Transfer Students: Postsecondary Institutions Could Promote More Consistent Consideration of Coursework by Not Basing Determinations on Accreditation
Published: 2005-10-18T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Each year thousands of students transfer from one postsecondary institution to another. The credit transfer process, to the extent that it delays students' progress, can affect the affordability of postsecondary education and the time it takes students to graduate. Seeking information on the processes and requirements that postsecondary institutions have in place to assess requests to transfer academic credits, Congress asked GAO to examine (1) how postsecondary education institutions decide which credits to accept for transfer, (2) how states and accrediting agencies facilitate the credit transfer process, and (3) the implications for students and the federal government of students' inability to transfer credits.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: When deciding which credits to accept from transfer students, receiving institutions consider the sending institution's type of accreditation, whether academic transfer agreements with the institution exist, and the comparability of coursework. However, institutions vary in how they evaluate and apply a student's transferable credits. Many officials from postsecondary institutions with regional accreditation told GAO that they would not accept credits earned from nationally accredited institutions. To streamline the transfer process, most institutions have transfer agreements with other institutions that generally provide for the acceptance of credits from the other institution without further evaluation. In some instances, institutions review student credits--not rejected for other reasons, such as accreditation--to determine comparability to their academic offerings. State legislation, statewide initiatives, and the accreditation standards that accrediting agencies set help facilitate the transfer of academic credits from one postsecondary institution to another. Among other things, states support the establishment of statewide transfer agreements, common core curricula, and common course numbering systems. Accrediting agencies facilitate the transfer process through the standards they set. The accrediting agencies that GAO reviewed generally adhere to the principle that institutions should not accept or deny transfer credit exclusively on the basis of a sending institution's type of accreditation. A student's inability to transfer credit may result in longer enrollment, more tuition payments, and additional federal financial aid, but current data do not allow GAO to quantify its effects on the students or the federal government. Data are not available on the number of credits that do not transfer, making it difficult to assess the actual costs associated with nontransferable credits.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Because thousands of students transfer each year from one postsecondary  institution to another, the credit transfer process, to the extent that it  delays students’ progress, can affect the affordability of postsecondary  education and the time it takes students to graduate. As of 2001, 40  percent of students entering college in the 1995-1996 academic year  attended at least two institutions during the next 6 school years. Annually,  the federal government invests billions of dollars—$21 billion in 2004—in  student financial aid under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended  (HEA). Because of the federal government’s large investment in student  financial aid, it is in the best interest of taxpayers that transfer students do  not unnecessarily repeat coursework, since such repetition could result in  additional financial aid awards.
Postsecondary institutions, state governments, and accrediting agencies  all play critical roles in the transfer process. As part of the transfer  process, receiving institutions must decide whether the credits of  incoming students are equivalent to those of their own course offerings.  States can influence the transfer process through legislation and  regulation, and accrediting agencies provide general guidelines regarding  the transfer of credit. Congress requires postsecondary institutions to be  accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Department of  Education (Education) before its students can become eligible for federal  financial aid.
In recent years, the ability of students to transfer credits has taken on  added importance because of increasing numbers of transfer students and  the changing nature of the types of institutions they attend. In general,  Education recognizes two main types of accrediting agencies—regional  and national. Regional accrediting agencies review institutions in a region  of the United States that includes at least three states that are reasonably  close to one another. National accrediting agencies review programs or  specialized institutions, such as acupuncture schools or private business  schools, on a national basis. In recent years, some nationally accredited  institutions have broadened their curricula to bring their course offerings  into line with those of traditional 4-year academic institutions. Yet  students from these types of institutions have complained that they have  been denied transfer credits on the basis of accreditation.
As Congress considers the reauthorization of HEA, it has requested  information on the processes and requirements that postsecondary  institutions have in place to assess requests to transfer academic credits.  You asked us to provide information on the credit transfer process,  including how and when decisions are made to accept or reject credits for  transfer. Specifically in this report, we examined (1) how postsecondary  education institutions decide which credits to accept for transfer, (2) how  states and accrediting agencies facilitate the credit transfer process, and  (3) the implications for students and the federal government of students’  inability to transfer credits.
To answer these questions, we reviewed transfer of credit policies from a  nationally representative random sample of 2-year public and 4-year public  and private institutions. In addition, we conducted site visits in California,  Florida, Missouri, New Jersey, and New York, where we interviewed  officials from public, private nonprofit, and private for-profit  postsecondary institutions that were nationally and regionally accredited.  In order to get a broad perspective on the challenges that students face  when transferring credit, we selected states with large transfer student  populations and varying levels of involvement in the credit transfer  process. We also interviewed officials from state education agencies  regarding institutional transfer policies and state initiatives to facilitate  credit transfer. We also interviewed officials from accrediting agencies and  national experts on credit transfer. Further, we reviewed state legislation  and accrediting agencies’ standards concerning transfer of credits. Finally,  we examined Education’s databases on postsecondary institutions. We  reviewed documentation about the various methodologies used to collect  the data in the databases and conducted interviews to establish the  reliability of the data. We conducted our work from January 2005 through  September 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government  auditing standards. For a more detailed explanation of our methodology,  see appendix I.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Patterns of enrollment in postsecondary education reflect that students  frequently enroll in more than one postsecondary institution. Education’s  National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) found that 40 percent of  students who entered college in the 1995-1996 academic year attended at  least two institutions in the following six years. Many students enroll in  community colleges with a plan for eventually transferring to a 4-year  baccalaureate program. As a result, 4-year institutions face pressure to  award transfer credit for coursework taken at another institution.
Data show that students transfer in numerous directions. Traditional  transfer is typically from a 2-year institution to a 4-year institution.
However, students also transfer from 4-year institutions to 2-year  institutions, known as reverse transfer, as well as laterally between similar  institutions (e.g., 2-year to 2-year or 4-year to 4-year). As shown in figure 1,  traditional transfer accounts for at least one-third of first transfer activity.
When students want to transfer their earned academic credits from one  institution to another, they must submit a transcript showing their  coursework and earned grades to the receiving institution. The receiving  institution may then evaluate the transcript and assess the educational  quality of the student’s learning experience, compare the level and content  of the learning experience with those of the learning experience offered by  the receiving institution, and determine the applicability of the student’s  coursework to the degree or programs offered at the receiving institution.  To help streamline the evaluation process, sending and receiving  institutions enter into voluntary transfer agreements, which contain  criteria for credits to transfer.
Today, many students who begin their studies at private, for-profit  institutions transfer to public or private nonprofit 4-year institutions. To  meet this demand, many private, for-profit institutions have revamped  their curricula, transforming what had chiefly been vocational training  aimed at job placement to a core educational curriculum that prepares  students to pursue associate’s, bachelor’s, and even graduate degrees.
The Department of Education administers federal postsecondary  education programs, including the Title IV federal financial aid programs  under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. To be eligible for  federal financial aid, a postsecondary institution must be accredited by an  accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of Education. Accrediting  agencies are private educational associations of regional or national scope  that develop evaluation standards and conduct site visits to evaluate  postsecondary institutions. To become recognized, an accrediting agency  must submit a written application to Education that lays out its standards  for accrediting institutions as well as its procedures for ensuring that  institutions follow those standards. Education requires accrediting  agencies to set standards that instruct institutions to have the resources  and policies in place to provide a quality education. Education applies the  same requirements to both regional and national accrediting agencies.  Education has recognized eight regional accrediting agencies that  generally accredit academic degree granting institutions in their specific  region of the country, and about 50 national accrediting agencies that  accredit various kinds of specialized postsecondary institutions, such as  technological or religious institutions, and programs such as nursing and  engineering.
The most current national data on students show that in September 2003,  an estimated 15.2 million students were enrolled in postsecondary  institutions; 77 percent of these students were enrolled in public  institutions, 17 percent in private nonprofit institutions, and 6 percent  enrolled in private for-profit institutions. Additionally, about 6,900 degree-  and non-degree-granting postsecondary education institutions had  students that were receiving federal financial aid. Figure 2 shows the  percentage of students attending public, private nonprofit, and private for- profit institutions, and figure 3 shows the type of institutions receiving  these funds.
In order to acquire federal financial aid, students are required, among  other things, to demonstrate financial need, demonstrate qualifications to  enroll in postsecondary education, be working toward an eligible degree  or certificate, be a U.S. citizen or eligible noncitizen, and maintain  satisfactory academic progress while in school. Education uses a formula  to determine the amount of a student’s financial need and his or her  expected family contribution toward tuition, taking into account a number  of factors including the student’s or family’s resources and the costs of  attending an institution. In their financial aid packages, students may  receive federal grants or loans, with the neediest students receiving about  $4,000 per year in a Pell grant and up to $4,000 in loans under the Perkins  loan program. Additionally, all students qualify to receive Stafford loans  for which the government may subsidize or defer the loan interest while  students remain enrolled in school.
section_title: Institutions Consider Accreditation, Transfer Agreements, and Coursework Equivalency when Making Credit Transfer Decisions, but Policies Vary
paragraphs: Prior to granting credit for courses taken at another institution,  institutions may consider a variety of criteria, such as accreditation,  transfer agreements, and course equivalency. Many institutions consider  the accreditation of the sending institution, including the type of  accreditation—national or regional—when determining which transfer  credits to accept. Institutions may also assess the equivalency of  coursework taken at other institutions, either through establishing transfer  agreements covering a number of courses or on a course-by-course basis.  Though reviewing courses can be time-consuming and maintaining  transfer agreements requires an ongoing commitment, officials said that  transfer agreements do facilitate the transfer process. Institutions also  vary in who makes the final decision on which credits to accept— administrative official or departmental faculty—and when they inform a  student of their decision.
subsections: section_title: Institutions Consider Accreditation when Deciding Which Transfer Credits to Accept and Commonly Accept Credits Earned at Regionally Accredited Institutions
paragraphs: We found that when making decisions about whether or not to accept  transfer credits, institutions often used the sending institution’s  accreditation as the initial measure of the quality of the institution and its  coursework. We found that about 84 percent of postsecondary institutions  had policies to consider the accreditation of the sending institution when  assessing transfer credits. About 63 percent of these institutions specified  that accreditation from any regional accrediting agency was acceptable,  and about 14 percent specified that they accepted national accreditation.  Institutions indicating that they accepted regional accreditation told us  that they also provide students with other options for getting their credits  transferred, such as passing a competency examination before their  credits would be granted. Many also said that they would allow any  student to appeal a decision, and an appeal would result in a more  thorough review of the student’s transcript.
Several officials from postsecondary institutions with regional  accreditation told us that as a rule, they did not accept credits earned at  institutions with national accreditation. For example, an official at one  institution told us that the institution did not accept credits from  nationally accredited institutions because the coursework was technical  and not academic. Similarly, an official at a regionally accredited  institution told us that the institution could not accept credits from  nationally accredited institutions unless the accrediting standards of the  sending institution paralleled their own standards. One reason given by  regional accrediting agency official for the incomparability of credits  earned at nationally accredited institutions was that these institutions  follow less stringent standards regarding such factors as faculty  qualifications and library resources. However, our review of the standards  from the regional accrediting agencies found that no regional accrediting  agency explicitly stated in its written policy that credits from nationally  accredited institutions should be denied.
We found that about 11 percent of institutions have policies that explicitly  state that they will accept both regionally and nationally accredited  credits. For example, one institution’s credit transfer policy states that it  will accept credits from “universities and colleges with accreditations by  one of the regional accrediting associations,… community and technical  colleges with accreditation by one of the regional accrediting  associations,… and technical colleges, business colleges and other schools  lacking regional accreditation but having accreditation by another agency  recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation .”  Officials from a regionally accredited institution told us that they would  accept credits regardless of accreditation and would review all credits the  same way. However, this process was more time-consuming than relying  solely on accreditation. To save time, some institutions had developed  databases to track previously approved courses in order to remove the  need to reevaluate them.
Officials at a nationally accredited institution told us that their students  often have difficulty transferring credits and that they are taking actions to  assist their prospective transfer students. They told us that regionally  accredited institutions did not always accept courses taken at the  nationally accredited institution. They advised students to assume that  credits would not transfer to regionally accredited institutions. Two  nationally accredited institutions we visited have responded to the credit  transfer difficulties by attaining, or seeking to attain, regional  accreditation in order to improve their students’ ability to transfer credits.  One of the three nationally accredited institutions we visited—the  institution with dual national-regional accreditation—reported having no  problems with transferring its students to 4-year institutions. In lieu of  seeking dual accreditation, another nationally accredited institution we  visited is reaching out to regionally accredited institutions to develop  transfer agreements to facilitate the transfer process.
section_title: Institutions Said That Transfer Agreements, though Time-Consuming, Do Facilitate Transfers
paragraphs: While many institutions use accreditation as a factor to assess transfer  credits, about 69 percent of postsecondary institutions have entered into  voluntary transfer agreements with other institutions. Typically,  institutions we visited establish transfer agreements with institutions that  send large numbers of transfer students. For example, Columbia College  in Missouri—a college with campuses in 11 states—has transfer  agreements with 18 community colleges throughout the country. In these  agreements, receiving institutions review a number of courses from  sending institutions and agree to accept comparable credits from that  institution. For example, the State University of New York system has a  transfer agreement among all of its institutions specifying that all 4 year  universities will accept associate degrees from community colleges within  its system, thus guaranteeing a baccalaureate degree with the completion  of 60 additional credits. Agreements can also cover individual courses,  such as mathematics and science courses that are required prerequisites  for upper-level courses.
Institution officials told us that although maintaining transfer agreements  requires considerable commitment, these agreements are useful because  they make the transfer process more transparent and allow it to operate  more smoothly. The agreements require receiving institutions to review  the course content of each partner institution to determine its  comparability and applicability to meeting the degree program  requirements. Maintaining these agreements requires regular ongoing  communication between participating institutions to keep apprised of all  new course offerings or any changes to current courses or degree  requirements. According to officials from several of the schools we visited,  the process of establishing the agreements and keeping them current  requires considerable commitment because institutions frequently revise  their courses and degree requirements. For example, it took one private  institution in New Jersey a full year to review courses for every  community college with which it had established new transfer agreements.  At another institution we visited, the official responsible for credit  evaluation told us that the time required for maintaining transfer  agreements had led the institution to reduce the number of its transfer  agreements by about 25 percent. While transfer agreements can be time- consuming, they help make the transfer process more transparent. For  example, in New Jersey, many 4-year institutions have established transfer  agreements with community colleges in the state. Community college  students may also access a Web page listing courses at their institution  that will transfer to participating 4-year institutions in New Jersey,  allowing students to know which credits will transfer before they apply to  a new institution. One official told us that the transfer agreements, once  established, allow the credit transfer process to operate smoothly between  the partnering institutions, because it becomes a matter of checking a list  to determine which credits to accept or deny.
Officials offered a variety of reasons for pursuing transfer agreements. In  some instances, transfer agreements were mandated in state law or  facilitated by state agencies, but these types of agreements were usually  between public institutions only. In other instances, institutions sought to  establish transfer agreements out of convenience because of the  significant number of students that moved between their institutions. In  addition to states and institutions, another organization we visited is also  involved in facilitating the establishment of transfer agreements. To  improve access to baccalaureate programs for certain populations of  minority students, the National Articulation and Transfer Network has  facilitated transfer agreements between community colleges and minority- serving institutions across the country.
section_title: Institutions Review the Comparability of Coursework but Vary in How They Administer This Process
paragraphs: Some institutions review students’ transcripts to determine the  comparability of the students’ coursework. Specifically, institutions  consider the characteristics of individual courses, such as the similarity of  courses on a student’s transcript to courses offered at the receiving  institutions and the applicability of the courses to the student’s intended  major. Institutions may ask for a course description or a class syllabus to  support their assessment. To expedite this review, some institutions  maintain a historical list of transfer courses that they have accepted in the  past. While not always a guarantee of transferability, listed courses have a  greater likelihood of acceptance than unlisted courses.
At the institutions we visited, two groups of reviewing officials are  generally responsible for determining which courses to accept for transfer:  (1) an admissions or other administrative officer, who determines which  courses meet general requirements, and (2) academic department faculty  members, who determine which courses meet degree requirements within  their departments. When reviewing officials consider the student’s official  transcript, they may review transfer agreements and historical lists of  accepted courses, request the syllabus or a list of books used in the  course, or discuss the course with a representative from the sending  institution or use an Internet service, such as the one maintained by the  American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, to  obtain a syllabus and description of the course, among other things. This  process is shown in figure 4.
Some 4-year institutions, citing time constraints and a significant backlog,  have taken steps to limit the number of courses they review. Some  institutions have established criteria for transferable courses, such as  determining the minimum grade or course level for which credits will be  accepted. Several 4-year institutions told us that they did not accept for  transfer any remedial (developmental) courses, technical courses, or  upper-level courses taken at a 2-year institution. Because of the backlog  created by the number of transcripts to review, not all institutions succeed  in providing students with an official report of transfer credits accepted  before classes begin. Officials at one institution told us that they provide  the report within 1 year of the student’s matriculation and encourage  students to take upper-level general education courses in the interim until  the report is received.
section_title: Some States and Accrediting Agencies Facilitate the Credit Transfer Process
paragraphs: To facilitate the transfer of academic credits, states enact a variety of  legislation and implement statewide initiatives covering primarily public  postsecondary institutions, and accrediting agencies set accreditation  standards. Many states have passed legislation that requires public  community colleges and 4-year public institutions to establish transfer  agreements and authorizes common curricula to ease the transfer of  credits. Some states have established a common course numbering system  for public institutions within the state and created statewide committees  to oversee the transfer of credit process within the state. In other states,  state law requires university systems to initiate and form transfer  agreements with institutions within the system to enhance the  transferability of credits. Some states have also launched statewide  initiatives to encourage transfer between 2-year and 4-year public  institutions, including offering guarantees that credit will transfer. For  their part, accrediting agencies facilitate the transfer process through the  standards they set for affiliated institutions. Accrediting agencies that we  reviewed have set standards for accreditation that require institutions to  make their credit transfer policy publicly available. The six regional  accrediting agencies that we reviewed generally encourage their member  institutions not to accept or deny transfer credit exclusively on the basis of  the accreditation of the sending institution. Some accrediting agencies  have incorporated this criterion into their standards; others have issued  policy or position statements.
subsections: section_title: Some State Legislation and Statewide Initiatives Ease Credit Transfer
paragraphs: States facilitate the transfer of credits among public institutions through  various statewide legislation and initiatives that, among other things,  support the establishment of statewide transfer agreements, common core  curricula, and common course numbering systems, and encourage  institutions and others to make transfer information available to the  public. We identified 39 states that had legislation pertaining to the  transfer of credit between postsecondary public institutions. In general,  most of the legislation focuses on facilitating the transfer of credit for  students transferring from community colleges to 4-year public  institutions.
Some states require or encourage the establishment of statewide transfer  agreements. For example, a Massachusetts statute empowers its board of  higher education to develop and implement a statewide transfer  agreement to facilitate the transfer of students without the loss of  academic credit or standing from one public institution to another.  Arizona law requires institutions to cooperate in operating a statewide  transfer network to facilitate the transfer of community college students to  Arizona public universities without a loss of credit toward a baccalaureate  degree. An Indiana statute requires the state’s Commission for Higher  Education to develop statewide transfer of credit agreements for courses  that are most frequently taken by undergraduates. Colorado’s statewide  transfer policy guarantees that as many as 37 credits of approved general  education courses taken at a Colorado public college or university will  transfer among all 2-year and 4-year institutions in the state.
Some states require or encourage the establishment of common core  curricula. A California statute directed the governing boards of the  University of California, the California State University, and the California  community colleges to jointly develop and adopt a common core  curriculum in general education for the purpose of transfer. These efforts  led to California’s general education transfer curriculum, which identifies  courses that community college students may complete to satisfy general  education requirements at campuses of both the University of California  and California State University systems. An Arkansas statute requires the  Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board to consult with colleges  and universities to establish a minimum core of courses that applies  toward the general education core curriculum requirements and is fully  transferable between state institutions.
Some states require or encourage the establishment of a common course  numbering system. Florida has developed a statewide course numbering  system that provides a database of equivalent postsecondary courses at  public vocational technical centers, community colleges, universities, and  participating nonpublic institutions. More than 100 institutions in Texas  participate in the state’s voluntary course numbering program, which  provides a shared, uniform set of course designations for students and  their advisers to use in determining both course equivalency and degree  applicability of transfer credits on a statewide basis.
Some state statutes identify the types of courses or blocks of courses that  are transferable. For example, Missouri officials told us that they interpret  their state law as requiring all institutions to accept associate degrees from  any source as evidence that general education courses have been  completed. Additionally, to facilitate student transfer among Missouri  institutions and to increase institutions’ accountability for student  performance in general education, the Coordinating Board for Higher  Education designed a 42-semester-hour block of general education.  Similarly, a Texas statute states that if a student successfully completes a  field-of-study curriculum developed by the state’s board of higher  education, that block of courses may be transferred and must be  substituted for the receiving institution’s lower division requirements for  the comparable degree program, and the student must receive full  academic credit. Likewise a Kentucky statute mandates that all lower  division academic courses offered by community colleges be transferable  for academic credit to any and all 4-year public colleges and universities in  the state.
Some state higher education agencies make information on transfer  agreements and course equivalency guides available to the public. For  example, some states, such as California, Maryland, and Florida, have  placed course equivalencies online for easy access and reference.  California maintains an online student transfer system called ASSIST that  serves as the official repository of transfer agreements for all public  postsecondary institutions in California and facilitates transfer from a  California community college to a University of California or California  State University campus. Maryland’s interactive online transfer  information source called ARTSYS allows students to find course  equivalencies between institutions, evaluate their transcripts, search for  majors, and explore recommended transfer programs. In addition, it  provides faculty access to update courses and provide course evaluations.  The Florida Academic Counseling and Tracking for Students (FACTS)  system offers a comprehensive range of transfer services, including a  transfer student bill of rights, links to statewide transfer agreements, and  an interactive transfer evaluation tool. A Pennsylvania statute supports  the implementation of a Web-based application that makes all transfer  agreements among higher education institutions available on the Internet.  Similarly, Virginia requires its state council of higher education to  publicize all general education courses offered at public 2-year  institutions, designating the courses accepted for transfer credit at 4-year  public and private postsecondary institutions in Virginia. Ohio  implemented a framework that guarantees students a statewide transfer  and published a transfer assurance guide to advise students of the 38  different baccalaureate degree pathways available for them to pursue  anywhere within the public higher education system and in Ohio’s  participating private institutions, and to identify which courses are  guaranteed to transfer and apply to requirements within the system.
While state legislation regarding credit transfer is generally intended to  facilitate the transfer of credits among public institutions, a few state  statutes require or encourage the involvement of private institutions. For  example, the Louisiana Board of Supervisors of Community and Technical  Colleges is required to continue development of articulation agreements  between institutions under the management of the board and institutions  managed by other postsecondary management boards, both public and  private. A Minnesota statute requests the governing boards of private  institutions that grant associate and baccalaureate degrees and have a high  frequency of transfer students to participate in the development of  required course equivalency guides. A West Virginia statute requires the  state’s Council for Community and Technical College Education to  establish and implement policies and procedures that ensure that students  may transfer and apply the credits earned at any regionally accredited in- state or out-of-state higher education institution.
section_title: Accrediting Agencies Set Accreditation Standards, and Some Encourage Institutions to Promote the Consistent Evaluation of Transfer Credit
paragraphs: Accrediting agencies’ standards for evaluating transfer credit generally  reflect the three criteria specified in a 1978 joint national statement on the  transfer and award of credit: the educational quality of the sending  institution, the comparability of credit to be transferred to the receiving  institution, and applicability of the credit in relation to the programs being  offered at the receiving institution. These agencies’ accrediting standards  generally require receiving institutions to consider if courses are  equivalent with their own curricula and standards. In 2000, CHEA issued  an updated statement that offered four additional criteria that accrediting  agencies and institutions should consider when making decisions about  transfer of credit and academic quality. Specifically, these criteria  emphasized the need for institutions and accrediting agencies to  (1) ensure that transfer decisions are not solely based on the  source of accreditation of a sending program or institution,  (2) reaffirm that the considerations that inform transfer decisions  are applied consistently in the context of changing student  attendance patterns and emerging new providers of higher  education,  (3) ensure that students and the public are fully and accurately  informed about their respective transfer policies and practices, and  (4) be flexible and open in considering alternative approaches to  managing transfer when these approaches will benefit students.
The accrediting standards and transfer policies of the 6 regional and 10  national accrediting agencies that we reviewed generally reflect the  original criteria included in the 1978 joint statement. In addition, some  accrediting agencies incorporated into their standards the CHEA criteria  added in 2000 that the institutions’ process for accepting transfer credit be  fair, consistently applied, and publicly communicated.
The 6 regional accrediting agencies that we reviewed all support CHEA’s  statement on the role of accreditation in the credit transfer decision- making process. As shown in table 1, some accrediting agencies have  incorporated this criterion into their standards; others have issued policy  or position statements.
Regional accrediting agencies recognize that the institutions are  responsible for determining their own policies and practices with regard  to the transfer and award of credit. Accrediting agencies will not know  whether an institution is following the standards and general guidelines  until the institution is reviewed. Officials at one accrediting agency told us  that because of the nature of the review cycle, it could take several years  to review all of the institutions and thereby ensure that they had  implemented the standards.
section_title: Students’ Inability to Transfer Credits May Have Cost Implications, but Financial Effects on Students and the Federal Government Are Unknown
paragraphs: The inability to transfer credits may result in longer enrollment, more  tuition payments, and additional federal financial aid awards, but the full  extent to which such results occur cannot be determined because  institutions told us they do not collect specific data on students that are  unable to transfer credit. For example, a 1996 study of Arizona’s public  university transfer practices found that community college transfer  students may be required to take additional courses in order to complete  their degrees because academic departments do not always accept  community college courses as prerequisites. The study found that the  accumulation of excess college credit hours could lead to additional years  in school, added taxpayer expense such as financial aid awards, or a  failure to complete a degree. Officials at selected nationally accredited  institutions also told us that denials based on accreditation can result in  students taking additional coursework in order to graduate. For example,  one nationally accredited institution told us that one of its recent  graduates had been required to repeat 2 years of coursework at a  regionally accredited institution before he could be admitted to a graduate  program. While credit transfer denials likely affect transfer students in a  number of ways, the effect that these denials have on students’ enrollment  duration, success in completing a baccalaureate program, or the  affordability of postsecondary education cannot be determined with  available data. Institution officials told us that they did not maintain data  on the number of credits they have denied for transfer because it would be  too cumbersome to maintain these files.
Our analysis of Education’s postsecondary education data found that  transfer students fare differently from nontransfer students. The national  data indicate that, on average, transfer graduates take about 10 more  credits and 3 more months to complete their baccalaureate degree than  nontransfer graduates. However, transfer students could take longer to  graduate for a variety of reasons that may or may not be related to their  decision to transfer. For example, a student who changes majors may need  to take additional courses in order to graduate. We could not determine  the extent to which transfer students differ from nontransfer students in  these areas. Nonetheless, students taking additional credits as a result of  being unable to transfer credits will likely have to pay additional tuition.  Based on national averages, these tuition payments could range from  about $150 per credit hour for students attending public institutions to  about $520 for those attending private schools. The extent to which these  costs are borne by the student or the federal government would vary  depending on the student’s eligibility for financial aid.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: Postsecondary institutions differ in how they assess transfer credits, and  as a result, the current credit transfer process does not ensure the  consistent consideration of student coursework. To facilitate the credit  transfer process, many states have enacted legislation and implemented  statewide initiatives covering primarily public postsecondary institutions  within their respective states. However, state efforts have limited  influence over students transferring to and from the nation’s private  institutions or institutions located outside state boundaries. Also, all  regional accrediting agencies subscribe to the principle that credits should  not be accepted or denied on the basis of the type of accreditation, but not  all of them have set standards requiring their member institutions to do so.  When such standards have been set, it takes accrediting agencies years to  review their member institutions’ policies to confirm their compliance.
To preserve their institutional reputations and maintain quality,  postsecondary institutions want their graduates to meet certain academic  standards. The federal government sets the same standards for regional  and national accrediting agencies to ensure that postsecondary  institutions provide a quality education. At the same time, it is in the  federal government’s interest to ensure that students receiving assistance  through federal aid programs, who have earned credits at an approved  accredited institution, do not have to repeat coursework when transferring  to another institution meeting the same standards. However, some  institutions continue to deny credits from institutions with national  accreditation without reviewing student coursework despite the fact that  these institutions are accredited by federally recognized national  accrediting bodies. Consequently, qualified students could be denied  credit for comparable coursework, leading them to incur further  educational costs that they may need to offset with additional federal  financial aid.
subsections: section_title: Matter for Congressional Consideration
paragraphs: In order to ensure consistent consideration of students’ previous  coursework, Congress should consider further amending the Higher  Education Act of 1965 to require postsecondary institutions eligible for  Title IV funding to not deny transfer credits on the basis of the type of  accreditation.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Education for  review and comment.  In its written response, included as appendix III,  Education said our report was useful and informative.
As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its contents  earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from the  issue date.  At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Secretary  of Education, interested congressional committees, and other interested  parties. We will also make copies of this report available to others on  request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on GAO’s  Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512- 7215 or ashbyc@gao.gov. Staff acknowledgments are listed in appendix IV.
section_title: Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: To describe how the transfer of credit operates among postsecondary  institutions, we examined transfer of credit policies for a nationally  representative sample of institutions and interviewed officials responsible  for credit transfer evaluations from public, private, nonprofit, and private  for-profit institutions. At each institution, we interviewed officials and  asked them questions related to their policies and practices on transfer of  credit, such as their criteria for accepting transfer credits, their process for  evaluating transcripts, and if students had appeal rights once a decision  was made. We also interviewed officials from the Council for Higher  Education Accreditation (CHEA), the American Association of Collegiate  Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO), and the Institute for  Higher Education Policy (IHEP). We reviewed publications and studies  conducted by these organizations, the American Association of  Community Colleges (AACC), and the Career College Association (CCA).
To learn about how states and accrediting agencies facilitate the transfer  of credit process, we searched legal databases for state statutes in all 50  states to determine if the states had legislation related to transfer of credit.  We also interviewed officials responsible for higher education from five  states, officials from national and regional accrediting agencies, and the  Department of Education (Education). We reviewed standards for  accreditation from 10 national accrediting agencies that accredit  institutions that grant degrees and the 6 regional accrediting agencies that  accredit senior or 4-year institutions. The 5 states we visited were  California, Florida, Missouri, New Jersey, and New York. In order to get a  broad perspective on the challenges that students face when transferring  credit, we selected states based on their varying levels of involvement in  the credit transfer process and with large transfer student populations.
To understand the implications for students and the federal government of  students’ inability to transfer credit, we reviewed some of Education’s  national databases to describe the typical transfer student. We reviewed  the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) database to  analyze the average cost of attendance at various types of institutions and  the Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) database to learn about the  transfer trends. We also used data from the National Educational  Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS). In addition, we spoke with national  experts and reviewed national studies related to the implications for  students and the federal government of student’s inability to transfer  credits.
subsections: section_title: Sampling Strategy
paragraphs: In order to collect information about the ways in which institutions of  higher education treated transfer credits, we undertook a data collection  effort from a random sample of 270 institutions of higher education. The  sample was obtained from the IPEDS database. The IPEDS data were from  the 2000-2001 time period. IPEDS is the Department of Education’s core  postsecondary education data collection program. It is a single,  comprehensive system that encompasses all identified institutions with  the primary purpose of providing postsecondary education. IPEDS is  designed to produce national-, state-, and institution-level data for most  postsecondary institutions.
We conducted a stratified random sample from the IPEDS database. The  sample represented 270 institutions, with 90 institutions from each of  three categories of postsecondary institutions. The three categories we  sampled included 4-year public, 4-year private nonprofit, and 2-year public  institutions. These three types of institutions represent 3,096 institutions  and over 95 percent of students attending higher education institutions.  GAO did not sample 4-year private, for-profit institutions and 2-year  private institutions. These types of institutions represented 1,264  institutions but less than 5 percent of students attending higher education  institutions.
Of the 270 institutions that were randomly selected, 6 were found to be out  of scope because our research indicated that they did not grant degrees or  granted only graduate degrees. These 6 institutions were not included in  the eventual results. Table 2 describes our source and response rates for  our sample of institutions.
Survey results based on probability samples are subject to sampling error.  Our sample of 264 institutions is only one of a large number of samples we  might have drawn from the total population of postsecondary institutions.  Since each sample could have provided different estimates, we express  our confidence in the precision of our three results as 95 percent  confidence intervals. These are intervals that would contain the actual  population values for 95 percent of the samples we could have drawn. As a  result, we are 95 percent confident that each of the confidence intervals in  this report will include the true values of the study population. All  percentage estimates from this survey of 4-year public institutions, 4-year  private nonprofit institutions, and 2-year public institutions have sampling  errors not exceeding plus or minus 7 percentage points.
section_title: Data Collection Methods
paragraphs: We collected data from the 264 schools primarily through a data collection  instrument that we filled out after examining the Web sites of the sampled  schools. Before deploying the Web site data collection instrument, we  conducted pretests with Web sites from 5 randomly sampled schools. We  followed up these Web site examinations with telephone calls to ensure  that the information we were obtaining from the Web sites accurately  reflected the transfer credit policies of the respective schools.
The extent of an institution’s policies on transferring credit from sending  institutions varied widely, and the policies were found under different  categories on the institutions’ Web sites. For example, some institutions  listed their policies under links to transfer student information or  admissions information, while others listed their policies only in the  college catalog/bulletin that was available at the Web site. Most college  catalogs/bulletins listed the transfer credit policy. In almost all cases, we  printed proof of answers and highlighted, underlined, or numbered the  answers to match the question number. All results obtained from the Web  site data collection instrument were verified by a second GAO reviewer  who independently examined documentation from the Web site or the  information on the Web site itself.
All but 8 of the 264 institutions had Web sites that we were able to  examine. For those institutions that did not have Web sites, we spoke with  officials from the institutions and asked questions from a telephone data  collection instrument. The results of these telephone interviews were  recorded by GAO interviewers.
section_title: Data Reliability Assessments
paragraphs: For this report we used data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education  Data System database, the National Educational Longitudinal Study of  1988, and the Beginning Postsecondary Students longitudinal study  database. We reviewed technical and methodological documentation for  all three databases, and in the case of NELS also spoke with a research  methodologist who had worked on the study. We found the data from the  databases to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this engagement.
section_title: Appendix II: State Legislation Related to Transfer of Academic Credit
subsections: section_title: Ala. Code § 16-5-8. Mandates a statewide articulation agreement under which all applicable credits transferred from a 2-year institution to a 4-year institution shall fulfill degree requirements at the 4-year institution as if they were earned at the 4-year institution.
paragraphs: Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-1824. Requires that community college districts and universities cooperate in operating a  statewide articulation and transfer system, including the process of transfer of lower division general education  credits, general elective credits, and curriculum requirements for approved majors, to facilitate the transfer of  community college students to Arizona public universities without a loss of credit.
Ark. Code Ann. § 6-53-205. Requires that the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board develop a plan  to maximize transfer credits of students from institutions within the system, including the development of a core  transfer program for students desiring to obtain a baccalaureate degree after transferring from an institution  within the 2-year system to the 4-year system.
Ark. Code Ann. § 6-61-218. Requires the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board to establish in  consultation with the colleges and universities a minimum core of courses that shall apply toward the general  education core curriculum requirements and that shall be fully transferable between state institutions.
A.C. Ark. Code Ann. § 6-61-505. Gives the State Community College Board the duty and power to work with  senior institutions of the state to develop the criteria for transfer of credits of students entering senior  institutions from community colleges.
Cal. Ed. Code § 66720. Requires the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the Regents of  the University of California, and the Trustees of the California State University to jointly develop, maintain, and  disseminate a common core curriculum in general education courses for the purposes of transfer.
Cal. Ed. Code § 66730 and note. Directs the Regents of the University of California (UC), the Trustees of the  California State University (CSU), and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges to have as  a fundamental policy the maintenance of a healthy and expanded student transfer system. Community college  students must have access to a viable and efficient transfer agreement program to the California State  University and the University of California for upper division work toward a baccalaureate degree.
Cal. Ed. Code § 66738. Holds the governing board of each public postsecondary education segment  accountable for the development and implementation of formal systemwide articulation agreements and  transfer agreement programs.
Cal. Ed. Code § 66739.5. States the intent of the legislature as ensuring that community colleges students who  wish to earn the baccalaureate degree at California State University are provided with a clear and effective  path to this degree.
Cal. Ed. Code § 66740. Requires each department, school, and major in UC and CSU to develop, in  conjunction with community college faculty in appropriate and associated departments, discipline-specific  articulation agreements and transfer agreements for those majors that have lower-division prerequisites.
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-1-108. Requires the Colorado Commission on Higher Education to establish, after  consultation with the governing boards of institutions, and enforce student transfer agreements between 2-year  and 4-year institutions and among 4-year institutions. Such transfer agreements shall include provisions under  which institutions shall accept all credit hours of acceptable coursework for automatic transfer to another state- supported institution of higher education in Colorado. The commission shall also establish and enforce student  transfer agreements between degree programs offered on the same campus or within the same institutional  system.
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-1-125. Directs the Colorado Commission on Higher Education, in consultation with each  Colorado public institution of higher education, to outline a plan to implement a core course concept that  defines the general education course guidelines for all public institutions of higher education.
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-5-122. Requires the governing board of every state-supported institution of higher  education to have in place and enforce policies regarding transfers by students between undergraduate degree  programs that are offered within the same institution or within the same system.
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-13-104. Lists statewide expectations and goals for higher education, including ensuring  that no student’s graduation is delayed due to lack of access to or availability of required and core courses and  ensuring that students who change degree programs lose only those credit hours that clearly and justifiably  cannot apply in the degree programs to which the student transfers.
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10a-19a. Directs the Commissioner of Higher Education, in consultation with the Higher  Education Coordinating Council, to establish a statewide Advisory Council on Student Transfer and Articulation  to maximize the transferability of course credits.
Fla. Stat. Ann. § 1007.01. Requires the State Board of Education, in order to improve and facilitate articulation  systemwide, to develop policies and guidelines with input from statewide K-20 advisory groups established by  the Commissioner of Education relating to a number of issues, including articulation agreements, admissions  requirements, and the transferability of credits among institutions.
Fla. Stat. Ann. § 1007.22. Authorizes university boards of trustees and community college boards of trustees to  establish intrainstitutional and interinstitutional programs to maximize articulation. These may include transfer  agreements that facilitate the transfer of credits between public and nonpublic postsecondary institutions and  the concurrent enrollment of students at a community college and a state university.
Fla. Stat. Ann. § 1007.23. Requires the State Board of Education to establish in rule a statewide articulation  agreement, which must among other things specifically provide that every associate in arts graduate of a  community college shall have met all general education requirements and must be granted admission to the  upper division of a state university, except for certain listed programs. The articulation agreement must also  guarantee the statewide articulation of appropriate courses within associate in science degree programs to  baccalaureate degree programs.  110 Ill. Comp. Stat. 805/2-11. Empowers the State Board in cooperation with the 4-year colleges to develop  articulation procedures to the end that maximum freedom of transfer among community colleges and between  community colleges and degree-granting institutions be available.
Ind. Code Ann. § 20-12-0.5-8. Requires the Commission for Higher Education to, among other things, develop  through the committee statewide transfer of credit agreements for courses that are most frequently taken by  undergraduates; develop through the committee statewide agreements under which associate degrees  articulate fully with related baccalaureate degree programs; and publicize by all appropriate means, including  an Internet Web site, a master list of course transfer of credit agreements and program articulation  agreements.
Ind. Code Ann. § 20-12-17-2. Requires all state-supported universities to accept the transfer credit of all  appropriate courses successfully completed by any student at any other state-supported postsecondary  educational institution having the same level of accreditation.
Kans. Stat. Ann. § 72-4454. Requires the state board of regents to adopt a policy requiring articulation  agreements among area vocational schools, area vocational-technical schools, community colleges, technical  colleges, and state educational institutions.
Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 164.580. Requires the Kentucky Community and Technical College System to be  responsive to the needs of students and employers to support the lifelong learning needs of Kentucky citizens  in order to, among other things, facilitate transfers of credit among certificate, diploma, technical, and associate  degree programs.
Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 164.583. Requires all lower-division academic courses offered by the community colleges  to be transferable for academic credit to any and all 4-year public colleges and universities.
La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 17:3129.1. Requires postsecondary management boards to adopt and implement in the  institutions under their jurisdiction common core courses that articulate from any institution of public higher  education to any other such institution, taking into consideration the accreditation criteria of the institution  receiving the credit.
La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 17:1871. Requires the Board of Supervisors of Community and Technical Colleges to  continue development of articulation agreements between institutions under the management of the board and  institutions managed by other postsecondary management boards, both public and private.
Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A, § 10902. States that one of the fundamental policies in the state’s public higher  educational planning is to provide for a uniform system of transferring credits for equivalent courses among the  various units of the University of Maine system.
Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A, § 10907. Requires the Chancellor of the University of Maine system to form a  committee that shall, among other things, establish a uniform system to facilitate the transfer of credits for  equivalent courses among the various units of the University of Maine system.
Md. Code Ann., Education § 11-207. Lists among the duties of the Maryland Higher Education Commission the  establishment of procedures for transfer of students between the public segments of postsecondary education  and the establishment, in conjunction with the governing boards, of standards for articulation agreements.
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 15A, § 9. Gives the board of higher education the duty and power to, among other things,  develop and implement a transfer compact for the purpose of facilitating and fostering the transfer of students  without the loss of academic credit or standing from one public institution to another.
Minn. Stat. Ann. § 135A.052. Recognizes as one of the missions of postsecondary institutions that community  colleges shall offer lower-division instruction in occupational programs in which all credits earned will be  accepted for transfer to a baccalaureate degree in the same field of study.
Minn. Stat. Ann. § 136F.05. Requires the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Board of Trustees to  develop administrative arrangements that make possible the efficient use of the facilities and staff of the  technical colleges, community colleges, and state universities so that students may have the benefit of  improved and broader course offerings, ease of transfer among schools and programs, integrated course  credit, coordinated degree programs, and coordinated financial aid.
Minn. Stat. Ann. § 135A.08. Requires the regents of the University of Minnesota and the trustees of the  Minnesota State Colleges and Universities shall develop and maintain course equivalency guides for use by  institutions that have a high frequency of transfer. The governing boards of private institutions that grant  associate and baccalaureate degrees and that have a high frequency of transfer students are requested to  participate in developing these guides.
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 173.005. Requires the coordinating board for higher education to establish guidelines to  promote and facilitate the transfer of students between institutions of higher education within the state.
Neb. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 85-1413. Requires the Coordinating Commission for Postsecondary Education to  incorporate into the comprehensive statewide plan for postsecondary education, among other things, the  facilitation of statewide transfer-of-credit guidelines to be considered by institutional governing boards.
Neb. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 85-963. Encourages the community college areas to work in cooperation with the  University of Nebraska and the state colleges for the articulation of general academic transfer programs of the  six community college areas.
Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 396.568. Requires that all credits earned by a student in a course at a community  college within the system must be accepted and applied toward the coursework required of the student in his  major or minor for the award of a baccalaureate degree upon graduation from any university or state college  within the system if certain criteria are met.
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 188-F:6. Requires the department of regional community-technical colleges and the  university system of New Hampshire to develop mutually agreed upon transfer articulation agreements.
N.J. Stat. Ann. § 18A:3B-8. Gives responsibility to the New Jersey Presidents’ Council to encourage the  formation of regional or other alliances among institutions, including interinstitutional transfers, program  articulation, cooperative programs and shared resources and the development of criteria for full faith and credit  transfer agreements between county colleges and other institutions of higher education.
N.M. Stat. Ann. § 21-1B-3. Requires the commission on higher education to establish and maintain a  comprehensive statewide plan to provide for the articulation of educational programs and facilitate the transfer  of students between institutions. The commission shall define, publish, and maintain modules of lower-division  courses accepted for transfer at all institutions.
N.M. Stat. Ann. § 21-1B-4. Requires each institution to accept for transfer course credits earned by a student at  any other institution that are included in a transfer module.
N.M. Stat. Ann. § 21-1B-5. Requires the commission on higher education to establish and maintain a process  to monitor and improve articulation through frequent and systematic consultation with institutions. The  commission shall establish a complaint procedure for transfer students who fail to receive credit and investigate  all articulation complaints and render decisions as to the appropriateness of the actions of the participants.
N.Y. Educ. Law § 351. Lists as one of the missions of the state university system to exercise care to develop  and maintain a balance of its human and physical resources that promotes appropriate program articulation  between its state-operated institutions and its community colleges as well as encourages regional networks  and cooperative relationships with other educational and cultural institutions.  1995 Sess. Laws, c. 287, §§ 1-3. Provides for the development, by the Board of Governors of the University of  North Carolina and the State Board of Community Colleges, of a plan for the transfer of credits among the  institutions of the North Carolina Community College System, and between those institutions and the  constituent institutions of the University of North Carolina, the intention of the General Assembly to adopt a  plan for the transfer of credits, and the implementation, by the State Board of Community Colleges, of a  common course numbering system.  1995 Sess. Laws, c. 625. Provides that the Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina and the  State Board of Community Colleges shall develop a plan to provide students with information regarding the  transfer of credits among community colleges and between community colleges and the University of North  Carolina and shall develop a timetable for development of guidelines.
Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 3333.16. Requires the Ohio board of regents to establish policies and procedures  applicable to all state institutions of higher education that ensure that students can begin higher education at  any state institution of higher education and transfer coursework and degrees to any other state institution of  higher education without unnecessary duplication; the board must also develop and implement a universal  course equivalency classification system for state institutions so that the transfer of students and the transfer  and articulation of equivalent courses are not inhibited by inconsistent judgment about the application of  transfer credits. Coursework completed within such a system at one state institution of higher education and  transferred to another institution shall be applied to the student’s degree objective in the same manner as  equivalent coursework completed at the receiving institution. The board of regents shall develop a system of  transfer policies that ensure that graduates with associate degrees shall be admitted to a state institution of  higher education. The board of regents shall study the feasibility of credit recognition and transferability to state  institutions of higher education for graduates who have received associate degrees from a career college.
Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 70, § 3207.1. States that the intent of the legislature is that credits earned by students in  any institution of higher education within the Oklahoma State System of Higher Education be fully accepted at  any other institution of higher education within the system.
Or. Rev. Stat. § 348.470. Declares that it is the policy of the state to encourage cooperation between the  Oregon University System and community colleges on issues affecting students who transfer between the two  segments and that all unnecessary obstacles that restrict student transfer opportunities between the two  segments shall be eliminated.  1997 Or. Laws ch. 653, § 1. Requires the State Board of Higher Education to continue to work with the State  Board of Education to develop policies and procedures to ensure maximum transfer of academic credits  between community colleges and state institutions of higher education.   24 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 15-1504-A. Requires the Department of Education and the Office of Administration to  establish management teams to distribute funds appropriated for the researching, planning, and development  of the Pennsylvania Education Network, which can include, when appropriate, implementing a Web-based  application that makes all articulation agreements among higher education institutions available on the Internet.
R.I. Gen. Laws § 16-45-1.1. Requires vocational programs to be organized for maximum articulation between  educational levels.
S.C. Code Ann. § 59-52-100. Requires the State Board of Technical and Comprehensive Education and the  Council of College Presidents, through the Commission on Higher Education, to clarify and strengthen  articulation agreements between associate degree programs and baccalaureate degree programs.
S.D. Codified Laws § 13-53-43. Requires that all general education credit hours fulfilling graduation  requirements in institutions accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools be  transferable between the universities under the control of the South Dakota Board of Regents and the technical  institutes governed by the South Dakota Board of Education. General education course credit hours are  transferable between the technical institutes and universities only for credit for general education courses.
Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-7-202. Requires the Tennessee Higher Education Commission to establish and ensure  that all postsecondary institutions in Tennessee cooperatively provide for an integrated system of  postsecondary education. The commission shall guard against inappropriate and unnecessary conflict and  duplication by promoting transferability of credits and easy access of information among institutions.
Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 61.822. States that if a student successfully completes the core curriculum at an  institution of higher education, that block of courses may be transferred to any other institution of higher  education and must be substituted for the receiving institution’s core curriculum. A student shall receive  academic credit for each of the courses transferred and generally may not be required to take additional core  curriculum courses at the receiving institution.
Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 61.823. States that if a student successfully completes a field of study curriculum  developed by the board, that block of courses may be transferred to a general academic teaching institution  and must be substituted for that institution’s lower division requirements for the degree program for the field of  study into which the student transfers, and the student shall receive full academic credit toward the degree  program for the block of courses transferred.
Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 61.831. States that it is the purpose of the statutory subchapter on transfer of credit to  develop a seamless system of higher education with respect to student transfers between institutions of higher  education, including student transfers from public junior colleges to general academic teaching institutions.
Utah Code Ann. § 53B-6-105.5. Requires the Technology Initiative Advisory Board to provide the State Board  of Regents with an assessment and reporting plan that includes an analysis of program articulation among  higher education institutions in engineering, computer science, and related technology.
Utah Code Ann. § 53B-16-105. Requires the Board of Regents to facilitate articulation and the seamless  transfer of courses within the state system of higher education; develop, coordinate, and maintain a transfer  and articulation system within the state system of higher education that allows students to transfer courses  among institutions of higher education to meet requirements for general education and lower-division courses  that transfer to baccalaureate majors and facilitates student acceleration and the transfer of students and  credits between institutions; and identify common prerequisite courses and course substitutions for degree  programs across all institutions of higher education.
Va. Code Ann. § 23-9.6:1. Gives the State Council of Higher Education the duty, responsibility, and authority to  facilitate the development of dual admissions and articulation agreements between 2- and 4-year public and  private institutions of higher education in Virginia. Such agreements shall be subject to the admissions  requirements of the 4-year institutions.
Va. Code Ann. § 23-9.14:2. Requires the State Council of Higher Education to develop, in cooperation with the  governing boards of the public 2- and 4-year institutions of higher education, a State Transfer Module that  designates those general education courses that are offered within various associate degree programs at the  public 2-year institutions that are transferable for credit or admission with standing as a junior to the public 4- year institutions. In developing such module, the council shall also seek the participation of private institutions  of higher education. The council shall also facilitate the development of dual admissions and articulation  agreements between the state’s public and private 2- and 4-year institutions of higher education, which are  subject to the admissions requirements of the 4-year institutions. The council shall make public all general  education courses offered at public 2-year institutions and designating those that are accepted for purposes of  transfer for course credit at 4-year public and private institutions of higher education in Virginia.
Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.45.014. Requires higher education branch campuses to collaborate with the  community and technical colleges in their region to develop articulation agreements to ensure that branch  campuses serve as innovative models of a two plus two educational system. Areas of collaboration include  joint development of curricula and degree programs.
Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.76.240. Requires the higher education coordinating board to adopt statewide  transfer and articulation policies that ensure efficient transfer of credits and courses across public 2- and 4-year  institutions of higher education. The intent of the policies is to create a statewide system of articulation and  alignment between 2- and 4-year institutions.
Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.76.2401. States that the statewide transfer of credit policy and agreement must  not require or encourage the standardization of course content or prescribe course content or the credit value  assigned by any institution to the course. Policies adopted by public 4-year institutions concerning the transfer  of lower-division credit must treat students transferring from public community colleges the same as students  transferring from public 4-year institutions.
Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.76.250. Requires the higher education coordinating board to convene work  groups to develop transfer associate degrees that will satisfy lower-division requirements at public 4-year  institutions of higher education for specific academic majors. Each transfer associate degree developed under  this section must enable a student to complete the lower-division courses or competencies for general  education requirements and preparation for the major that a direct-entry student would typically complete in the  freshman and sophomore years for that academic major. Completion of a transfer associate degree does not  guarantee a student admission into an institution of higher education.
Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.720. Requires the higher education coordinating board, in consultation with the  state board for community and technical colleges and the council of presidents, to recruit and select institutions  of higher education to participate in a pilot project to define transfer standards in selected academic disciplines  on the basis of student competencies. Under the pilot project, participants shall develop standards, definitions,  and procedures for quality assurance for a transfer system based on student competencies.
W. Va. Code Ann. § 18B-2B-6. Lists among the powers and duties of the West Virginia Council for Community  and Technical College Education to establish and implement policies and procedures to ensure that students  may transfer and apply toward the requirements for a degree the maximum number of credits earned at any  regionally accredited in-state or out-of-state higher education institution; to cooperate with the governor’s P-20  council of West Virginia to remove barriers relating to transfer and articulation between and among community  and technical colleges, state colleges and universities, and public education, and to implement a policy jointly  with the commission whereby any course credit earned at a community and technical college transfers for  program credit at any other state institution of higher education and is not limited to fulfilling a general  education requirement.
Wis. Stat. Ann. § 36.11. Lists among the powers and duties of the board of regents to establish policies for the  appropriate transfer of credits between institutions within the system, to establish policies for the appropriate  transfer of credits with other educational institutions outside the system, and to establish and maintain a  computer-based credit transfer system that shall include all transfers of credit between institutions within the  system and other courses for which the transfer of credits is accepted.
Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 21-16-602. Requires the Wyoming Education Planning and Coordination Council to facilitate  cooperative arrangements among state education institutions in the sharing of facilities, personnel, and  technology or otherwise assist in articulation between the institutions.
section_title: Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Education
section_title: Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
paragraphs: Cornelia M. Ashby; (202) 512-7215 or ashbyc@gao.gov.
section_title: Staff Acknowledgements
paragraphs: Bryon Gordon, Assistant Director  In addition to those mentioned above, Elizabeth Bax, Richard Burkard,  Sara Edmondson, Jonathan S. McMurray, John Mingus, James Rebbe,  Walter Vance, and Ann T. Walker made significant contributions to this  report.