Exploring Influences of Policy Collisions on Transfer Student Access: Perspectives From Street-Level Bureaucrats

Abstract

States and institutions increasingly rely on articulation agreements to streamline vertical transfer, although the effectiveness of those policies on transfer student outcomes remains unclear. To better understand this effectiveness, we explored a partnership between the College of Engineering at a mid-Atlantic research university and two community colleges located within the same state. We interviewed engineering faculty and academic advisors (i.e., the street-level bureaucrats who implement policy) to explore how an articulation agreement influences processes and policies related to coursework transfer. Our results revealed complexities in the implementation of the articulation policy as it collides with an enrollment management university policy that differs in purpose. Their collision has challenging implications for transfer students and for the faculty and advisors responsible for interfacing with those students.

Examining the Undocumented College Student Policy Implementation Environment Through a Contextual Interaction Theory Lens

“…This investigation supports scholars of third-generation higher education policy implementation who argue for the examination of contextual factors to more deeply understand the complexities inherent in policy implementation (Felix & Ramirez, 2020; Grote et al, 2020; Leon & Vega, 2019; Nienhusser, 2014, 2018a). While CIT was a beneficial theory to frame this investigation, we encourage other higher education scholars to test its relevance in understanding the implementation of other higher education policies.…”

Engineering community college transfer pathways through pre‐transfer programs

“…The enrollment policy outlines that transfer students must complete a minimum of 12 grade point average (GPA)‐bearing credits at VT post‐transfer and earn a minimum of a 3.0 GPA to gain admission into their first choice of engineering degree‐granting discipline. The articulation agreement, as currently written, does not detail particulars of the enrollment management policy or the particulars of that process of admissions into degree‐granting engineering disciplines (see Grote et al., 2020 for a full analysis of how the collision of these policies influence transfer students).…”

Using higher education and other social sciences research to inform engineering education research: A cross‐national perspective

“…In a study led by a PhD student (Grote et al, 2020), David Knight and his colleagues focused on the context of the policies that support—and hinder—engineering students transferring from community colleges to 4‐year institutions in the United States. They drew on research from the field of public policy identifying the role of “street‐level bureaucracy” in policy implementation (Lipsky, 2010).…”

“…As Denver, David, and Jenni's cross‐national comparison shows (Cao et al, 2021), the steady supply of competent engineers was deemed to be a critical force in sustaining the global competitiveness of key industries in China and the United States. In a separate, US‐focused piece of scholarship (Grote et al, 2020), David shows that access concerns, a key topic of the US political debate, are embodied in the complex journeys of transfer students whose aspiration for upward mobility encounters the rigid admission and enrollment management standards of engineering programs in 4‐year higher education institutions.…”