSAS

sample was designed to include students enrolled in all types of postsecondary education.

However, service academies were not included in the institution sample because of their unique

funding and tuition base, and certain other institutions were also excluded.40 In addition to a

computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) of students and parents, the NPSAS surveys

collect students’ registrarial and financial aid information directly from the sampled institutions.

To provide the full range of information on financing postsecondary education, NPSAS samples

both aided and nonaided students.

The Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:90/94) followed students

from the NPSAS:90 sample who were identified as first-time beginning (FTB) students in

academic year 1989–90. A CATI was conducted 2 and 4 years after the base year that collected

information concerning enrollment, program completion, education financing, employment, and

family formation; graduate school access and enrollment; and civic participation. The data derived

from this survey permit a variety of analyses concerning postsecondary persistence and

completion, entry into the work force, and civic participation.

Unlike other NCES longitudinal surveys based on grade-specific cohorts (such as High

School and Beyond), the BPS design allows for the increasing numbers of “nontraditional”

postsecondary students, such as those who have delayed their education due to financial needs or

family responsibilities. Students who began their postsecondary studies before 1989–90, stopped

out, and then returned to their studies in 1989–90 were not included, nor were students who were

still enrolled in high school.

The NPSAS and BPS survey samples, while representative and statistically accurate, are not

simple random samples. Instead, the samples are selected using a more complex three-step

procedure with stratified samples and differential probabilities of selection at each level. First,

postsecondary institutions are initially selected within geographical strata. Once institutions are

 

40Other excluded institutions were those offering only avocational, recreational, or remedial courses; those

offering only in-house business courses; those offering only programs of less than 3 months’ duration; and those

offering only correspondence courses.
70

organized by zip code and state, they are further stratified by control (i.e., public; private, not-forprofit; or private, for-profit) and offering (less-than-2-year, 2-year, 4-year nondoctorate-granting,

and 4-year doctorate-granting). Sampling rates for students enrolled at different institutions and

levels (undergraduate or other) vary, resulting in better data for policy purposes, but at a cost to

statistical efficiency.

For more information on BPS:90/94, consult Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94) Final Technical Report (Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996).

Accuracy of Estimates

The statistics in this report are estimates derived from a sample. Two broad categories of

error occur in such estimates: sampling and nonsampling errors. Sampling errors occur because

observations are made only on samples of students, not on entire populations. Nonsampling errors

occur not only in sample surveys but also in complete censuses of entire populations.

Nonsampling errors can be attributed to a number of sources: inability to obtain complete

information about all students in all institutions in the sample (some students or institutions

refused to participate, or students participated but answered only certain items); ambiguous

definitions; differences in interpreting questions; inability or unwillingness to give correct

information; mistakes in recording or coding data; and other errors of collecting, processing,

sampling, and imputing missing data.

Data Analysis System

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the BPS:90/94 Data Analysis

System (DAS). The DAS software makes it possible for users to specify and generate their own

tables from the BPS data. With the DAS, users can replicate or expand upon the tables presented

in this report. In addition to the table estimates, the DAS calculates proper standard errors41 and

weighted sample sizes for these estimates. For example, table C1 contains standard errors that

correspond to table 5 in the text, and was generated by the DAS. If the number of valid cases is

too small to produce a reliable estimate (fewer than 30 cases), the DAS prints the message “lowN” instead of the estimate.

In addition to tables, the DAS will also produce a correlation matrix of selected variables to

be used for linear regression models. Included in the output with the correlation matrix are the

design effects (DEFTs) for each variable in the matrix. Since statistical procedures generally

compute regression coefficients based on simple random sample assumptions, the standard errors

must be adjusted with the design effects to take into account the NPSAS stratified sampling

method. (See discussion under “Statistical Procedures” below for the adjustment procedure.)

 

41The NPSAS and BPS samples are not simple random samples and, therefore, simple random sample techniques

for estimating sampling error cannot be applied to these data. The DAS takes into account the complexity of the

sampling procedures and calculates standard errors appropriate for such samples. The method for computing

sampling errors used by the DAS involves approximating the estimator by the linear terms of a Taylor series

expansion. The procedure is typically referred to as the Taylor series method.
71

For more information about the BPS:90/94 Data Analysis System, contact:

Aurora D’Amico

NCES Longitudinal Studies Branch

555 New Jersey Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20208-5652

(202) 219-1365

Internet address: Aurora_D’Amico@ed.gov

Statistical Procedures

Two types of statistical procedures were employed in this report: testing differences

between means, and adjustment of means after controlling for covariation among a group of

variables. Each procedure is described below.

Differences Between Means

The descriptive comparisons were tested in this report using Student’s t statistic.

Differences between estimates are tested against the probability of a Type I error, or significance

level. The significance levels were determined by calculating the Student’s t values for the

differences between each pair of means or proportions and comparing these with published tables

of significance levels for two-tailed hypothesis testing.

Student’s t values may be computed to test the difference between estimates with the

following formula:

t =

E - E

se +se

1 2

1

2

2

2

(1)

where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be compared and se1 and se2 are their corresponding

standard errors. Note that this formula is valid only for independent estimates. When the estimates

were not independent (for example, when comparing a total percentage with that for a subgroup

that is included in the total), a covariance term was added to the denominator of the t-test

formula.

There are hazards in reporting statistical tests for each comparison. First, comparisons based

on large t statistics may appear to merit special attention. This can be misleading, since the

magnitude of the t statistic is related not only to the observed differences in means or percentages

but also to the number of students in the specific categories used for comparison. Hence, a small

difference compared across a large number of students would produce a large t statistic.

A second hazard in reporting statistical tests for each comparison occurs when making

multiple comparisons among categories of an independent variable. For example, when making

paired comparisons among different levels of income, the probability of a Type I error for these

comparisons taken as a group is larger than the probability for a single comparison. When more
72

than one difference between groups of related characteristics or “families” are tested for statistical

significance, one must apply a standard that assures a level of significance for all of those

comparisons taken together.

Comparisons were made in this report only when p £ .05/k for a particular pairwise

comparison, where that comparison was one of k tests within a family. This guarantees both that

the individual comparison would have p £ .05 and that for k comparisons within a family of

possible comparisons, the significance level for all the comparisons will sum to p £ .05.42

For example, in a comparison of the percentages of males and females who enrolled in

postsecondary education only one comparison is possible (males versus females). In this family,

k=1, and the comparison can be evaluated without adjusting the significance level. When students

are divided into five racial–ethnic groups and all possible comparisons are made, then k=10 and

the significance level of each test must be p £ .05/10, or p £ .005. The formula for calculating

family size (k) is as follows:

k =

j(j -1)

2

(2)

where j is the number of categories for the variable being tested. In the case of race–

ethnicity, there are five racial–ethnic groups (American Indian, Asian/Pacific Islander, black nonHispanic, Hispanic, and white non-Hispanic), so substituting 5 for j in equation 2,

k =

5(5 -1)

2

=10

Adjustment of Means to Control for Background Variation

Tabular results are limited by sample size when attempting to control for additional factors

that may account for the variation observed between two variables. For example, when examining

the percentages of those who completed a degree, it is impossible to know to what extent the

observed variation is due to socioeconomic status (SES) differences and to what extent it is due

to differences in other factors related to SES, such as type of institution attended, intensity of

enrollment, and so on. However, if a nested table were produced showing SES within type of

institution attended, within enrollment intensity, the cell sizes would be too small to identify the

patterns. When the sample size becomes too small to support controls for another level of

variation, one must use other methods to take such variation into account.

To overcome this difficulty, multiple linear regression was used to obtain means that were

adjusted for covariation among a list of control variables. Adjusted means for subgroups were

obtained by regressing the dependent variable on a set of descriptive variables such as gender,

 

42The standard that p<.05/k for each comparison is more stringent than the criterion that the significance level of

the comparisons should sum to p<.05. For tables showing the t statistic required to ensure that p<.05/k for a

particular family size and degrees of freedom, see Olive Jean Dunn, “Multiple Comparisons Among Means,”

Journal of the American Statistical Association 56 (1961): 52–64.
74

race–ethnicity, SES, etc. Substituting ones or zeros for the subgroup characteristic(s) of interest

and the mean proportions for the other variables results in an estimate of the adjusted proportion

for the specified subgroup, holding all other variables constant. For example, consider a

hypothetical case in which two variables, age and gender, are used to describe an outcome, Y

(such as attaining a degree). The variables age and gender are recoded into a dummy variable

representing age, A, and a dummy variable representing gender, G:

Age A

24 years or older 1

Under 24 years old 0

and

Gender G

Female 1

Male 0

The following regression equation is then estimated from the correlation matrix output from the

DAS:

ˆ Y = a + b1A+ b2G (3)

To estimate the adjusted mean for any subgroup evaluated at the mean of all other variables,

one substitutes the appropriate values for that subgroup’s dummy variables (1 or 0) and the mean

for the dummy variable(s) representing all other subgroups. For example, suppose Y represents

attainment, and is being described by age (A) and gender (G), coded as shown above, with means

as follows:

Variable Mean

A 0.355

G 0.521

Next, suppose the regression equation results in:

ˆ Y = 0.15 + 0.17A + 0.01G

To estimate the adjusted value for older students, one substitutes the appropriate parameter

estimates and variable values into equation 3.

Variable Parameter Value

a 0.15 —

A 0.17 1.000

G 0.01 0.521

This results in:

ˆ Y = 0.15 + (0.17)(1) + (0.01)(0.521) = 0.325
75

In this case the adjusted mean for older students is 0.325 and represents the expected

outcome for older students who look like the average student across the other variables (in this

example, gender). In other words, the adjusted percentage who attained after controlling for age

and gender is 32.5 percent (0.325 x 100 for conversion to a percentage).

It is relatively straightforward to produce a multivariate model using the DAS, since one of

the DAS output options is a correlation matrix, computed using pair-wise missing values.43 This

matrix can be used by most statistical software packages as the input data for least-squares

regression. That is the approach used for this report, with an additional adjustment to incorporate

the complex sample design into the statistical significance tests of the parameter estimates

(described below). For tabular presentation, parameter estimates and standard errors were

multiplied by 100 to match the scale used for reporting unadjusted and adjusted percentages.

Most statistical software packages assume simple random sampling when computing

standard errors of parameter estimates. Because of the complex sampling design used for the BPS

surveys, this assumption is incorrect. A better approximation of their standard errors is to multiply

each standard error by the design effect associated with the independent variable (DEFT),44 where

the DEFT is the ratio of the true standard error to the standard error computed under the

assumption of simple random sampling. It is calculated by the DAS and produced with the

correlation matrix.

 

43Although the DAS simplifies the process of making regression models, it also limits the range of models.

Analysts who wish to use other than pairwise treatment of missing values or to estimate probit/logit models can

apply for a restricted data license from NCES.

44The adjustment procedure and its limitations are described in C.J. Skinner, D. Holt, and T.M.F. Smith, eds.,

Analysis of Complex Surveys (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1989).
76

Table C1—Standard errors corresponding to table 5

Total 4-year 2-year Less-than-2-year

Total 1.13 1.08 1.95 2.26

Control of first institution

Public 1.45 1.42 2.15 5.58

Private, not-for-profit 1.72 1.57 4.83 8.43

Private, for-profit 2.06 — 3.57 2.38

Attainment at first institution1

Did not attain 1.46 1.78 2.21 3.68

Attained, total 1.44 0.40 3.48 2.56

Certificate 2.33 — 4.52 2.56

Associate’s degree 3.58 6.40 3.87 —

Bachelor’s degree (2) (2) (

2

) (2)

Grade point average 1989–90

Not reported 1.95 2.24 3.26 3.48

Below 2.50 1.94 1.73 3.20 6.45

2.50–2.99 2.70 1.96 5.33 5.46

3.00–3.49 2.68 1.84 4.88 5.54

3.50 or higher 2.57 2.26 4.98 3.36

Highest degree expected 1989–90

Less than a bachelor’s degree 2.11 4.87 2.93 2.56

Bachelor’s degree 1.99 1.74 3.27 5.58

Advanced degree 1.64 1.22 3.41 8.83

Socioeconomic status

Bottom 25% 2.33 3.21 3.45 2.92

Middle 50% 1.58 1.52 2.53 3.07

Top 25% 1.69 1.41 3.39 8.71

—Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1

For those who attained more than 1 degree at the first institution, first degree attained.

2Not applicable. Students who attained a bachelor’s degree at first institution are not eligible for transfer (see text), and lessthan-4-year institutions do not award bachelor’s degrees.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1989–90 Beginning Postsecondary Students

Longitudinal Study, Second Follow-up (BPS:90/94), Data Analysis System.