tion…. Pathways should

be transparent, clear and

seamless.”

Still, Chong added that

there is not a “one-size-

fits-all” solution to the

problem of transfer. He

pointed to divergent

statewide responses,

from Florida’s common

course numbering sys-

tem throughout its public

institutions to a recently

passed bill in California

that mandates the state’s

community colleges cre-

ate transfer-specific as-

sociate degrees for full

acceptance in the Cali-

fornia State University

System.

Amy Sherman, co-author

of the CAP brief and as-

WASHINGTON — To

make it easier for stu-

dents to earn and transfer

college credits across

institutions, policy mak-

ers and educators should

work together by sup-

porting broader articula-

tion agreements and

adopting more prior

learning assessments,

several experts argued at

a Center for American

Progress event Thursday.

“Articulation and trans-

fer is an old problem, but

it’s begging for new so-

lutions,” said Frank

Chong, the Education

Department’s deputy as-

sistant secretary for com-

munity colleges. “I really

believe this is a con-

sumer protection issue.”

The average community

college student earns 140

credits while pursuing a

bachelor’s degree even

though only 120 credits

are typically necessary,

according to a new CAP

policy brief discussed at

the event. For many stu-

dents, these additional 20

credits repeat credits

earned elsewhere or

knowledge they may

have gained outside the

classroom.

“Just think about those

20 credits multiplied by

thousands of students,”

Chong said. “At a time

when we’re rationing

education … this is not

an acceptable situa-

Promoting 'Consumer Friendly' Transfer

June 2011

Chair

Glenn Sowells

Co-Chair

Sarah Lack

Secretary

Kayla Kelly

Historian

Nancy Hyde

Treasurer

Ginger Williams

By David Moltz at www.insidehighered.com June 2011

IN THIS EDITION

Page 1

Promoting ‘Consumer

Friendly’ Transfer

Page 3

We’re Hiring!

Page 4

In the Spotlight

Page 5

NTCC Snapshots

Page 6

Accreditation and Eligi-

bility

Page 9

The HRSouthwest Con-

ference

(See EDUCATION, page 2)

P A G E 2

(EDUCATION continued from page 1)

sociate vice president

for policy and strategy

alliances at the Council

for Adult and Experi-

ential Learning, offered

some broad-based rec-

ommendations for how

to make “a more con-

sumer-friendly educa-

tion system.”

Sherman suggested

that states need to

“create incentives for

higher education to

support mobile stu-

dents,” or those who

attend more than one

institution, as many of

today’s students do.

She encouraged policy

makers to expand ex-

isting institution-to-

institution articulation

agreements into state-

wide agreements and to

eventually consider

working to establish

“cross-state” agree-

ments.

“We should also learn

more about the mobil-

ity and outcomes of

students who cross in-

stitutional borders,”

Sherman said. “We

should define success

more broadly. The stu-

dent’s individual out-

come should matter as

much as the institu-

tion’s.”

Finally, in the spirit of

pushing more transpar-

ency, she called on

educators and policy

makers to “demystify

the path to degree

process.” She favors a

national database on

articulation and trans-

fer, building on what

information is cur-

rently available, which

would help students

see clearly how their

credits transfer before

they enroll.

“I really think naviga-

tional assistance and

advising is the missing

l ink out there,”

Sherman said. “Even if

there’s great advising

at institutions, it tends

to be focused on 'my

institution.' ”

Articulation and trans-

fer practices vary

across the country. The

CAP brief notes that 14

states have a “general

education common

core curriculum” that is

easily transferable

from one institution to

another. Only seven

states have a “common

course numbering sys-

tem.” Twenty-two

states have “statewide

program major articu-

lations” that allow

seamless transfer be-

tween institutions if

students maintain the

same major. Twenty

states have “block

credit transfer” that

allows students to

transfer credit “en

masse.” Finally, 30

states have “transfer

associate degrees,”

with which a student is

guaranteed acceptance

as a junior at a four-

year institution.

Paula Compton, associ-

ate vice chancellor of

the Ohio Board of Re-

gents, offered a few

successful examples of

improved transfer poli-

cies adopted within her

system. For example,

Ohio has created

Transfer Assurance

Guides, or “groups of

foundational courses

that represent a com-

monly accepted path-

way to the bachelor’s

degree,” for 40 differ-

ent degrees offered at

institutions around the

state.

Compton said faculty

support is important for

these types of initia-

tives to succeed. She

added that faculty

members need to see

that, for example, they

are not being told what

learning outcomes are

wanted but rather that

they need to work to

help create them on

their own by becoming

leaders in the process.

“We have over 50 fac-

ulty panels to write and

review learning out-

comes,” Compton said.

“If articulation and

transfer is to work, it

has to be based on

T H E B R I E F C A S E

(See TRANSFER, page 3)

DeVry University seeks a Director of Com-

munity Outreach

DeVry University (Mesquite) seeks a Di-

rector of Enrollment Services

DeVry University seeks a Campus Director

of Admissions

UNT-Dallas seeks a Director of Distance

Learning and Instructional Technologies.

Concordia University Texas seeks an Ad-

missions Recruiter for Non-Traditional and

Graduate Programs

(TRANSFER continued from page 2)

P A G E 3 J U N E 2 0 1 1

trust. In a culture, it might

take time to get that. But if

you get people … to un-

derstand the overarching

goal of what you’re really

trying to achieve, it’s

amazing.”

Regarding prior learning

assessments, Sherman and

other panelists admitted

that these credits are not

universally available, are

often accepted in limited

ways and are often not ac-

cepted if a student trans-

fers. Unlike with articula-

tion agreements, there are

fewer examples of state-

wide adoption of prior

learning assessments.

The prior learning assess-

ment most commonly ac-

cepted by institutions is

credit earned by passing an

Advanced Placement test

with a certain score. Still,

there is room for improve-

ment in the assessment and

acceptance of AP credit,

Compton said. In 2007, the

Ohio Board of Regents

standardized that a score

of 3 or higher on any AP

test would earn credit at

any college within the sys-

tem.

Ohio’s public institutions

are all members of the Ser-

vicemembers Opportunity

Colleges and offer the ac-

ceptance of some military

training for college credit

through the College-Level

Examination Program.

Still, Compton said the

state has to do more work

so that other prior learning

assessments will gain wide

acceptance.

“I think there’s this big

fear that when you step

outside of this box that

quality and rigor will go

down,” Compton said.

“We have to assure people

that that’s not the case.”

— David Moltz

DeVry University seeks a Director of Com-

munity Outreach

DeVry University (Mesquite) seeks a Di-

rector of Enrollment Services

DeVry University seeks a Campus Director

of Admissions

UNT-Dallas seeks a Director of Distance

Learning and Instructional Technologies.

Concordia University Texas seeks an Ad-

missions Recruiter for Non-Traditional and

Graduate Programs

P A G E 4

What programs do you of-

fer? ( Graduate, Under-

graduate, Ect..) The Dallas

campus offers a wide variety

of degree programs. Bache-

lor’s, master’s, and doctoral

degrees are available in the

College of Psychology and

Behavioral Sciences, College

of Education, College of Busi-

ness, and College of Under-

graduate Studies. The Dallas

campus is also home to the

American School of Profes-

sional Psychology, which fea-

tures the Doctor of Psychology

(PsyD) degree in Clinical Psy-

chology program.

What is something special

about your University/

College (what makes your

school unique)? At Argosy

University, Dallas we under-

stand that many students are

also juggling jobs and family,

making it difficult for them to

plan courses that fit their busy

schedule. In order to accom-

modate our students’ needs,

we offer flexible learning for-

mats such as evening and

weekend classes as well as

online courses.

Coursework at Argosy Univer-

sity, Dallas emphasizes inter-

personal skills alongside aca-

demic learning. A large focus

is put on personal improve-

ment and development, and we

are committed to creating a

supportive learning environ-

ment and providing our stu-

dents with numerous opportu-

nities and resources.

Where are your loca-

tions? The Dallas campus is

located off of 635 and the

Tollway by the Galleria

Mall. However, we have 18

campuses in 15 different

states. How long have you been

with your University/

College? Jeannie Smith has

been with Argosy University

since May 2010. Her focus is

to represent Argosy Dallas in

the education, government,

and military sector. Michelle

Bilgri has been with Argosy

University since June 2010.

Her focus currently includes

the healthcare, corporate busi-

ness, and small business sec-

tor.

Representative

Michelle Bilgri

Jeanne Smith

E-Mail

'mbilgri@argosy.edu'

Phone number

214.459.2259

What is your title and what

do you do? As Associate Di-

rectors of University Outreach

we are responsible for creating

partnerships with companies

and organizations in the Dal-

las/Fort Worth area and help-

ing promote the Argosy name.

Tell us a little about yourself,

outside of work: (family,

hobbies etc…) Michelle en-

joys spending time with her

family, which includes her

husband of 10 years as well as

her 2 sons, Joey (7) and Jake

(4). Jeanne is an out-

doorsy person that loves water

and really enjoy working with

potential students and Argosy

University!

www.argosy.edu

At Argosy University, our academic programs

focus on the interpersonal skills vital to profes-

sional achievement, while our faculty and staff

nurture students’ confidence and competence to

thrive in their chosen fields.

Distinguished full-time teaching faculty

Student-centered education

One of the largest graduate student com-

munities in the nation

A large number of degree programs, in-

cluding doctorate, master’s, bachelor’s,

and associate’s degrees

Flexible learning options, including evening

and weekend courses.

J U N E 2 0 1 1 P A G E 5

Student loan de-

faults are rising, sparking

real concern among policy

makers and the higher edu-

cation community. At the

same time, there is confu-

sion about the respective

roles of accreditation and

U.S. Department of Educa-

tion's determinations of

institutional eligibility for

federal student aid pro-

grams. Moreover, the cur-

rent law provides inade-

quate standards and tools to

make and implement those

eligibility decisions, espe-

cially as they relate to de-

fault rates.

The federal government

plays a large role in provid-

ing student financial aid.

But the default rates on

student loans are unaccepta-

bly high, even as recently

adjusted. The fiscal year

2008 national two-year co-

hort default rate averaged 7

percent, but the trial three-

year cohort default rate is

22.4 percent for for-profit

colleges, 9.7 percent for

public colleges, and 6.7

percent for private nonprofit

colleges, according to the

Education Department.

While some loan defaults

are the result of bad eco-

nomic times, the situation

requires scrutiny. Are stu-

dents given enough protec-

tion and taxpayers provided

enough accountability?

We believe the situation

calls for a refocusing on

how the government en-

sures that federal student

aid funds are being used

wisely. We propose that

accrediting agencies focus

on institutional quality and

the Education Department -

- armed with higher stan-

dards and some new tools --

undertake a more rigorous

financial review to deter-

mine which institutions

should be eligible to award

federal student aid.

Clear Responsibility for

Distinct Roles The public expects account-

ability for the billions of

dollars in financial aid

given to students annually.

A critical question is how to

provide accountability

while avoiding government-

established learning out-

comes. We oppose govern-

ment prescriptions for

learning outcomes as a

means to achieve account-

ability because it would

stifle the vitality, independ-

ence and diversity of our

member institutions. We do

support outcome measure-

ments that are voluntary

and publicly disclosed, such

as the Voluntary System of

Accountability and the Col-

lege Portrait.

The best means to achieve

reasonable accountability

is: (1) accrediting agencies

should be responsible for

academic considerations

without determining learn-

ing outcomes; 2) the Educa-

tion Department should be

responsible for fiscal con-

siderations necessary to

T H E B R I E F C A S E

determine institutional

eligibility.

These combined but dis-

tinct roles will help

achieve the requisite ac-

countability and necessary

public credibility.

Accreditation and Aca-

demic quality The accreditation system

was designed as a collabo-

rative self-improvement

process to gauge and en-

hance academic quality as

appropriate to institutional

mission. Through this

process, the determination

of academic content and

quality remains in the

purview of academe.

Of course, accreditors

must be informed by the

default rates and related

matters as they review

academic effectiveness.

However, accreditors are

not qualified to be audi-

tors or credit officers and

should not have front-line

responsibility for default-

rate triggered actions.

The accreditation process

no doubt should be im-

proved, but overall ac-

creditation has enhanced

higher education quality.

If we did not have ac-

creditation, we would

create something like it.

Accreditation should, at

its essence, continue as a

self-improvement process

to enhance academic qual-

ity. Individual institutions

should measure learning

outcomes that they deter-

mine are appropriate to

their mission and institu-

tion type, and accrediting

agencies should expect

them to do so.

The Education Depart-

ment and Institutional

Eligibility

Accreditation vs. Eligibility June 17, 2011 By R. Michael Tanner and Peter McPherson www.insidehighered.com

P A G E 6

(See MONEY, page 3)

P A G E 7 The Education Depart-

ment, not accreditors,

has the ultimate respon-

sibility to determine

whether an institution is

eligible to participate in

the federal student aid

programs. This is the

letter and intent of the

law. Fiscal reviews by

the Education Depart-

ment should be done

regularly, not just in an

accreditation cycle or

process, to catch default

and related troubles

early. Such problems

often get worse, not bet-

ter, with age. Moreover,

the Education Depart-

ment appropriately has

the responsibility for

investigating fraud in

connection with financial

aid.

An institution cannot

keep its eligibility under

the law unless it also

keeps its academic ac-

creditation. However,

some do not know that

by law eligibility and

accreditation are two

separate processes. In

fact, many have begun to

confuse or partly merge

the two processes, as

accreditors have been

pushed to make loan

default rates a primary

factor in accreditation

decisions.

Accordingly, the Educa-

tion Department should

once more be very clear

to Congress and the pub-

lic that it is responsible

for eligibility determina-

tions, particularly those

driven by the level of

default rates and not the

accreditors. Of course,

institutional accreditation

should continue as a con-

dition of eligibility for

federal student aid pro-

grams.

Comments on Imple-

mentation

Apparently a major ac-

countability challenge is

the high default rates of a

small number of institu-

tions -- institutions that

frequently have very low

graduation rates. For-

profit colleges are not the

only institutions with

high default rates, but the

recent data from the Edu-

cation Department show

they have about 10 per-

cent of the students and

approaching half of the

defaults.

The default issue is com-

plex because many of the

institutions with high

default rates serve a dis-

proportional number of

low-income, minority,

first-generation and non-

traditional students. Stu-

dent financial aid pro-

vides access to opportu-

nity, and some loan

losses are to be expected.

Nevertheless, with these

considerations objec-

tively weighed, the Edu-

cation Department’s eli-

gibility process should

deal with problem insti-

tutions.

The true default rates of

some institutions might

be substantially higher

than the rates commonly

cited because of how the

rates are calculated under

the law. The only de-

faults considered in mak-

ing eligibility determina-

tions are those that occur

during the three years

after the student leaves

school. In addition, be-

cause of how the default

rates are calculated, even

some of those defaults

are not counted. Appar-

ently a whole business

has grown up to help

some institutions manage

default rates.

Note that the repayment

rates under the new gain-

ful employment regula-

tions are calculated dif-

ferently and for separate

purposes than the default

rates discussed here. We

have concerns about the

rigor of those regulations

but that is beyond the

scope of this piece.

The criteria should be

strengthened to incorpo-

rate more comprehensive

default rates, a step that

will require changes in

the law. In any case, the

Education Department

should have a full set of

options in dealing with

problem institutions.

Fines can now be im-

posed, but many believe

the fines are generally

not large enough to

change institutional be-

havior. Decisions on

eligibility itself too often

drag on for years while

the institutions continue

to receive federal student

aid funds. The eligibility

decision is often a life-or

-death decision -- either

full access to student aid

programs or no access at

all. This all or nothing

approach has made ef-

fective enforcement

more difficult. Interme-

diate sanctions would be

easier to make politically

and may be more effec-

tive to drive changes in

institutional behavior.

An intermediate sanction

might work as follows:

an underperforming in-

stitution could have the

number of students eligi-

ble for student loans lim-

ited to 85 to 90 percent

of the prior three-year

average. Such restric-

tions would greatly im-

pact an institution. Quali-

fied students denied use

of their financial aid at

one institution would

generally go to another

institution.

We are concerned about

the current law and the

confusing expectations

for accreditors and the

Education Department,

not the people involved

in applying the law or

doing the accreditation.

Conclusion Accreditation should

remain a collaborative

self-improvement proc-

ess to gauge and enhance

academic quality. The

Education Department

should be held account-

able for making the deci-

sions on default rates as

part of eligibility deci-

sions. The law should be

changed so that eligibil-

ity decisions will be

made with more appro-

priate criteria and the

proportional penalties

suggested above.

Peter McPherson is

president and R. Michael

Tanner is chief academic

officer and vice presi-

dent, respectively, of the

Association of Public

and Land-grant Univer-

sities.

MONEY continued from page 6

T H E B R I E F C A S E

P A G E 8

Dallas Baptist University

Dallas Baptist University now

offers a Master of Arts in Com-

munication degree. If you are

interested in finding out more on

this new program please contact

Joanne Morgan by email at

joannem@dbu.edu or by phone

at (214) 333-6854.

http://www3.dbu.edu/graduate/

macoma.asp

University of Texas at

Arlington

UT Arlington Fort Worth's new

Master of Science in Interdisci-

plinary Studies

University of Texas at Dallas

UTD’s School of Management

MBA Program ranks among top

20 public universities in the U.S.

A Profile of This Year's Freshmen A survey from January 2011 by The Chronicle of Higher Education http://chronicle.com

Do you have news about your

University/College? Please send

to sbishop@tarleton.edu

70th Annual Human Resources Conference and Exposition

P A G E 9 J U N E 2 0 1 1

Mark your calen-

dars NTCC members! The

HRSouthwest conference

is coming up. It was de-

cided that NTCC would

host a table at the event

this year. Our table will be

ran in shifts, voluntarily,

by NTCC members. Infor-

mation on shift schedules

and assignments will be

discussed at a later date.

The HRSouthwest Confer-

ence is the largest regional

human resources Confer-

ence in the United States.

The Conference offers

world-renowned keynote

speakers, two and a half

days of educational ses-

sions networking opportu-

nities and exposure to the

latest HR products, tech-

niques and services.

NTCC members are asked

to wear their NTCC pins.

If you did not receive your

NTCC pin, please contact

Ginger Williams or our

marketing committee.

This is an exciting event

coming up for NTCC and

we are looking forward to

a great turnout in volun-

teers.

Treasurer, Ginger Williams

giwilliams@aii.edu

972.310.9231

October 30-November 2, 2011 in Fort Worth, Texas

Testimonials from past Exhibitors:

"We were very pleased with the traffic at our booth. The

entire show was very well run, and we intend to be there next

year."

Carolyn Garrity, Director of Business Development,

PRITCHETT

"This was our first year to exhibit at this show, and we ended

up making a lot of great contacts. I am positive we will be

back next year."

Scott Buksa, Coleman American Moving Services

"The attendees were decision makers that were interested,

friendly and stopped to really learn what we do and if we

could provide them with a service."

Susan V. Fox, Director of Marketing, Hotchkiss Insurance

Agency, LLC

"We had such a great time at the HRSouthwest Exposi-

tion. It was really a benefit to our company."

Collette Coffman, Corporate Outreach Marketing, Norstar

Accolade Property Management

Business Name

The North Texas Collegiate Consortium, estab-

lished in 1993, is an association of recruiters from

North Texas Colleges and Universities. The mem-

bers of the Consortium assist employers in their

efforts to encourage an educated workforce by

coordinating their education fair needs with all

members of the Consortium. This means that the

employer simply provides the facilities and adver-

tises the event with their employees. The Consor-

tium eliminates the need for hundreds of e-mails,

phone calls, and coordination with all of our uni-

versities and colleges.

The North Texas Collegiate Consortium recog-

nizes that an educated employee is our most valu-

able resource. Therefore, the Consortium, work-

ing together in collaboration with business, indus-

try, and other community organizations, seeks to

offer their service to encourage, promote, and pro-

vide continued education options for adults.

This service is offered by members of the

North Texas Collegiate Consortium to serve

business, industry, and community organiza-

tions while promoting associate, bachelor,

graduate, and doctoral level study.

The Briefcase, a North Texas Collegiate Consortium publication, is produced by the Newsletter Committee

Editors: Bethany Winkenweder, Concordia University Texas

Sheila Bishop, Tarleton State University