1. Plenary Address Trudy Bers Executive Director, Research, Curriculum & Planning Oakton Community College Des Plaines, Illinois

2. Setting the Context of Transfer 63% 1992 12 th graders who subsequently earned > 10 postsecondary credits attended more than one school Multiple transfer patterns – swirling 2-year to 4-year 4-year to 2-year (reverse transfer) 2-year to 2-year 4-year to 4-year Concurrent enrollments of all sorts Multiple measures of transfer; no clear answer

3. Creat ing a Transfer Going Culture Stephen Handel – The College Board CC Role: Prepare students academically University Role: Work with cc to align courses and curricula, give students accurate info, welcome transfers In addition, for CC: Help students understand transfer options and processes In addition, for both: Work together and with state re: statewide policies and practices to facilitate transfer

4. IPKIT Improving Practitioner Knowledge to Increase Transfer Barbara Townsend, U of MO (PI) + advisory group Lumina-funded Purposes – Provide practitioners with knowledge & skills to gather & analyze institution-specific data re: transfer – Improve policies & support programs for transfer students http://education.missouri.edu/orgs/index

5. IPKIT Modules Institutional audits of policies, practices and attitudes affecting transfer students; Guide to conducting focus groups about transfer; Guide to constructing surveys about transfer; Information on coding open-ended responses to survey questions; Annotated list of data sources for information about transfer and degree attainment.

6. IPKIT Audits: Focus on the Institution & State Context Two-year and four-year versions Three components – Inventory of state’s & college’s policies affecting transfer students – Ascertain college’s practices & attitudes affecting transfer students – Ascertain availability & use of data about student transfer & performance after transfer

7. ‘Doing’ IPKIT Audits IPKIT leader IPKIT team Multiple sessions – won’t have answers right away

8. IPKIT Data Existing policies State-level Institution-level Institutional attitudes & practices Collection & use of data

9. Reality Check: Reasonable Expectations Think Short-term and Long-term Data & Information – Collected or need to be collected – Operational definitions – Centralized or decentralized – Ownership & access – Data entry – Quantitative or qualitative

10. The Leader and the Team Leader – Champion or task-manager – Level – Role Team – Representation – Level

11. Data Gathering Approaches Institutional data (student information systems) Home-grown surveys National surveys – NSSE, CCSSE, SENSE State & Nat’l data sources – National Student Clearinghouse, IPEDS, state student unit record systems

12. More Data Gathering Approaches Focus groups (students & staff) Individual interviews (students & staff) Document reviews (brochures, agreements) Web sites Observations

13. What Potential Students Want to Learn from Web Site Survey of 500 students with intent to transfer Web site content Program I want82% Can I afford to attend64% Will enough credits transfer54% Do I like the location35% How successful are graduates24% Faculty18% Extra-curricular activities12% Will I fit in9% www.noellivitz.com/expectations

14. Beyond IPKIT: Testing Yourselves

15. Moving Forward to Improve Transfer: The Six Whos Who recommends Who champions Who approves Who manages Who implements Who funds

16. Action Planning Think of two concrete projects to improve transfer at your institution: – Project #1: Doable in one year – Project #2: Two-three year timetable