EFFECTS OF TRANSFER ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS AT THE FOUR‐YEAR INSTITUTION

This study presents an in‐depth meta‐analysis of transfer shock, the grade point average (GPA) drop experienced by many community college transfer students. The purpose of the study was to identify all possible studies dealing with transfer shock and to report the magnitude of GPA change from the last quarter or semester at the community college to the end of the first quarter or semester at the senior institution. The study also researched the amount of recovery of GPA obtained by the community college transfer students at the 4‐year institution.

The search revealed 62 studies that reported the magnitude of GPA change. The studies showed that although community college transfer students in 79% of the studies experienced transfer shock, the majority of the magnitude of GPA change was one half of a grade point or less.

Of the studies that showed that community college transfer students experienced transfer shock, 67% reported that students recover from transfer shock, usually within the first year after transfer. Significantly, 34% of these studies showed community college transfer students recovered completely from transfer shock, 34% showed nearly complete recovery, and 32% showed partial recovery.

Because admission criteria for community college transfer students are based almost solely on academic performance, it is important for admissions personnel to consider the GPA recovery phenomenon in the decision process, not just the transfer‐shock phenomenon.     

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF REVERSE TRANSFER,LATERAL TRANSFER,AND FIRST‐TIME COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS

Among the “new” students attending community colleges are a large number of reserve and lateral transfers, students with previous college experience. This study was conducted to provide information on their characteristics and their reasons for attending and leaving colleges as compared to the first‐time college study. A sample of 10,196 students in the Los Rios Community College District (California) was studied and five student groups were identified: First Time Students (FTS), 54.7 percent; Noncompleter Lateral Transfers (NCLT), 19.2 percent; Completer Lateral Transfers (CLT), 7.5 percent; Noncompleter Reverse Transfers (NCRT), 12 percent; Completer Reverse Transfers (CRT), 7.6 percent. The CRT and FTS groups differed most significantly. The CRT were older, more often married with children, worked more hours, and were taking fewer units. In general, the characteristics of the other three groups were similar and at a mid‐point between the CRT and FTS. Factor analysis of the reasons for attending showed that factors related to job training, location, low cost, lack of admissions requirements, and the colleges' reputation were important for study groups. Preparation for transfer was not among the most important factors for any group. Students who left four‐year colleges listed reasons related to academic indecision, cost, and items critical of the previous institutions significantly more often than students who had left two‐year colleges. They reported reasons related to mobility and short‐range goals significantly more often. Results appeared to support previous studies with regard to students' characteristics. Further research on students' reasons for attending and leaving, as well as a reexamination of colleges' program formats, services and delivery systems were recommended.     

COMMUNITY COLLEGE TENURE: TEACH OR RESEARCH?

How responsible community colleges can help determine the degree to which they are serving the educational needs of minorities is the focus of this paper. The authors illustrate the importance of using US Census data and enrollment characteristics to assess how well colleges are serving the needs of all their constituencies. An example of how these data have been used for community colleges in one state is presented. The methodology discussed is seen as effective, however, only when such an assessment is used as the foundation upon which a complete package of services is provided to meet the needs of all students     

MOVING DOWN THE ROAD: COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AT THE UNIVERSITY

This study examines the relationship between 34 personal, demographic, and environmental characteristics of community college transfer students and their academic performance over a 2‐year period. The subjects for the study were 267 transfer students admitted to a research university during a fall semester. Data on the characteristics were collected through a survey and analyzed in relation to first and second semester GPAs and second year GPAs. Five characteristics showed a consistent statistical relationship with three or more GPA measures. A multiple regression analysis was used to identify which of these characteristics were useful in predicting the GPAs of the transfer students based on their previous backgrounds and attitudes.     

GRADING WITHOUT POINTS DOES IT HURT STUDENT PERFORMANCE?

Abstract. We gave students enrolled in a research methods course the option of receiving normal grade feedback on assignments (with point values assigned) or receiving feedback on assignments without point values assigned. With respect to final grades earned, students in the two groups did not differ significantly. Final grades were related to self-report of effort as well as future career plans. We encourage instructors to experiment with the mechanics of grade feedback to optimize educational opportunities for students.     

TWO‐YEAR COLLEGE ATTRITION: DO STUDENT OR INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CONTRIBUTE MOST?

This study examined certain effects of seven student pre‐enrollment characteristics and three student‐institutional characteristics on retention status. Path analysis of these longitudinal data was unable to compare favorably with other studies using similar determinants. Certain practical implications of the study also are presented, emphasizing the burden of evidence that suggests that entering student characteristics cannot be used alone to explain the retention decision, that retention programs should be strategically rather than generically focused, and that program holding power may be related to student career consciousness and goal specificity.     

STUDENT VOICES IN THE TRANSFER PROCESS: DO WE HEAR THEM? DO WE LISTEN?

The “baby boomer echo” is increasing the number of traditional age students attending higher education, yet funding from both state and federal is remaining constant. In order to provide a higher education future for all who desire it, fiscal resources must be even more carefully allocated. Improving the transfer process from community colleges to four‐year colleges and universities will conserve our fiscal and our human resources and provide a higher education for more of our citizens. Statistics alone will not improve the transfer process; the voices of students experiencing this process must also be heard. A Fall 1994 cohort group of students transferring from Colorado's 15 community colleges to Colorado State University (CSU) was identified. Within this Fall 1994 cohort, two groups of students were formed based on their earned grade point average (GPA) at CSV at the end of Fall 1995 semester: students who achieved a 3.25 GPA or better and students who were placed on academic probation. The focus group discussions were transcribed and qualitatively coded. The thematic units that evolved centered on the students’ perceptions of their pre‐transfer experience, post‐transfer experience, and recommendations for improving the transfer process. The implications for practice include the processing and disseminating of transfer information, the advising function in the transfer process, and the need for on‐going evaluation of the process.     

MINORITY COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS WHO TRANSFER TO FOUR‐YEAR COLLEGES: A STUDY OF A MATCHED SAMPLE OF B.A. RECIPIENTS AND NON‐RECIPIENTS

In order to study the factors promoting and inhibiting transfer and the attainment of the bachelors degree, we conducted telephone interviews with 48 minority students who had received Ford Foundation Upper Division Scholarships between 1971 and 1975 and who had transferred from a two‐year to a four‐year college. Each of the 24 pairs consisted of one bachelors degree recipient and one non‐recipient who were matched according to the following criteria: gender, race/ethnicity, age, parents education and occupation and initial community college major. In high school, the bachelors degree recipients had stronger academic backgrounds than the non‐recipients. In community colleges, the bachelors degree recipients were more likely to see their instructors and counselors as “helpful” and to be members of a campus organization than non‐recipients. In four‐year colleges, the bachelors degree recipients were less likely to have lost credits when they transferred and more likely to belong to student organizations and to see their classmates as “helpful” than non‐recipients. We relate these findings to previous research on the importance of social integration into college life.

     

OPENING DOORS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES ON COMMUNITY COLLEGE CAMPUSES: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? WHAT DO WE STILL NEED TO KNOW?

This article reviews the Community College Journal of Research and Practice research articles related to students with disabilities and establishes a focused research agenda addressing the issues either found in, or absent from, the articles. Using a modified qualitative methodology, three common themes were found: (a) campus factors supporting student success, (b) participant label ambiguities, and (c) research methodology selection. It is concluded that there is a continued need for research addressing staff development, accommodations, needs of specific disability groups, self-advocacy and self-determination approaches, and participant-oriented research methodologies used to serve students well.