Articulation in higher education

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Articulation in higher education
Physical Description:
xiii, 167 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Remley, Theodore Phant, 1947-
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Articulation (Education) -- Virginia   ( lcsh )
Community colleges -- Virginia   ( lcsh )
State universities and colleges -- Virginia   ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1980.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 159-165).
Statement of Responsibility:
by Theodore Phant Remely, Jr.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 000100264
notis - AAL5725
oclc - 07336887
System ID:
AA00002196:00001

Full Text














ARTICULATION


THEODORE


IN HIGHER


PHANT


EDUCATION


REMLEY,


A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY




A A AAA. Ann."
UM


To Those


Community


College


Students


Who


Aspire


to Earn


Baccalaureate


Degrees




IIA;AI"I~iiIDDII N BEE; ":"1B :'i~~l~"l"i"" XE"I":;E "E" ""X:;" 1 """" ""Fi """" N"X:"":""PP"""" :~ ;$ l"~'*'" *' d X~1B~~
: BliisI~": A1~~ A^;E"B"rrrX^ Cx~2i"


ACKMOWLEDGMENTS


Sincere


gratitude


conveyed


to all


who


have


made


this


study


possible.


The


author


acknowledge


proves


sional


role


model


provided


chairperson.


Stripling


Stripling,


doctoral


s expertise


committee


experience


con-


tribute


greatly


success


of this


study.


cooperation


encouragement


extended


Janet


Larsen


James


L. Wattenbarger,


are


other


appreciated


members


as well.


author


further


wishes


thank


Thomas


Goodale


Larry


Loesch


their


assistance.


Special


gratitude


extended


to Dr.


Phyllis


Meek


understanding


personal


interest


author


profe


ssional


development.


The

support

College.


also


autho

of the

The


provided


appreciates


admini

author'


essential


financial


station of Northern

s colleagues at the


encouragement.


and profe

Virginia

Alexandria


Without


ssional


Community

Campus

coopera-


tion


of all


those


who


took


time


to complete


surveys,


rr~ ** ~ ~flh~l A n4- hoannnac1 a flah .4 r.


hM rra


Robert


supervisory


committee,


; : ~;ii" i;... ,,. ;;; a rr; ;;
Ji ;; ;; xI
I" """", :,:,,


9 ii d


c~rlF~t~


Wnlr 1 Ff


han~rr


~ankn: nn


1 ~~


nmC


T n ^








staff


the


Northern


Virgin a
v 4,yill:


Community


College


Alexandria


Campus


Data
Ena4s


Communication


Center.


Their


help


greatly


appreciated.


The


skill,


understanding,


and


encouragement


of Mary


Palmer,


typist


dissertation,


were


important


factor s


completion.


Thanks


are


due


author


s wife


, Jacquelyn


Ostrom


Remley,


who


never


complained


about


educational


active


ties


provided


clerical


assistance.


nephew,


Steven


M. McVay,


helped


tabulating


results.


The


warmest


gratitude


due


author'


parents.


Through


their


love,


they


have


given


him


self


-confidence


to achieve


goal


. They


share


ownership


this


disser-


station


and


resulting


degree














TABLE


CONTENTS


PAGE


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LIST


OF TABLES


vrjiii


ABSTRACT


CHAPTER


INTRODUCTION.


Articulation


Virginia


Definitions.


CHAPTER


REVIEW


OF RELATED


LITERATURE


Preparation fo

The Admissions


Transfer

Procedure


* 6, 6 S S S S S S

* S S S S S S S S S S S


Acceptance


into


Transfer


Institution.


Transfer


Courses


Orientation


and


Registration.


Integration


into


Transfer


Institution.


Availability


of Servi


ces


Personal


Adjustment


CHAPTER


III,


RESEARCH


METHODOLOGY.


Research


Questions


Populations.


Sampling


Procedure


fl^L 4 1 a1^ :^


n~c~




I~i Air, NB" ;B "E Ai;dN wAbuw "A j"N ; j****** ****


TABLE


CONTENTS- -CONTINED


PAGE


Instruments


Pilot


CHAPTER


Response


a a a a a a r


Study.


RESULTS


Rate.


Demographic


Analysis


the


Results.


Differences
Articulation


n Respon
Survey .


ses


Survey


Polici


Respon


ses.


Items


Analy


the


Articulation


Survey


. 93


Summary.


a a a S S a a S S) S S S S S S C i 114


CHAPTER


, SUMMARY,


CONCLUSIONS


, IMPLICATIONS


, AND


RECOMMENDATION

Summary.

Conclusion

Implicati'

Recommends


S]S. .


. . . 119


S . . . . 119

ns....... . 125

ons . . . . 128

nations. . . . . 131


APPENDIX

APPENDIX


ARTICULATION

ARTICULATION


SURVEY,

SURVEY,


FORM A,


FORM


PART

PART


* 135

. 136


APPENDIX


APPENDIX


ARTICULATION


SURVEY
COLLEGE


SURVEY,


OF POLICIES


TRANSFER


PART


AFFECTING


STUDENTS.


S. .- 138

COMMUNITY


. . 141


APPENDIX


LETTER


TO COMMUNITY


COLLEGE


PRESIDENTS


. 147


Data




'"::""~"Ei ;::IIIB"XI:; "EA
i r.I~ c "
IiB?2
tl~s gi .; iii;,,gil iB <4
~A C i "4<


BE:: :


41E mc8


TABLE


CONTENTS


- -CONTINUED


PAGE


APPENDIX


LETTER


TO PRESIDENTS


OF FOUR-


YEAR


COLLEGES


AND


UNIVERSITIES.


* 0 151


APPENDIX


LETTER


TO GRADUATES.


153


APPENDIX


FOLLOW-UP


LETTER


TO GRADUATES.


. . 154


APPENDIX


LETTER


TO COLLEAGUES


155


APPENDIX


FOLLOW-UP


LETTER


TO COLLEAGUES


. . 156


APPENDIX


LETTER


TO STUDENT


AFFAIRS


OFFICERS


. 157


APPENDIX


FOLLOW-UP
OFFICERS


LETTER


TO STUDENT


AFFAIRS


. 158


REFERENCES


a p p p p p a a S p a p 0 P. 5 5 S 159


BIOGRAPHICAL


SKETCH.


* 166













LIST


OF TABLES


TABLE


PAGE


VIRGINIA PUBLIC
THEIR SEPARATE


COMMUNITY
CAMPUSES.


COLLEGES


AND


S ~ S SI S 5 S50


VIRGINIA PUBLIC FOUR-YEAR COLLEGES AND
INSTITUTIONS THAT ACCEPT TRANSFER STUDENTS
FROM VIRGINIA PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES. .


A.A. AND A.S. DEGREE GRADUATES FROM
VIRGINIA PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES
DURING 1978-1979 . . .


. 51


. . 52


VIRGINIA
AND STAFF


PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGE
INCLUDED tIN STUDY. .


FACULTY
. . 54


VIRGINIA PUBLIC FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE AND
UNIVERSITY FACULTY AND STAFF INCLUDED
IN STUDY . . . .

PILOT STUDY CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
TWO ADMINISTRATIONS OF THE ARTICULATI
SURVEY . . . .


*. 55


FROM
ON
. . 66


RESPONSE f
GRADUATES.


LATE


OF COMMUNITY


COLLEGE


S S S. S S 5 5 6..9


RESPONSE
COMMUNITY

RESPONSE
FOUR-YEAR


RATE OF FACULTY
COLLEGES .


AND


STAFF


. . 70


RATE OF FACULTY AND STAFF A
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.


. . 71


DEMOGRAPHIC


DATA


FOR


ALL


RESPONDENTS


. . 72


DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FOR
GRADUATE RESPONDENTS


COMMUNITY


COLLEGE


DEMOGRAPHIC
nR.QpnwnflWrrq


DATA


FOR


FACULTY


AND


STAFF


a S S S S a a S 5 .74


77


dl::









LIST


TABLE S--CONTINUED


TABLE


PAGE


ANALYSIS
AND DEGR

ANALYSIS
EARNED,
COLLEGE
AND AGE


OF
EE


VARIANCE OF
OF KNOWLEDGE


GENDER,
FOR ALL


OF VARIANCE OF TYPE O
CURRICULUM COMPLETED,
FROM WHICH STUDENT WAS
FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE


RACE,
RESPONDENTS.


F DEGREE
COMMUNI TY
GRADUATED,
GRADUATES.


ANALYSIS
ATTENDED
BEFORE BE
ATTENDING
REJECTION


F VARIANCE OF WHETHER GRADUATE
DUR-YEAR COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY
NG GRADUATED, COLLEGE PRESENTLY
NUMBER OF TRANSFER APPLICATION
, AND INTENDED BACCALAUREATE


MAJOR


FOR


COMMUNITY


COLLEGE


GRADUATES.


S. 86


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF POSITION, INSTITUTION
WHERE EMPLOYED, HIGHEST DEGREE HELD, AND
COMMUNITY COLLEGE ATTENDANCE FOR COLLEGE AND
UNIVERSITY FACULTY AND STAFF . .


. 91


RESULTS FROM SURVEY OF POLICIES AFFECTING
COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS. .


MEANS FOR EACH ITEM
FOR ALL RESPONDENTS


ON ARTICULATION


SURVEY


ARTICULATION
MEAN SCORES


SURVEY
IN RANK


ITEMS
ORDER.


RECEIVING


HIGHEST


: x ":E""EE "" : E : """" ::E:
"""::E" "" :: "" E,,x,: "E"
~:,
; ; :i;





Vx
" ~, ;T


stract


sse


rotation


Presented


the


Graduate


Council


the


the


University


Requirement


Florida


the


Degree


Partial
Doctor


Fulfillment


Philosophy


ARTICULATION


Theodore


IN HIGHER.


Phant


EDUCATION


Remley,


December


1980


Chairman:


Robert


Stripling


Major


Department


Counse


lor


Education


Perceptions


the


articulation


procedure


whereby


Virginia


public


community


college


graduates


transfer


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


university


were


surveyed


study.


The


perceptions


then


were


compared


to policies


reported


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


universe


that


affect


community


college


transfer


students.


The


Articulation


Survey


consisting


items


was


cons


tructed


the


researcher


measure


perceptions


the


articulation


procedure


Virginia.


Items


the


survey


were


identified


the


professional


literature


and


through


discussions


with


national


articulation


experts.


A second


survey


munity


were


strument,


College


the


Transfer


restatements


Survey


Students,


items


from


Polici


Affecting


contained


the


items


Articulation


Com-


that


Survey.


4 ..~A ..4 A. -~1 e~...qan CI.. I~ a A a -.


mk, C,11


n ~ : +: r7 r~ rr 1


,,I,~


ck,


A .tArA




,i::"8
IEE"E"BEEBE" IEEiX"~E"i~
II..
8~ ,:8:"
:rE a I::a B;ix"
BE,,,""
,i"
ir ;;" '"


colleges


who


were


,,, KK K KK K KK K
*: ~~~i ^" KK KKKK KK.K


1978


-1979


academic


year; j

division


counselor
** a ; ;;;


a~in sion s


and


records


coordinators,


chairpersons,


and


faculty


from


the


Virgin ia


public


community


colleges;


and


221 admissions


officers,


department


chairpersons,


and


faculty


from


the


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


universities


that


accept


community


college


transfer


students.


The


response


rate


for


these


subjects


was


73.2%.


Chief


student


affairs


administrator s


the


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


universities


that


accept


corn-


munity


college


transfer


students


were


asked


to complete


the


Survey of

Students.


Policies

Thirteen


one-way


Affecting

completed


analysis


Community

surveys


variance


College


were


was


Transfer


returned.


used


analyzing


responses

subjects


the


perceived


Articu


the


lation Survey

articulation


determine


procedure


whether


differently.


Community


college


faculty


and


staff


perceived


Virginia


articulation

graduates or


problems


four-year


as more

college


severe

and u


than


community


university


faculty


college

and


staff.


Respondents


who


reported


they


were


well-informed


regarding


articulation


problems


Virginia


perceived


articulation


problems


as less


severe


than


those


respondents


who


indicated


they


had


little


or no knowledge


articulation.


Vta


" fP ;I'EB,, Eq~
$,ria~;,; i~r 'E"" ..rr,
I
re







admi


ssion


one


or more


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


or universe


cities


perceived


articulation


problems


as more


severe


than


those


who


had


received


no rejections.


Affecting

responses

reported


Community


the


items


College


Articulatio


as existing


some


the


Graduates

n Survey.

transfer


Survey

were c

Seven


Policies


compared


policies


institutions


interpreted


as serious


articulation


problems,


but


were


per-


ceived


populations


surveyed.


below

These


average significance

policies included


the


refusing


accept


grades


for


transfer;


denying


transfer


CLEP,


institutional


credit-by


-examination,


and


military


course-


work


credits


awarded


community


colleges;


scheduling


first-


term


transfer


students


regi


station


after


all


native


students


have


had


the


opportunity


to regi


ster;


holding


transfer


students


to current


transfer


policies


rather


than


those


effect


when


the


student


entered


the


community


college;


and

lish


offering


community


the


college


pro


transfer

gram for


program


students; f

outstanding


ailing


community


college


graduates;


and


offering


on-campus


housing


to community


college


transfer


students


after


filling


requests


from


freshmen


and


native


students.


The


requirement


that


community


college


tr ans fer


students


have


higher


graduate


Doint


averacres


than


native


Responses


as problems


could


same


orientation


a recruitment


freshmen


to estab-




:":~,"E.
'ii8 BE: BE:
:""""
~:~""""":::::
BIX"

;; ;


students


aftar


the


deadline


for


housing


were


two


the


many


articulation


problems


reported


as not


existing


transfer


institutions,


yet


perceived


as existing


Articulation


Survey


respondents.












CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION


significant


number


students


planning


earn


baccalaureate


degree


the


United


States


complete


their


first


two


years


at a local


community


college.


Figures


complied


the


American


Association


Community


and


Junior


Colleges


(1980)


reveal


that


during


fall,


1979,


4,487,872


students


the


United


States


enrolled


credit


courses


two-year


institutions.


Enrollment


for


the


1979


-1980


academic


year


increased


4.3%


over


the


previous


year.


Community


colleges


have


served


increasing


numbers


students


the


past


year


, except


1978


-1979,


when


enrollment


was


down


.1%.


The


number


students


choosing


to attend


community


colleges


for


the


first


years


their


baccalaureate


degrees


expected


increase.


The


program


designed


for


student


who


plan


transfer


after


two


years


the


community


college


an institution


that


grants


comprehen


baccalaureate


slve


community


degrees


college


a basic


curriculum.


component


The


the


coursework


completed


students


planning


transfer


intended


. .


1


Jc


1


1 ,




-i~ji -"li P~ ~ X; i "N "Mn,.i4;ii"E Eli""lli;iiii ;ii ;: i ''"~iis:;" i'"""E"" i
A.' "", : u .j 111" ; ;"; ; i' ; ; "~i;


4i


studentswho


programs


will


at.3


have


begin


B


un their
^*..;


work


baccalaurate


at local


commun-


ity


college .


college


T;re


sqUgti~ce


followed boy t


years


twa years at
t a for-yfear
A^tA.year~cj


a, community


college


university
_j iverfay s 7


acceptable


method


obtaining


a baccalaur-


eate


degree


under


these


state


plans.


The


transfer


community


college


graduates


to four-year


colleges


and


universities


a regular


occurrence.


would


seem


logical,


then,


that


these


states


would


dedicated


to making


the


transfer


procedure


as equitable


and


expeditious


as possible.


Articulation


the


procedure


whereby


community


college


students


transfer


four-year


colleges


or universities


complete


their


baccalaureate


degrees.


Factors


that


inhibit


the


orderly


and


smooth


transfer


community


college


students


are


identified


articulation


problems.


In 1976,


Kintzer


reported


that


states


had


published


guidelines


or policies


regulating


the


transfer


credit


from


community


colleges


transfer


institutions.


Fourteen


these

genera


guidelines cc

I guidelines.


intained

The o


specific


other


policies


states


and


relied


13 provi

on inter-


institutional


agreements


wherein


neighboring


community


colleges


and


transfer


institutions


negotiated


transfer


policies


with


no comprehensive


state-wide


plan.


Some


states


ded


; :r": :;


the state' S


college




Al ^I"N rA" AA A *


develop


recommendations


Overall,


Kintuzer


(1975)


concluded


that


the


majority


state


articulation


plans


are


"rudi-


mentary


stages


development"


Two


general


questions


were


formulated


for


this


study:


Which


articulation


problems


hinder


the


smooth


transfer


of public

colleges


community


and


college


graduates


and


to public

various


four-year

groups


affected


the


articulation


procedure


perceive


the


same


articulation


problems?


The


professional


literature


reveals


that


mos t


articula-


tion


studi


have


concentrated


on cooperation


agreements


between


common ity


colleges


and


transfer


institutions.


Further


study


needed


concerning


the


personal


difficulties


students


encounter


they


make


the


transition


from


commun-


ity


colleges


to four-year


colleges


and


universe


ities.


Institutional


commitment


to effective


articulation


measured


more


realistically


examining


the


results


policies


and


programs


have


on students


than


reviewing


the


stated


intentions


policies


and


programs.


A community


college


that


purports


to offer


1'nvest


parallel"


courses


students


intending


transfer


does


not


fulfill


obliga-


tions


students


are


not


advised


adequately


as to which


courses


courses i


to complete


inferior.


the


content


A statement


- -


community


transfer


college


institution'


universities?




J gIN h1 XB~Xj AW" 'II.E A";:d D1flA;q. ni' 'hg HIAD" ji ,S : idNi
j~DD;~;Dgj~g uijuDrit;:

"; V


communi ty


college


transfer


students


are


denied


equal


access


to financial


aid,


housing,


or other


benefits


enjoyed


native


students.


The


purpose


this


research


was


to scientifically


analyze


perceptions


articulation


problems.


This


study


was


designed


answer


the


following


questions


related


the


stated


purpose:


faculty


and


staff


community


colleges and transfer


institutions


and


community


college


graduates


perceive


articulation


as a problem?


Which


specific


articulation


problems


are


perceived


community


college


graduates,


community


college


faculty


and


staff


mem-


bers


and


transfer


institution


faculty


and


staff


members?


What


policies


exi


transfer


institutions


that


affect


adversely


transfer


students


who


have


been


graduated


from


community


colleges ?


faculty


and


staff


community


col


and


transfer


institutions


and


community


college


graduates

by transft


perceive


as existing


articulation


Two


ancillary


problems


were


not


addressed


thi


research.


Many


students


transfer


to public


four-year


colleges

community


and


universities


Some


before


the


being

problem


graduated

ms they f


from


ace


public


may


different


from


those


experienced


students


who


have


been


institutions?


problems


reported


colleges.




A AA Ai


5 /


problems

because


technical


their


graduates


transfer


experience


an exception


will


the


not


general


explored

articu-


nation


procedure.


Although


assumed


drawn


articulation


that generalizations

from a comprehensive


a national


concerning


study


problem,


articulation


the


was


could


articulation


procedure


one


state.


This


thorough


study


articulation


problems


Virginia


could


provide


meaningful


insights


into


the


articulation


problems


experienced


community


college


graduates


throughout


the


United


States.


Articulation


Virginia


In 1966,


the


Virginia


General


Ass


embly


created


a state


Board


Community


to coordinate


the


Colleges


Virginia


and


Community


strative


System


department


(Vaughn,


1970).


was


anticipated


that


the


state


vocational


and


technical


school


and


some


the


exi


sting


two-year


branches


state


universe


ities


would


become


part


the


Virginia


Community


College


stem.


During


the


1978


-1979


academic


year,

College


99,681


stem


students


(VCCS


were

Annual


enrolled

Report,


the


1979).


Virginia


1980,


Community

there


were


It has


separate


been


public


estimated


community


colleges


the


one-third


system.


the


an admini


College


that


approximately


- -










Kintzer


(1976b,


.ped


articulation


efforts


Virginia


with


the


fo lowing


statement:


The process of


articulation


Virginia


basically


nity


interinstitutional.


colleges


establish
guideline
process,
ences bet


deal


transfer


with


each


agreements


While this


the system


ween


and


allows


among


Individual


senior
within


college


the


a lengthy and
for individual


institutions.


'(p


commu-
e to


state
tedious
differ-
.115)


Essentially,


the


articulation


procedure


Virginia


the


result


a complex


amalgamation


individual


efforts.


The


State


Council


Higher


Education


Virginia,


through


Admission


and


Articulation


Advisory


Committee,


has


issued


articulation


guidelines


that


serve


as recommendations


all


public


Kintzer

public


institutions


(1976b)

four-year


higher


observed,

colleges


education


public


and


community


universities


Virginia.


colleges

develop


and

articula-


tion


agreements


on a geographical


basis


Virginia.


The


articulation


guidelines


were


first


developed


1967.


that


year,


the


overall


Virginia


Plan


Higher


Education


recommended


acceptance


four-year


colleges


and


universities


qualified


community


college


graduates


and


an expansion


the


upper


level


enrollments


four-year


colleges


and


univer-


sities


to accommodate


transfer


students.


Coordination


among


all


segments


higher


education


was


recommended.


The


articu-


nation


guidelines


were


updated


1969


and


1972


and


coordina-


qE"":E:
. "" """;;;""":;; ""; i ~r~"i: ii;;; '"ri
": ; ~" :E :" ~""1::::
i""". li&")X"""B,
'"""E1B ii,,,
8:.


jE"


1EE"IE"("""""EE "X(X"""""""""":;~"i: S~X~BV
if :EiE:: V
6



* ;8 i i i I ii x F


In 1970,


a study


was


cobructed


determine


whether


Virginia


institutions


higher


education


agreed


with,


and


were


following,


national


articulation


guidelines


which


had


been


promulgated


the


Joint


Committee


on Junior


and


Senior


Colleges


the


Association


American


Colleges,


the


American


the


Association


American


Community


Association


and


Collegiate


Junior


Regi


Colleges,


strars


and


and


Admi


ssions


Officers


(Gallimore,


1971).


There


was


little


no agreement


from


the


respondents


as to what


they


considered


the


ideal


articulation


situation


and


what


they


reported


the


real


articulation


situation


Virginia.


While


most


the


res


pondeifts


concurred


with


the


national


articulation


guidelines


, they


did


not


feel


thes e


guidelines


were


being


followed.


In a comprehensive


study


cooperation


between


Virginia


public


community


colleges


and


Virginia


public


transfer


institutions,


Finley


(1976)


reached


several


conclusions


concerning


articulation


Virginia.


found


a considerable


level


interinstitutional


cooperation


and


that


geographic


proximity


was


a ma3or


factor


in the


incidence


cooperation.


He discovered


a high


level


resi


stence


the


establishment


articulation


policy


where


did


not


already


exist


the


General


Assembly


or the


State


Council


Higher


Education.


i~~~ Sl I


L


rl*


q


r x 1


-


I




'EEE~: i; li":::"
I:""Ei: E"ELE: EE
I i
I; i""E:i i"" ii, ~X
IE"
IE,: 8:
E":;:
r
1;11::"~"; i. aE: ,,la
p pJ
r ~idC .r


Iba ar 8i" ,d"I Sx:


Va~~x~


;;;r;:r:~ ;2li~


K
4

and


students


ich deburses


from


th~


community


college


curric-


ulum


are


acceptable


for


transfer.


Each


public


transfer


institution


independently


determines


which


community


college


courses


they


will


accept.


These


guides


also


contain


general


information


on admissions


procedures,


financial


aid,


and


housing


the


transfer


institution.


When


consultation


with


community


colleges


occurs


the


development


these


trans-


guides,


with


community


college


faculty


and


staff


within


the


same


geographical


region


the


transfer


institution.


Community


college


students


who


are


positive


their


major,


have


chosen


their


transfer


institution,


and


are


cap-


able


meeting


their


chosen


institution s


entrance


require-


ments


have


few


problems


selecting


their


coursework


the


community


college.


Unfortunately,


few


students


fall


into


this


category.


The


typical


common ity


college


student


who


eventually


plans


earn


a baccalaureate


degree


more


likely


undecided


about


a major;


unsure


the


institution


where


the


degree


will


completed;


and


possess

into in


an academic


stitutions


bac


with


ground that

competitive


makes unli

admissions.


.kely


This


acceptance

student


faced


with


a dilemma


when


choosing


the


courses


to complete


the


community


college.


For


instance,


there


are


four


E"":"~::agj:
I, ;
x 1








appropriate


mathematics s


sequence


required


the


student'


first


choice


transfer


institutions


or a different


mathe-


matics


sequence


required


institutions


that


are


the


student3


second,


third,


or fourth


choices.


A community


college


student


who


plans


transfer


does


not


have


the


luxury


remaining


undecided


about


a major


the


first


two


years


college.


community


college


students


not


have


transfer


institution


selected


and


a firm


commitment


major


when


selecting


courses,


they


run


risk


completing


coursework


that


not


transferable


or will


not


fulfill


baccalaureate


degree


requirements.


Course


tion


problems


students.


transfer


facing

s study


Thi


one


Virginia

examined


the


many


public c

several


potential


community

addition


articula-


college

al policies


and


attitudes


that


have


a broad


impact


the


community


college


graduate


s chance


Success


in completing


the


baccalaureate


degree.


The


tion


passed


Virginia


problems


Hous e


General


existed


Joint


Assembly


Virginia


recognized


and


Resolution


that


on February


Thi


articula-


1976,


stated


resolution


that


the


community


colleges


the


state


were


responsible


for


providing


freshman


and


sophomore


courses


and


that


these


courses


should


transferable


to baccalaureate


degree


pro-


grams.


The


General


Assembly


acknowledged


that


students


had




#
i ;a'' uEE: i::"~"ii :EE
,iii I""E"l "8"":X"",,,I
::::~::" iiEi"EjE, 8I:".."".. ~jei: xx I;:
IF:::
:~"f""":,~j: E: i~jE, '":i",,
:: """ :"E:,:"X: ..1


an articulation


agreement


and


to report


progress


by


November


1 96.


The S

resolution


tate

with


euncit of

a report


Higher

issued


Education


Sartori


responded to

(1976). The


the


report


concluded:


"The


state


ar iculat ion


Virginia


generally


healthy


and


*


. existing


mechanisms


are


adequate


to address


any


problems


.related


to articulation"


10).


The


report


stated


that


transfer


guides


published


public


transfer


institutions


were


adequate


to meet


the


articulation


agreement


required


the


resolution.


Whether


the


intent


the


resolution


was


satisfied


with


the


report


questionable,


but


no further


action


has


been


taken


the


General


Assembly.


Since


from


articulation,


differing


or the


perspectives


transfer

various


procedure,

populations,


viewed


this


,study


presents


the


perceptions


articulation


problems


expressed

college g


counselors,


eight


graduates,


Virginia


admissions


and


groups:


Virginia


public


records,


Virginia

public c


community


Virginia


public


community


college


public


community

college


coordinators


four-year


college


and


university


admissions


officers,


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


university


department


chair-


persons,


Virginia


public


community


college


division


chairpersons,


Virginia


public


community


college


faculty,


'"X(:X("""""B"""E: :EEEYB""E:"X"""""";";"E"""X""""
:in,:h IE;~BI:::
"~PE:":::~ : ,ij: ,", i """" :" : :"" :":"q4E
IE"B, E"
IE :E
'"1
:"r::"l:
;; ":
ili8E~ji:
i" :E: "." ":I


"::" i: E
s~g:,, ,:::

:
5;; ,
"" "",: I:
": ; x
:":,



:" E i


.,E
"""X( ,:"
,x
:








graduates.


Also,


articulation


policy


statements


Virginia


public


transfer


institutions


were


reviewed


and


institutional


representatives


were


asked


answer


specific


questions


about


policies


were


toward


chosen


beca


transfer

use of t


students.


heir


The


involvement


populations


the


surveyed


articulation


procedure.


Virginia


community


college


graduates


who


had


been


graduated


from


degree


programs


specifically


designated


transfer


curriculums


were


included


the


study.


Their


impressions


articulation


problems


based


their


own


personal


transfer


experiences


and


the


transfer


experiences


their


peers


were


felt


to be


important.


Counselors


and


coordinators


admissions


and


records


the


Virginia


Community


College


System


were


chosen


because


they


are


a position


to know


the


problems


community


college


graduates


face


during


the


transfer


procedure.


Community


college


counselors


either


directly


assist


transfer


students


choosing


transferable


courses


to complete


their


degrees


or serve


as consultants


to faculty


who


perform


this


function.


Students

intercede


often

when


call

the


upon co

students


immunity


college


experience


couns


transfer


elors to

problems


associated


with


acceptance,


financial


aid,


course


transfer,


or housing.


It i


the


responsibility


community


college


counselor s


to be


aware


specific


transfer


policies


f the


o












members of tle admissions staff are the first contact fQr

transfer students miaad their p erCptions of articulation were

deemed important to this study. Admissions personnel are

charged with explaining and implementing transfer policies

promulgated by the faculty and staff of the various institu-

tions., Even though admissions staff members sometimes do not
i==== ===== = = = ===== = = = = = = =


have


a great


deal


decision-making


power,


they


often


super-


vise


transcript


evaluations


for


transferability


courses,


transmit


acceptance


or nonacceptance


letters,


and


generally


are


concerned


with


the


integration


transfer


students


into


the


educational


community.


As members


the


student


services


staff


at four-year


colleges


and


universities,


admissions


officers


are


aware


adjustment


problems


transfer


students


experience


once


they


arrive


on campus.


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


university


depart-


ment


chairpersons


departments


to which


community


college


transfers


are


accepted


were


included


the


study.


They


seem


to be

fer p


the


ultimate


policies.


decision-makers


Acceptance


the


concerning


transfer


academic


institution


trans-

may


depend


upon


acceptance


a particular


academic


department.


Department


accepted


chairpersons


their


and


their


departments


faculties


the


j3 junior


decide


level,


who


determine








students


once


they


have


arrived


on campus


and


feedback


from


their


faculties


, department


chairpersons


become


sensitive


the


adjustment


problems


transfer


students.


Academic


division


chairpersons


divisions


responsible


Associate


Arts


(A.A .)


and


Associate


Science


(A.S.)


degree


programs


in the


Virginia


public


community


colleges


also


were


included


thi


study.


Community


college


divi


sion


chairpersons


coordinate


several


academic


disciplines.


They


initiate


curriculum


changes


and,


under


the


community


college


academic


deans,


have


responsibility


insuring


that


courses


required


for


A.A.


and


A.S.


degrees


are


"college


parallel"


capable


transfer


into


baccalaureate


degree


programs.


The


perceptions


articulation


Virginia


public


com-


munity


college


faculty


members


were


solicited


because


they


either


serve


as faculty


advisors


or work


closely


informal


advisory


relationships


with


students


planning


transfer.


The


faculty


included


thi


study


are


members


academic


divi


sions


responsible


for


A.A.


or A.S.


transfer


degree


pro-


grams.


Community


college


faculty


members


design


course


content,


influence


curriculum


decis


ions,


and


often


provide


advice


transfer


student s


concerning


their


choice


trans-


institution.


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


university


faculty


members


who


were


included


this


study


serve


as faculty


(i




*l A* A A AAAAAA A A
1

14


experience


through


classroom


contact


and


advising


interviews.


Since


four-year


college


and


university


faculty


evaluate


the


academic


achievement


students,


they


are


sensitive


any


differences


that


may


exist


academic


preparation


between


community

The


college


chief


transfers


student


and


services


students.


officers at each


the


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


universities


that


accept


transfer


students


were


asked


to complete


a survey


indicating


some


their


stitutional


policies


toward


trans-


fer


students.


Ins


titutional


publications


also


were


reviewed


regarding


articulation


policies.


Even


though


states


differ


approaches


to articulation


between


leges


public


and


community


universities,


colleges


thi


and


public


one


four-year


col


new

the


perspective

articulation


on a national


situation


problem.

Virginra,
inca


Through


some


examining


generalizations


can


made


about


the


articulation


procedure


throughout


the


United


States.


Definitions


Some


terms


related


this


research


warrant


general


definitions.


native


study


state


provides







15


focuses


the


trans


fer


Virgin ia


publ ic


community


college


graduates


to Virginia


public


four-year


co i leges


and


unLver


ities.


"Transfer


institution"


refers


the


institution


higher


education


A transfer


offers b

Virginia


to which


stitution


accalaureate


public


community


may


degrees


four-year


any

and


colleges


college


college

ccepts

and un


students


or universe


transfer


iversitie


transfer.

ty that


students

s that


accept


transfer


students


who


have


been


graduated


from


Virginia


public


community


colleges


are


the


transfer


institutions


most


often


referenced


thi


study.


"Native


students,


" when


used


conjunction


with


the


term


"transfer


students,


" refers


to students


who


began


their


four-year


degree


program


freshmen


the


institution


being


discus


sed.


"Transfer


students


are


those


students


who


began


their


four-year


degree


program


at another


institution


higher

degree.


education,


this


but

study


have

, the


transferred

transfer s


to complete


students


their


primary


concern


are


those


who


have


been


graduated


from


Virginia


public


community


colleges


and


who


have


transferred


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


univer


sites.




..? Th <
IB EC


CHAPTER


REVIEW


RELATED


LITERATURE


Three


stinct


phases


emerge


when


considering


the


pro-


cedure


wherebyP


community


college


graduates


transfer


four-


year


colleges


and


universities .


the


first


phase,


the


potential


graduates


must


prepare


for


the


transfer


procedure


while


they


still


are


attending


the


community


college .


Next,


they


must


through


an admi


ssions


procedure


that


includes


acceptance,


transcript


evaluations,


registration,


and


orien-


station.


Finally,


community


college


transfer


students


must


integrated


into


the


four-year


colleges


and


universities


to which


they


have


transferred.


Transfer


students


become


integrated


transfer


through


the


institution


services


and


provided


their


own


the


personal


adjustment


a new


environment.


study


articulation


between


community


colleges


and


transfer


institutions


must


concerned


with


three


the


phases


identified


above.


more


narrow


approach


articulation


would


exclude


essential


components


the


pro-


cedure.


Although


some


writers


concerned


with


articulation


as a result


them








articulation


and

the


problems


investigations

preparation, a


(Kintzer,

specific


admissions,


19 75;

problem


and


Wattenbarger,


areas.


integration


1972)


Studies


phases


articulation


will


reviewed


turn.


Preparation for


Transfer


Community


college


students


planning


transfer


after


graduation


require


preparation


two


areas.


First,


they


must


have


a strong


academic


background


prepare


them


perform


adequately


upper


divi


sion


courses.


Also,


they


must


have


sufficient


information


concerning


transfer


insti


tutions


make


an informed


choice


and


prepare


themselves


taking


the


proper


courses


for


transfer.


Both


community


college


students


and


transfer


institution


faculty


staff


fear


that


community


college


courses


may


inferior


academically


those


taught


the


four-year


college


or university.


Perel


and


Vairo


(1969)


have


reported


that


students


transferring


mathematics


and


foreign


language


Credits


from


community


colleges


often


find


thems


elves


sad-


vantaged


compared


to native


students.


Kintzer


(1979a)


has


expre


ssed


a concern


that


there


seems


to be


a diminishing


empha


on quality


control 1


some


community


colleges.


Since


feel


s the


strength


trans


fer


programs


rests




#"""
i" E~~"ii~~ii~iiE"ei," ii
I:,,,:::E
,::"B
: i


1I9


loss


colleges.


transfer


institution


In a follow-up


study


confidence


conducted on


the


community


transfer


stu-


dents


from


Lane Comawity College


Oregon,


Lamberts (1977)


found


that


a major


di fficul Ly


reported


students


after


transferring


was


skill


deficiency.


The


respondents


survey


complained


deficiencies


writing


skills


and


study

views


habits.

with Ca


Kintzer


ilifornxa


(1978) f

community


found,


college


through


informal


students


who


inter-

had


transferred,


reading


that


necessary


they

for


were


surprised


university


courses


the

and


great

the n


amount


umber


essay


examinations


and


writing


ass aignments


that


were


required


them.


Kintzer


also


reported


that


the


students


felt


the


community


college


had


not


prepared


than


for


the


severe


competition


for


grades.


While


statistical


studies


show


that


community


college


students


eventually


perform


well


academically


as native


students


(Birnbaum,


1970;


Grover,


1967;


Nickens,


1970),


concerns


continue


to exist


that


com-


munity


college


courses


not


prepare


students


adequately


transfer.


Community


college


students


anticipating


transfer


require


accurate


and


complete


information


concerning


the


transfer


institutions


they


are


considering


order


to plan


appropri


ately.


A college


transfer


conference


sponsored


the


E i E;; ": I" E E E ~2~8~ B ~g~g~ ~:X E X E E E x a E B ";E "
18"":::"""" E""
I:" ii~
LE"


Ij::"~;;;";;;;x";; ;~~~i~r ~;;:it;


*: >"i *


~8~:
"8:


"""B :,,,:
,, :
,, "d.








information


(Kuhns,


1974) .


O'Grady


(1974)


and


Lamberts


(1977)


have


concurred


that


transfer


information


essential


fostering


the


transfer


proceditre


for


community


college


students.


Fahrer


and


Michelich


(1974)


have


made


an appeal


explicit


transfer


information


as opposed


vague,


general


statements.


Information


concerning


transfer


policies


not


helpful,


however,


when


the


policies


themselves


are


not


respon


sive


the


needs


transfer


students.


Even


situations


where


the


information


not


conducive


smooth


transfer,


students


deserve


convenient


access


the


information


that


available


In a study


which


surveyed


community


college


transfer


students


at a major


midwestern


universe


ity,


Donato


(1973)


found


that


the


respondents


held


highly


unreali


stic


expecta-


tions


univer


sity


life.


Supplying


transfer


students


with


complete


information


concerning


the


institution


to which


they


are


planning


transfer


could


help


bring


their


expec-


stations


into


a more.


real


stic


perspective.


The Admi


ssions


Procedure


The


admi


ssions


procedure


begins


for


community


college


transfer


students


when


they


request


an application


from


the


admi


ssions


office


the


institutions


to which


they


are


I~




liii:: EiE: E~: i~ EE
1EEB"X"E"" ;i~h~~E"'"':'
#"" "ix",,
d"::


institution

community


they


prefer,
p^kMkJk:~bjkUdk:*


colleg$ aree


not


courses t

accepted


hey

for


have


completed


transfer,


the


the


regis-


tration


procedure


leaves


them disappointed,


or the


orienta-


tion


program


does


not


meet


their


needs.


These


various


elements


problems


the


for


admissions


community


procedure


college


that


transfer


pose


students


potential


will


considered


separately.


Acceptance


into


the


Transfer


Institution


When


the


admissions


staff


a four-year


college


university


with


competitive


admission s


attempting


determine


which


students


are


to be


admitted


into


their


institution,


their


goal


to develop


an equitable


set


criteria


upon


which


to base


their


decisions.


community


college


graduate


s access


transfer


often


determined


basic


admissions


policies.


a maximum


number


community


college


graduates


can


admitted


each


year


they


are


subjected


discriminatory


admissions


practices,


community


college


graduates


virtually


could


have


no chance


gaining


admission


to a given


institution.


Hills

admissions


(1965a)

decision


bluntly

s about


has concluded,

risky students


"We

when


are


making


we are


dealing


Ta4 4- 1, rnrFJ 4s.r.Cvlrsara-L.~nIt'41r &..~4.4 11.- J-- -s


- ~ U, n


i" i~i"fi: E:"E"
IEEE E,
IB ":, g~
~,,,i
: i


""PI


institri~e;~ofi


k


ra; C


'S ld\


7C LknL :rr


~i~L, ,


,LL: Lc.;lA


fnh1


I







21


practice


requiring


higher


grade-point


averages


for


trans-
4-aie'-


fers


than


native


students


enter


upper


division


work


was


identified


O'Grady


(1974)


as detrimental


to articula-


tion.


higher


Sandeen


grade


and


point


Goodale


averages


(1976)


are


have


suggested


required


that


transfer


stu-


dents,


specific


policies


should


developed


and


widely


disseminated.


Four-year


colleges


and


universities


must


determine


which


credentials


order


are


to predict


needed

that


from


a community


individual


college


s potential


for


graduate

success.


Sandeen


and


Goodale


(1976)


have


reported


that


stitutions


require


a variety


document


that


might


include


standard-


ized


test


scores,


high


school


grades,


recommendations,


institution-developed


screening


devi


ces


or even


on-c


ampus


interviews.


Wattenbarger,


Glea


zer,


Masiko,


and


Seay


(1966)


have


concluded


that


academic


performance


a community


college


program


the


best


single


predictor


success


transfer


Transfer


institution.



Courses


After


community


college


graduates


have


gained


acceptance


to a four-year


college


or university,


their


transcripts


are


-A ..t


4 -


--- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L -) .-- --- -. ---


tnt.


e___


..Y- I


--


' II




;"; EEE"iliiiiiii; i:::~:;": i :i lii"~E:"ii
,8,,, :E
IB
I ,


They


often


feel


cheated


or discr imitated


against


when


they


lose


credits


during


transfer.


there


no statewide


articulation


agreement,


insti


tutions


located


in- the


same


geographical


region


may


enter


into


informal


or formal


articulation


agreements


Hertig


(1973)


has


predicted


that


articulation


plans


are


doomed


failure


unless


department


chairpersons


attack


problems


local


at most,


regional


level.


Ernst


(1978)


has


recommended


an "mitterinstitutional


articulation


committee"


community


colleges


and


transfer


institutions


are


located


close


one


another.


He stated


that


this


committee


could


foster


the


exchange


information


and


help


resolving


misunderstandings.


Perel


and


Vairo


(1969)


have


advocated


personal


regional


approach


to articulation


because


they


felt


allowed


transfer


institutions


to help


mold


the


curriculum


the


nearby


community


college.


According


to Menacker


(1974),


"The


community


college


at fault


when


assumes


that


can


develop


academic


policies


and


curricula


independently


the


senior


college"


201).


On the


other


hand,


Schroder


(1969)


has


said


that


community


dictated


college


transfer


transfer


institutions.


curriculum


O'Grady


should


(1974)


not


has


admonished


both


transfer in


stitutions


and


community


colleges








Increased


communication


between


faculty members


com-


munity


colleges


and


transfer


institutions


seems


to be


the


only


method


insuring


curriculum


development


that


takes


articulation"


into


account


(Wattenbarger


& Medford,


1974).


Menacker


(1974)


has


complained


that


subject


specialists


have


tended


to remain


aloof


and


has


recommended


meetings


and


faculty ex

university

have sugge


change

faculty


sted


programs r

y members.


faculty


between co

Leister


exchanges


ammuni


and


.ty college

MacLachlan


as a method


for


and


(1976)


transfer


institution


to attract


more


community


college


transfers.


Hertig


(1973)


has


encouraged


the


mixing


sciplinary


counterparts


from


community


colleges


and


transfer


institu-


tions.


In Iowa,


thi


exchange


accomplished


through


reciprocal


on-campus


visits.


Biology


faculty


members


who


have


participated


these


vis


have


reported


articulation


to be


much


easier


(Karre,


1972).


Formal


conferences


are


rejected


Pere


and


Vairo


(1969),


however,


because


they


feel


such


meetings


often


cause


confusion.


Instead,


they


have


advocated


informal,


personal


contacts


between


faculties


nearby


institutions.


It has


been


observed


that


the


faculty


transfer


institution


need


to reach


agreement


concerning


transfer


policies


before


they


meet


with


community


college


faculty


(Kuhn


, 1973).


appears


that


consensus


among


transfer










Wattenbarger 1L959)

are developed, they


has


warned


should


that when

s simple and


transfer

clearly


regulations

stated.


The


need


improve


credit


transfer


the


most


press-


ing


problem


community


college


transfer


students,


accord-


ing


Menacker


(1974).


He has


said,


"College


and


universe


ties


often


base


credit


acceptance


policies


the


view


that


all


junior


colleges


are


academically


suspect


and


hence


restrictive


credit


transfer


policies


are


needed


'keep


standards


In(,


201).


Some


academic


disciplines


have


made


attempts


on their


own


to solve


community


college


and


transfer


institution


articulation


problems.


Gross


and


Baker


(1972)


have


reported


that


task


force


telecommunications


faculty


recommended


that


community


college


offerings


limited


five


basic


courses.


They


also


suggested


names


for


the


courses


and


the


number


credits


that


should


assigned.


This


task


force


was


developed


because


telecommunications


courses


were


being


offered


under


many


different


names


numerous


departments


community


colleges.


In California,


an attempt


to solve


the


transfer


problem


journalism


courses


led


to significant


changes


(Pasqua,


1974).


A journalism


catalogue


was


developed


that


sted


the


lower


divi


sion


requirement


for


journalism


majors


at all


California


transfer


institutions.


One


insti


:E*j
::j:







25


In most


four-year


colleges


and


universe cities,


freshmen


and


sophomores


are


required


to complete


a core


curriculum


supplemented


electives


during


their


first


two


years


Schroder


(1969)


has


argued


that


community


college


graduates


should


given


full


junior


status


if they ar gra ted with a


transferable


degree


from


a community


college.


Schroder


said


there


little


need


for


more


lower


division


transfer


require-


ments


than


coursework


from


the


four


fields


physical


science,


life


science,


social


science,


and


humanity


es.


When


core


curriculum


requirements


are


different


between


community


colleges


and


universities,


students


who are cradtaed f racthe


community


college


find


they


are


still


lacking


required


courses


when


they


arrive


the


transfer


institution


(Furniss


& Martin,


1974;


Kuhns,


1973).


0 'Grady


(1974)


has


observed


that


some


four


-year


colleges


and


universe


cities


draw


blurry


lines


stinction


between


upper


and


lower


divis


ion


courses,

offer a


but


course


hold

e the


community

transfer


colleges ac

institution


countable

considers


they


upper


divi


sion.


Another


broad


area


course


tran


sfer


that


causes


articulation


problems


the


concept


nontraditional


credits


, credit-by-examination,


or challenge


examinations


(Furniss


& Martin,


1974).


has


been


suggested


that


ti Arrrss


rsmr i rT=ment f


nn rnrnnptsnnri s


i n af i +11+ i rrn a


hi3SPI~


i




""" """ "' ""I A


transfer


institutions


have: developed


eompetency-based


degree


programs.


Kintzer


(1979a)


has


termed it.


unusual


that


trans-


institutions


with


their


own


nontraditional


credit


pro-


grams


seldom


accept


nontraditional


credits


awarded


com-


munity


colleges.


Romaine


(1975)


has


suggested


that


transfer


institutions


students


should


"test


have


out"


a regular

courses


practice


or otherwise


allowing

demonstrate


their


already


acquired


knowledge.


survey


older


students


the


University


Nebraska-Lincoln


found


that


students


felt


they


would


have


been


better


served


they


could


have


had


prerequisites


waived


and


challenge


examinations


available


them


(Rawlins,


1979).


Furniss


and


Martin


(1974)


have


suggested


that


transfer


institution


does


have


a provi


sion


waiver


credits


or prerequisites,


should


published


po 1 icy


that


not


totally


arbitrary


and


all


students


can


take


advantage


Kuhns


(1974),


along


with


Fahrer


and


Michelich


(1974) ,


has


agreed


that


any


such


policies


should


public ized.


Other


problems


related


course


transfer


that


have


been


identified,


but


not


elaborated


upon,


include


community


colleges


and


transfer


institutions


operating


on different


calendars


(i.e.,


quarter


vs.


semester)


(Furniss


and


Martin,


1974); t


transfer


institutions


recuirina


that


the


commun itv


k :":" EE,,
,, ""El",," EEE~


"


:"" ::
E" B
a,





2A

27


they


have


earned


grades,


yet


not


allowing


community


college


1974;


students


Kintzer,


transfer


1973a; Kuhns,


grades


1973),*


(Fahrer


transfer


& Michelich,


institutions


refusing


1973) ;


to accept


community


remedial


college


course


students


work


being


for


transfer


two


years


coursework


transfer


transfer


institutions


from comm

rejecting


unity


credits


college


were


1973);

awarded


the


community


college


military


experiences


(Furniss


Martin,

accept


1974) ;

"old" c


and


creditt


transfer i

s (Furniss


institutions

& Martin,


reluctance

1974).


New


concepts


have


been


suggested


to help


alleviate


the


credit


transfer


problem


community


college


graduates


experience.


Chapman


and


Babb


(1974)


have


suggested


that


states


develop


common


course


numbering


system.


This


would


allow


transcript


evaluations


to be


done


computer


and


would


eliminate


many


the


equivalency


questions


currently


raised


regarding


com-


munity


college


courses.


Kuhns


(1973)


has


identified


problem


the


fact


that


community


college


students


plan


their


transfer


programs


when


they


enter


the


community


college


based


transfer


institution


s policies


effect


that


time.


Two


or more


years


later,


when


they


are


ready


transfer,


policies


at the


transfer


institution


may


have


changed


and


community


college


students


have


no recourse.


(Kuhns,


limited


(Kuhns,


students





:E::EE~i::B""EEE""~EE;"E""X "" #;""" ;; ; """; """ """"""""""E;X(""" ""EX""E"X "x x"
,BE~~~~xx xX""!!i!: :" "::::" :, ",? ,,":"",,":aE
ILIE~~~~ii~ xx" EE" E"


there


no grandfather


Clause,


O'Grady


(1974)


has


suggested


that


when


transfer


institutions


make


curriculum


changes,


they


give


community


colleges


to 18


months


to adjust


their


courses


study


accommodate


the


change.


Orientation


and


Registration


community


college


transfer


students


are


different


from


entering


freshmen,


then


perhaps


the


orientation


program


the


transfer


two groups

There are


as well

some obv


institution


(Goodale,


ious


should


1971;


differences


different


Worley

between


for


& Conrad,

community


these


1973).

college


graduates


and


freshmen.


Community


college


graduates


are


two


or more


years


older


than


freshmen


and


they


have


completed


two


years


college


already.


the


other


hand,


they


are


similar


freshmen


that


this


may


their


first


experi-


ence


living


away


from


home.


Like


the


freshmen,


often


this


the


first


educational


experience


for


the


community


college


stude


int in a

A great


four-year


deal


college


research


or university


exploring


setting.


characteristics


the

The


community


results


college

these


transfer

studies


student


indicate


has

that


been


completed.


community


college


transfer


students


have


needs


that


are


different


from


those









Iwai


and


Church ll1


(1979)


studied


the


differences


between


students


who


were


successful


college


and


those


who


did


not


complete


the


baccalaureate


program


they


had


begun.


They


found


that


successful


students


showed


a higher


frequency


parental


expectations


academic


success


than


those


who


had


withdrawn.


The


researchers


also


found


that


48.4


the


academically


unsuccessful


students


were


commu-


nity


college


transfer


students


and


that


the


community


college


graduates


tions


reported

success.


the 1

These


owest


frequency


findings


could


parental

meaningful


expecta-

1 for


those


who


plan


orientation


programs


for


community


college


transfer


students.


A longitudinal


study


the


high


school


class


1972


conducted


Peng,


Bailey,


and


Ekland


(1977)


reveal


that


socioeconomic


status


a more


powerful


predictor


whether


a student


will


attend


a community


college


or university


a freshman


than


any


other


trait


such


academic


ability,


sex,


or race.


Orientation


programs


should


take


into


account


that


community


college


graduates


are


likely


to be


from


lower


socioeconomic


status


groups


than


native


students


and


should


geared


to meet


the


concerns


students


with


fewer


social


and


economic


resources.


Comprehens ive


studies


on community


college


transfer


29











graduates


^KK Ki~i S ^K K
.; ;; K K ^ Uc* ^j
'* TB J-- *:*.. ^ ^ "E^_ ^ ^ *- *f. ^ 1-^ k i^^ *jjm W .juhj ..l ..-:..U; ^U


of WaShington,


the


Lunneborgs


found that when .oniared


native


graduates,


graduates


who


had


transferred


from


community


colleges


had


waited


longer


choose


their


major,


were


less


satisfied


with


the


institution


emphasis


on undergraduate


education,


felt


more


isolated,


per-


ceived


less


meaningful


student


-faculty


relationships,


planned


on to graduate


school


less


often,


were


more


likely


to anticipate


working


jobs


unrelated


their


career


fields,


and


were


overrepresented


social


sciences


and


underrepresented


natural


sciences.


their


long


tudinal


study,


Peng


and


Bailey


(1977)


compared


native


stu-


dents


to community


college


transfer


students


and


discovered


that


transfer


students


were


less


likely


have


been


graduated


from


high


school


academic


programs,


less


likely


have


high


self


-concepts,


had


a more


external


locus


control,


had


more


work-oriented


and


family-oriented


life


goals,


and


had


lower


scores


on academic


achievement,


ability,


and


aspiration.


Laudicina


(1974)


reported


that


community


college


transfer


students


used


the


library


and


sought


academic


and


vocational


counseling


more


often


than


native


students


at Fairleigh


Dickinson


University.


Zultowski


and


Catron


(1976),


after


completing


a study


at Wake


Forest


University,


concluded


that


"":":B E"" :: jj::Ej ~:EE E:
; ; ; : Ii
:: :


::" ":"""::::"::: :":""
E
EE ""~


aaill;s; F;;









students


had


tried


all


drugs


except


~ri~ne;


and


cigarettes


more


often


than


native


students.


More


transfer


students


regularly


used


beer,


wine,


and


liquor


as well.


was


reported


this


study


that


transfer


students


were


more


reluctant


than


native


students


the


universe


ity


counseling


center


with


drug


related


problem.


In a study


completed


Sunday


(1976),


10,000


students


who


took


the


ACT


test


the


latter


part


1973


were


sur-


veyed.


Nine


groups


nontraditional


students


were


identified


and


included


part


-time


students


, (2)


evening


students


students


from


family


with


annual


incomes


under


$7,500,


students


students,


from


non-English


chicano


speaking


homes,


students


black


older


than


students


with


low


ACT


scores


and


commuting


students


living


at home.


Tuition


was


more


often


a concern


non-


traditional


students


than


their


traditional


counterparts.


The


results


thi


survey


revealed


that


nontraditional


students


study


are


skill


more


, and


likely


they


mathematics.


Since


need


the


help


in reading,


population


stu-


dents


who


transfer


from


community


colleges


tends to


non-


traditional


(Koos,


1970) ,


would


seem


that


orientation


planners


would


want


to respond


the


concerns


expressed


study


nontraditional


students.


a S a .


students,


**


I


I


~-










students.

transfer f

percentage


Al tough minority


idm cnmshnity


minority


students


colleges

transfer


(Van

student


are


less


1


Alstyne, 1

ts usually


likely

974),

will


to

the

out-


weigh


the


percentage of


minority


students


the


native


population.


Aul


ston


(1974)


has


concluded


that


black


trans-


fer


students


may


have


more


trouble


adjusting


a new


environment


than


nonminority


transfer


students,


especially


since


most


transfer


institutions


are


predominately


white.


Godbold


(1976)


has


postulated


that


black


students


choose


community


colleges


the


most


acceptable


place


to begin


their


baccalaureate


program


because


community


colleges


offer


the


best


support


system


for


nontraditional


or disadvantaged


students.


Rawlins


(1979)


found,


interviews


with


students


over


years


old


the


University


Nebraska-Lincoln,


that


older


than


average


students


have


special


needs


that


might


need attention

munity college


during o

transfer


orientation.


students


The

much


average

higher


age

than


com-


that


native


juniors


(Koos,


1970).


The


prof


ess


ional


literature


has


recognized


that


the


special


needs


orientation


transfer


programs


students


(O'Grady,


1974;


should


Sandeen


addr


ess


& Goodale,


1976;


Worley


Conrad,


1973).


r ~n 1:'
xx, :E
X,",







33


Too
neglect


t


often


the


frequently
experiences


few


any


mlsperce ive
transfer st


easing
since
ate ex
to, bu


into
they


needs of
assumed t


enable


not


freshmen.


are


transf


hat


them


transition


college


udents need


new


older
such
Same


enter


problems.
e somewhat
attention


college


and
help
as,


have


had


should


that


a new
Given


that


freshmen


assistance


previous
probably


given


incoming


125)


Similar


the


conclusion


these


researchers,


others


have


agreed


that


community


college


transfer


students


need


orientation


program


despite


the


fact


that


they


already


have


completed


two


years


college.


Although


Startzel


(1977)


has


warned


that


orientation


transfer


students


should


consis


t of


more


than


mere


regis-


tration,


Deuel


and


Lyons


(1974)


have


reported


a registration


program


that


replaced


the


transfer


orientation


program


Frostburg


State


College


Maryland.


Thi


program


used


three


approaches


for


new


transfer


student


registration:


individual


on-campus


registration


and


advisement


students

(3) large


admitted

group o


early;


n-campus


mail-in


advisement


regis

and r


tration;


and


registration.


Both


faculty


and


students


were


most


impressed


with


the


individual


registration


and


advisement


approach.


An interesting


find-


this


study


was


that


only


the


faculty


advisors


felt


they


had


sufficient


information


adequately


advise


new- student


.the


orientation
er students.
ir previous


the


programs


collegiate
college with


their


perience,


as
and


they


the


environment.


However,
collegi-
e similar











Transfer


institutions


have


tried


a variety


approaches


meet


the


special


orientation


needs


transfer


students.


Doman


and


Canada


(1975)


have


reported,


transfer


orientation


program


Kansas


State


Univer


sity


that


utilizdd


"p~i3er


coun-


selors


who


led


.groups


students.


All


participants


received


academic


credit.


At Buffalo


State


University


a new


transfer


orientation


program


was


developed


when


was


dis-


covered


that


transfer


students


perceived


the


campus


unfriendly

academic a


(Anstett,


dvisement,


1973).

which


a program


continued


separate


as usual,


from


interested


faculty


and


staff


were


asked


write


letters


five


incom-


ing


transfer


students


introducing


themselves


the


students'


"friends.


The


faculty


and


staff


met


at least


twice


during


first


semester


with


the


transfer


students


to whom


they


had


written.


Rawlins


(1979)


found


that


older


students


indi


cated


a desire


for


a special 1


orientation


program


that


would


include


their


spouses


and


respond


their


specific


needs.


Powell


and


Rodgers


(1975)


developed


an orientation


program


women


who


;had:


been


away


from


formal


education


for


or more


years.


They


grouped


students


according


to living


locations


to facilitate


car


pooling,


provided


small


group


experiences


with


current


students


and


trained


peer


corun-l


selors


who


had


been


through


the


same


experience


--


serve


li~iii ;;::~iF:i~"Bli;~ '""":"""
:aa::E
'i:::
I"B 1::
,, B









technical


deci


sions


that


must


made


concerning


the


transfer


student


first


registration.


Since


the


student


will


the


transfer


institution


only


two


years


and


the


course es


selected


for the


first


term


will


determine Athe


student


initial


impres


sion


the


institution,


the


first


registration


can


critical


transfer


students


(Medford,


1974).


Follow-up


surveys


transfer


students


have


indicated


that


they


found


their


first


registration


a particularly


distress-


ing


aspect


the


transfer


procedure


(Lamberts,


1977;


Rawlins,


1979).


The


most


obvious


registration


problem


for


transfer


students


occurs


when


transcript


evaluations


are


not


completed


the


transfer


institution


until


after


the


student


has


registered


the


first


time


(Kuhns,


1973;


strunk,


1974).


the


already


anxiety-evoking


situation


a first


regi


stra-


tion,


transfer


students


are


forced


guess


whi


ch of


their


courses


will


trans


and


hope


they


not


duplicate


courses


which


they


will


later


receive


credit


fail


to register


essential


first


term


courses.


When


transfer


students


find


themselves


the


last


group


to register


the


coming


term,


they


often


must


regi


ster


for


their


second


or third


choice


courses


because


so many


classes


are


filled


that


point


--


added


strunk,


- -


the


1974). A

adjustment


n inadequate

pressures f


class


acing


schedule

transfer


often

students











inzqd i nto te


Tra sf : st|/ ion ^1


Once


community


college transfer


students


have


been


admitted


the


transfer


institution,


oriented,


and


regis-


tered,


they


then


must


try


to assimilate


themselves


into


their


new


educational


setting.


Similar


to entering


freshmen,


the


adjustment


process


may


difficult


for


community


college


transfer


students.


For


many


students


just


graduating


from


community


colleges,


transferring


a four-year


college


or university


will


pro-


vide


them


with


their


first


experience


living


without


their


parents


' direct


supervision,


being


responsible


for


their


financial


and


social


affairs,


and


surviving


an academi-


cally


competitive


environment.


For


other


older


or commuting


community


co llege


students,


the


transfer


will


less


traumatic.


However,


these


students


also


will


have


to adjust


new


regulations,


adapt


a new


academic


environment,


and


balance


their


family


or household


responsibilities


with


the


new


institution


s requirements.


The

to help


quality

community


and


quantity


college


transfer


student se

students


!rvices


available


certainly


could


have


an impact


on whether


the


students


succeed.


I ii :" i "" iii"";;""" I"
t""e
". F;"": ""
),E"""
IB":::,
,,,:B re,: ": I:


E;.
1


xB ,~"
i"" :: k""l'l:xl
EE ,, : E,,: ":::


,, "EE:
: : x









Availability of


Services


The


literature


related


to services


for


community


college


students


who


have


transferred


four-year


colleges


and


univer


cities


concentrates


the


areas


counseling,


housing,


financial


aid,


academic


advising,


student


activity


and


special


services


to deal


with


the


unique


problems


articulation.


In admini


string


the


Mooney


Problem


Checklist


to both


transfer


students


and


native


students


two


universities


the


New


York


state


system,


Conroe


(1976)


found


that


native


students


indicated


they


were


experiencing


more


problems


than


transfer


students.


Despite


this


finding


less


personal


problems


reported


among


the


transfer


student


population,


must


detendinied


whether


community


college


transfer


students


who


need


counseling


are


able


to have


their


needs


fulfilled.


There

students r


are


eadily


conflicting


reports


or reluctantly


seek


to whether

counseling


transfer

services.


Laudicinia


(1974) ,


as dean


students


at a state


universe


ity,


perceived


that


community


college


graduates


sought


counseling


more


often


than


native


students.


Conroe


(1976),


however,


reported


no significant


differences


between


trans


fer


and


native


students


regarding


contacts


with


staff


for


help


n~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ Fl~ aw f anI nI-'n-n-I,e.


1IYC ~t.l: *I A


..121 AU A


_1


LA *IAJIJ


t ~I 1,


11n7r\


I


1*111 1115


I.*




B~EBEI~iEB: Iji 8;;"X"X"":"E0B"1
I::: I~~~i F "EE:" I:100
X"":B" I""E:,,I' :"EE" #2"0>
IEEBE"" r


Most


new


students


have


difficulty


determining


where


help,


but


transfer


students


may


have


an amplified


problem


of- accessing


counseling


services


as they


adjust


froiri


a small


campus


to a large


transfer


institution


environment.


Most


transfer


institution


administrators


seem


assume


that


freshmen


nded


dormitory


housing


more


than


transfer


stu-


dents


and


make


priority


decisions


accordingly.


Although


some


research


has


indicated


that


students


encounter


the


same


adjustment


lack


problems


adequate


no matter


on-campus


where


housing


they

has b


live


een


(Sauber,


cited


1972) ,


as a major


problem


community


college


transfer


students


(Sandeen


Goodale,


1976;


Sistrunk,


1974).


Due

college


the


transfer


lower soc

students


ioeconomic


compared


status


to native


community

students


(Peng


Bailey,


1977),


the


former


consistently


need


greater


financial


aid.


Several


studies


have


shown


that


community


college


transfer


students


' lack


financial


resources


major


obstacle


their


academic


success


(Furniss


& Martin,


1974;


Kuhns,


1973;


Lamberts,


1977;


Peng


& Bailey,


1977;


Rawlins,

concluded


1979;

that


Willingham,

students la


1972).


Lcking


Aulston


adequate


(1974)


financial


has

support


after


transfer


tend


to drop


out


college.


While


a dearth


financial


aid


a problem


for


all


to '":"i







39


after


the


deadline


for


submitting


financial


aid


applications


has


passed


(Sandeen


Goodale,


1976).


Van


Alstyne


(1974)


has


observed


the


irony


the


situ-


action


when


students


choose


to attend


community


colleges


their


first


two


years


save


money


with


lower


tuition


and


house ing


costs,


only


to find


themselves


excluded


from


financial


aid


for


which


they


could


have


been


eligible


they


had


attended


the


four-year


college


or university


as freshmen.


Faculty


members


assigned


to advise


community


college


transfer


students


have


a great


deal


influence


as to whether


transfer


procedure


smooth


or difficult.


very


comforting


for


community


college


transfer


students


who


find


their


advisors


to be


knowledgeable,


sympathetic,


and


helpful.


the


other


hand,


transfer


students


perceive


their


faculty


advisors


uninterested


or unable


to help


them,


they


may


feel


alone


a hostile


environment.


s trunk


(1974)


found


inadequate


academic


advi


sing


to be


a major


problem


community


college


transfer


students


Florida.


Rawlins


(1979)


reported


that


older


students


desire


more


understanding


their


unique


position


as students


from


faculty


and


administration.


Kintzer


(1978),


through


inter-


viewing


transfer


students,


found


that


they


missed


the


close


relationship


with


instructors


and


the


personalized


teaching


they


experienced


the


community


college.


..


S




1E""i ;;;;"a; E;;:"""BC; ih; b: hEB
i" ,, : "
,Eil~



ii
i ""Ei~


N""


colleges

(1974) f

grams ar


.and


univorsitiM. do*
f C*
*k-1^"1^' -^
I :: I. IF."' /" :<. /


oun4that mod
.. ..^. !' *^f .. ^ ^ / .^ ao iil .^


e gared


transfe:


tow ard atve
..!.. t..J i^~B. .*. ^ l AE j:-.B.v eCZ1


ht meet their'

Sinsti tuition

student s C


needs.


activities


odmainity


Sistrunk


pro-


college


trans fer


students


often
K "


feei


alienated rrom


on-going


activi--


ties


programs


that


have


tI-ade


no provisions


for


their


arrival


on campus.


Some


attempts


have


been


made,


however,


program


student


University


activities


nontraditional


California-Irvine


students.


where


the


the


students


commute,


the


activities


program


has


been


oriented


toward


its


unique


advisors

for comm


population


work


uting


(Gentry,


pairs


students


1975).


sponsor

their r


Undergraduate


programs


evidence


student


and activities

areas. Career


planning,


test


taking


hints,


and


study


skills


programs


are


offered


the


homes


the


advisors.


Community


recreational


facilities


are


utilized


and


dinners,


tours,


and


faculty-study


dialogue


programs


are


available e


the


students.


While


adjusting


the


new


transfer


institution


environ-


ment,


many


community


college


students


feel


the


need


for


administrator


specifically


appointed


to help


solve


their


problems,


There


seem


to be


some


articulation


problems


that


require


individualized


attention.


Several


studies


have


indi-


cated


a need


an articulation


officer


available


'*"" ;;;p~"*:B"EEX:E""~""X:EeE"""""""":P""""" r' """"""""' '" ""'::' J"':::'P r':":;BP;P E:
r: "j: IEX *B,,BE""
,,,
I:: aE::
8x,,


P"E,""
"::EE:E"


:**









Fahrer


and


Michelich


(1974)


have


argued


that


an articu-


lation


officer


should


available


transfer


students


on an


individual


basi


and


a definitive


and


publicized


appeals


pro-


cedure


'should


available


transfer


students


who


feel


they


have


been


aggrieved


an institutional


procedure


policy.


Personal


Adjustment


There


tendency


for


the


first


term


grades


trans-


fer


students


to drop


below


their


cumulative


community


col


lege


averages


(Knoell


& Medsker,


1965).


Thi


phenomenon


sometimes


referred


"transfer


shock"


(Hill


, 1965b;


Nolan


Hall,


1978).


A number


factor


might


contribute


this


drop


in grade


point


average,


but


certainly


adjustment


a new


academic


and


social


environment


must


have


an impact


academic


success


firs


term


community


college


transfer


students.


After


a study


Virginia


community


college


transfer


students,


Nolan


and


Hall


concluded,


"A drop


GPA


[grade


point


average]


may


often


an indication


that


something


dramatically


affecting


one


life


style


and


not


just


one


s study


habits"


547).


In a study


Iowa


reverse


transfer


students


students


whn


hbad


tra n sfer-red


tho a nmmlrrni +v


nol .ape


frnm


fn lr--vsR r










environment


they


found


the


community


college.


Reverse


transfer


students


felt


that


the


community


colleges


more


time


was


given


to studett


discussion


classes,


instructors


communicated


their


expectations


students


more


effectively,


feedback


was


better


from


instructors,


and,


generally,


instructors


took


a more


active


interest


students


' progress.


A study


Anstett


(1973)


has


indicated


that


community


col


lege


students


who


have


transferred


miss


the


friendly


atmos-


phere


they


left


behind


the


community


college.


program


that


provided


community


college


faculty


and


staff


the


opportunity


to meet


with


their


students


who


had


transferred


to a large


state


university


demonstrated


the


community


college


personnel


the


stress


associated


with


the


academic

Lynch, &


and


social


Bargar,


adjustments


1969).


These


students

face-to-fa


experienced

ce meetings


(Clarke,

with


transfer


students


and


staff


from


their


former


community


colleges


seemed


to heighten


the


awareness


the


personal


difficulty


the


transfer


procedure.


Closely


related


the


community


college


transfer


students


' ability


to adjust


successfully


the


new


environ-


ment


the


transfer


institution


s interest


retaining


these


students


once


they


have


enrolled.


While


a variety


factors


may


influence


transfer




4: 3 !M !M : j

-- s 43


exper ience


as a result


the


mechanics


transferring


(Van


Alstyne,


1974).


Rich.


(1979)


has


terdm


a myth


that


community


college


transfer


students
Sfareifs


will


have


serious


adjust-


ment


problems


despite


any


help


the


transfer


institution


tries


to give


these


students.


negative


transfer


experience


would


seem


to amplify


any


academic


social


deficiencies


community


college


transfer


student s


might


bring with


them


the


might


transfer


recognize


institution.


problems


An effective


facing


retention


transfer students


program


and


attempt


to help


students


successfully


solve


them


through


improvement


the


articulation


procedure.


Because


their


total


focus


on community


college


transfer


students,


some


educators


suggest


that


upper


divi


sion


universe


should


that


studied


role


only


students


for


the


other


junior


transfer


level


institu-


tions


(Higbee,


1973;


Kintzer,


1979a).


Florida,


Michigan,


Texas,


Illinois


, New


York,


California,


Minnesota,


and


Penn-


sylvania


have


upper


divi


sion


universities


that


could


studied


(Thompson,


1978)


The


success


depend


upon


the


community


college


ability


transfer


adjust


student


personally


and


academically


the


transfer


institution.


admit


model


will


student




r'.:" 'II A:::NNI n f rI"::er' n n"r n iNarABiII A"I A A XjB E HA AA*fflA ANI A A I A H AIIN flA IK A A ** """""** I** ** **! ** ** *<**< * *


4IIAThR


RESEARCH


METHODOLOGY


Thi


was


a descriptive


study


perceptions


articula-


tion


problems


that


exist


the


procedure


whereby


community


college


graduates


transfer


from


Virginia


public


community


colleges


ties.

degrees


The


design


to Virginia


Virginia

,ed for t


public


public


transfer,


four-year


community


the


colleges


universe


offe

Arts


two


(A.A.)


and


Associate


Science


(A.S.),


degrees


The


A.A.


degree


programs


available


to Virginia


community


college


students


include


Art


Education,


Art


History,


Fine


Arts


, Liberal


Arts,


Music,


Photography,


and


Theatre


Arts.


Students


may


earn


A.S.


degrees


the


following


majors


Business


Admini


station,


Education,


Engineering,


General


Studi


, and


Science ,


Students


graduated


Virginia


from


public


community


generally


colleges


considered


also


may


nontransfer


are


awarded


either


the


Associate


Applied


Science


(A.A.S.)


degree


or a certificate


these


programs.


The


participants


this


study


indicated


their


percep-


tions


whether


certain


articulation


problems


exist


and


the


and


colleges


Associate


prodgfms


and









Thi


chapter


will


present


the


research


questions


the


study.


A description


the


populations


studied


and


the


sampling


procedure e


also


will


reviewed.


An explanation


will


be given


procedures


*employed


collecting


and


analyzing


& C)


the


and


data.


the


The


Survey


Articulation

Policies Af


Survey


fecting


(Appendices

Community


College


Transfer


Students


(Appendix


used


to collect


the


data


this


study


will


described.


The


results


pilot


study


that


was


completed


to establish


the


reliability


the


Articulation


Survey


and


to provide


trial


run


the


study


will


presented


as well.


Research


Questions


The


res


earch


questions


thi


study


were


What


effect,


any,


the


following


factors


have

are


the


problems


groups


--- corn


perceptions


in Virginia:

munity college


whether ar

(a) member

graduates


ticulation

ship in one


, community


situations


three


college


faculty


staff,


and


four-year


college


or university


faculty


and


staff;


gender;


race;


and


self-


reported


degree


knowledge


concerning


articulation


problems


Virginia?


In the


case c


Virginia


public


community


college


*L


p




"":x~i"i"Pi"iEia'rlliiii:e~l3~~~~EE~i:~
~k, :jjjjlj:,::E:"I~;Ei:E~]i~ili~::E"::" ":"
'"'C~~";;I
"" 1"8~E"EE ,~~i
"i:::l: k: I::
,E:,,," i"
,,:1"": E:x #
BE '~~:;I;""""; : .. il ~.s;
ii'
:E
I: E"" i ""~ i~.~E~i
'B ,r


4,6~


problems


Virginia:


(a)


type


degree


earned;


cur-


riculah


completed;


a)


common ity


college


from


which


student


was


graduated;


age;


whether


the


graduate


attended


four-year


college


or university


before


being


graduated


from


a community


college;


college


or university


presently


attending;


n umber


admissions


rejections


from


transfer


institutions;


and


intended


baccalaureate


major?


Do the


situations


following


as problems


seven


Virginia


groups


and,


perceive


they


articulation


what


degr


ee of

Virgin


public


seriousnes

ia public


community


they


community


college


perceive

college


admissions


these


problems:


counselors;


coordinators;


Virginia

Virginia


public


have


community


primary


college


academic


responsibility


division


A.A.


or A.S.


chairpersons


degree


who


programs;


Virginia


public


community


college


faculty


members


who


work


closely


with


students


planning


transfer;


Virginia


public


four-year


college


or university


admissions


staff


pro-


fessionals;


Virginia


public


four-year


college


or univer-


sity


department


chairpersons


departments


into


which


community


college


graduates


are


accepted


juniors;


and


Virginia


public


four-year


college


or university


faculty


members


who


advise


community


college


graduates


who have


transferred?


What


effect,


any,


the


following


factors


'""; I: liii~:": E;6EII"": Ei;
~BE""a
iii,, ?;
1""8~""" ,, I""ExEE
)c~~,:E~k:"
iE~i E i i ,

4 :E,





47


What


policies


actually


in Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


universities


that adversely


affect


tran


sfer


students


who


have


been


graduated


from


Virginia


public


community


colleges?


the


various


groups


surveyed


perceive


artic-.


ulation


problems


as existing


when


reported


as existing


transfer


institutions


Virginia?


Populations


an effort


to gather


differing


viewpoint


the


same


issue,


eight


groups


were


asked


indicate


their


percep-


tions


articulation


problems


Virginia:


a random


sample


A.A.


and


A.S.


degree


graduates


from


each


of the


Virginia


public


community


colleges


who


were


graduated


during


the


1978


-1979


academic


year;


Virginia

Virginia


public

public


community

community


college

college


counselors;

coordinators


admi


ssions


and


records;


Virginia


public


community


college


divi


sion


chairpersons


divi


sions


having


primary


responsibility


for


AC~A.


and


A.S.


degree


programs;


Selected


Virginia


public


community


college


faculty


who


work


closely


with


students


planning


transfer;


Virainia


onh i r


four-vea


r coleloas


and


un i vrn


.- t.V




AA AAA AAA AA A AAAA AAlA
,Et"


. selected


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


univer-


sity


community


col leg


chairpersons

e transfer s


depa


students


rtments that

as juniors;


accept

and


selected


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


nniver-


sity


faculty


who


advise


students


who


have


transferred


from


Virginia


public


community


colleges.


To gather


information


concerning


policies


affecting


Virginia


community


college


transfer


students,


chief


student


affairs


adminiStrators


at 14


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


univer s cities


were


asked


to complete


the


Survey


Policies


(Appendix


official


Affecting


publications


College


concerning


the


Transfer


these


policies


Students


found


four-year


colleges


and


universities


also


were


reviewed.


Public


higher


education


Virginia


consists


com-


munity


colleges,


one


two-year


branch


a univer


sity,


and


four-year


colleges


and


universities.


the


public


four-


year

nity


colleges

college


requires


and


transfer

graduates


students.

to complete


SVirginia

Virginia

e a full


accept


Military

four-year


commu-


Institute

program


at that


institution.


The


only


other


state-supported


tuition


higher


education


Virginia


Richard


Bland


College,


two-year


branch


the


College


William


and


department


Community


Statements


Virginia


public


universities










All


the


public


community


colleges


(Table


and


the


public


four-year


colleges


and


universe


ities


that


accept


community


college


transfer


students


(Table


were


included


this


study.


Sampl ing


Procedure


Surveys


were


sent


through


the


mail


to a random


sample


from


each


the


community


colleges


the


A.A.


and


A.S.


degree


June, 1

from th

lists,

leges w

number s


dents


graduates


who


979.


e


Virginia


a random


'ere


(Sn


was


sample


selected


edecor and

graduated


were


graduated


the spec

public cc

e from ea

y degree

Cochran,


from


:ified

ummunit


lch


type


between


graduates


colle


the


utilizing


1967).


Virginia


July,


were


1978,


ges. From

community


table


192


A total


public


community


and


obtained


these


col


random


stu-


colleges


with


A.A.


degrees


and


1,612


were


graduated


with


A.S


. degrees


between


July,


1978,


and


June,


1979


. Of


these


total


, 41


A.A.


graduates


and


A.S.


graduates


were


ected


randomly


and


sent


the


Articulation


Survey.


The


number


of A.A.


and


A.S


degree


graduates


included


the


random


sample


shown


Tabi


iill 4 '3 f~~~~~~I -'. n a 1n'-A- n4 na .Ar


nn: A~iS


jj j


*r;lm:


III nF


Ltr A


n~~


~Allh~~J FI


I & I


A


I U


5


1





I .I"~ '" ic II ..IM
xv
: ::E"E


TABLE


VIRGINIA. PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES
AND THEIR SEPARATE CAMPUSES


Ridge


Central 1
Dabney
Danvill
Eastern
Germann
John Ty


Community


College


Virginia Community C
S. Lancaster Communit
e Community College
Shore Community Coll
a Community College
ler Community College


college
y College


ege


J.



Lor
Mou
New


Sergeant Reynolds Co
Downtown Campus
Parham Road Campus
Western Campus
d Fairfax Community
ntain Empire Communi
River Community Col


immunity


College


College
ty College
lege


Northern


Virginia


Community


College


Alexandr
Annandal
Loudoun
Manassas
Woodbrid
Patrick Henry
Paul D. Camp
Piedmont Virg
Rappahannock


Nort
Sout
Souths ide
Chri
John
Southwest
Thomas Ne
Tidewater
Ches
Port


ia Campus
e Campus
Campus
Campus
ge Campus
Community Col
Community Coll
inia Community
Community Coll


1
e

e


h Campus
h Campus
Virginia Community
stiana Campus
H. Daniel Campus
Virginia Community
Ison Community Coll
Community College
apeake Campus
south Campus


ege
ge
College
ge


College


College
ege


Virginia Beach Campus
Virginia Highlands Community College
Vi m ini F Q Wolaarn rf'nPmmn i r1rCl 1 ww


Blue













TABLE


VIRGINIA


PUBLIC


THAT


FOUR


-YEAR


ACCEPT


COLLEGES


TRANSFER


AND


UN3VERSIT2BES


STUDENTS


FROM


VIRGINIA


PUBLIC


COMMUNITY


COLLEGES


Chri


stopher


Clinch
George
James


Vail


Mason
Madison


Newport


College


College
University


Universe


ity


Longwood


College


Mary


Washington


College


Norfolk


State


Un iver


sity


Old


Dominion


Radford
Universi
Virginia
Virginia
Virginia


Unive


University
rsity
Virginia


Commonwealth
Polytechnic


State


Univers


Institute


and


State


University


University


The


College


William


and


Mary


BX"X


.














TABLE


A.A.


AND


A.S.


DEGREE


GRADUATES


FROM VIRGINIA


PUBLIC


COMMUNITY


COLLEGES


DURING


1978


-1979


Number
during


Graduates


1978


-1979


Number


Surveyed


Community


College


A.A.


A.S.


A.A.


A.S.


Ridge


Central
Dabney


Danville
Eastern
Germanna


J. S
John
Lord


Virginia
. Lancaster


Shore


argeant
Tyler
Fairfax


Mountain


New


Reynolds


Empire


River


Northern


Patrick


Paul


Piedmont


Virginia


Henry
Camp
Virginia


Rappahannock


Southside
Southwest
Thomas Ne
Tidewater


Virginia
Virginia


Virginia
Virginia
Ison


Highlands
Western


Wytheville


Total


1,612


Blue


rr:: rr r'; ; ; ; I ,,,, ~XEX;I: "r;:


B ,E"
i, 1 9~:







53


asked


to complete


the


Articulation


Survey


Surveys


also


were


sent


all


the


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


divi


university


sion


admi


ssions


chairpersons


staff


divi


officers


slons


with


There


primary


were


response


ability


community


A.A.


or A.S.


colleges.


degree


All


programs


these


divi


Virginia


sion


public


chairpersons


were


asked


to participate


thi


study


. There


were


department


chairpersons


departments


that


accept


community


college


colleges


graduates


and


juniors


universe


Virginia


these


public


four-year


department


chair-


persons,

a random


were


sample


sent

from


the

each


Articulation


the


Survey,


institution


representing

s. Each


community


college


divi


sion


chairperson


and


transfer


institu-


tion


department


chairperson


participating


the


study


was


asked


to distribute


Articulation


Survey


to a faculty


member


the


divi


sion


or department


who


worked


closely


with


transfer


students.


The


total


number


participants


at each


institution


depicted


Tabl


and


All


trans


Polici


chi


ef student


institutions


Affecting


were


Community


affair


asked


admini


strators


to complete


College


Transfer


the


the


Survey


Students


which


requested


information


about


the


stitution


s policies


regarding


transfer


students.


The


study


included


total


participants.




... ..IM ^ .. ... ....

~~~ ;i 54";;" ;;ElE;rx;;;


TABLE


MVIRGINIA


PUBLIC


COMMUNITY


COLLEGE


FACULTY


AND


STAFF


INCLUDED


IN STUDY


CoordinaS-


Community


College


Coun-
selors


taorstdf


Admissions


Division
Chair-
persons


I,r


Tot~al


FacUlty


Surveyed


Ridge


Central
Dabney


Danville
Eastern
Germanna


J.Sargeant


John
Lord


Virginia
.Lancaster


Shore


Reynolds


Tyler
Fairfax


Mountain


New


Empire


River


Northern


Paul


Patrick
Piedmont


Virginia
Camp
Henry
Virginia


Rappahannock


Southside
Southwest


Thomas


Virginia
Virginia


Nelson


Tidewater


Virginia
Virginia


Highlands
Western


Wytheville


Total


Blue







55


TABLE


VIRGINIA


PUBLIC


FACULTY


FOUR


AND


-YEAR


STAFF


COLLEGE


INCLUDED


AND


UNIVERSITY


IN STUDY


College


Four-Year


Admiss


or University


ions


Staff


Dept.
Chair-
persons


Total


Faculty


Surveyed


Chri


stopher


Newport


Clinch
George
James


Valley
Mason
Madison


Longwood


Mary


Washington


Norfolk


Old


State


Dominion


Radford


Univer


sity


Virginia
Virginia


Virginia


Commonwealth
Polytechnic


Institute


Virginia
College
Mary


and


State


State


"William


and


Total










Data


Collection


Before


a researcher


allowed


collect


data


any


the


Virginia


public


community


colleges,


the


research


pro-


ject


must


first


receive


approval


from


the


Virginia


Community


College


System


Re search


and


Information


Committee


composed


community


college


presidents.


A form


supplied


the


Virginia


Community


College


System


Office


Institutional


Studies


and


Reports


was


completed


detailing


the


scope


and


purpose e


this


study.


After


the


Research


Committee


approved


the


tudy,


each


Virginia


public


community


college


president


had


to be


asked


individually


to participate.


Letters


soliciting


participation


the


study


were


sent


each


pre


sident


(Appendix


after


a staff


member


from


each


college


had


been


identified


who


was


interested


the


research


project.


The


staff


members


agreed


to distribute


and


collect


the


Articulation


Survey.


Letters


endorsing


this


study


from


the


Virginia


Secretary


Education


(Appendix


and


College


the


Interim


Chancellor


(Appendix


were


the

sent


Virginia


the


Community

community


college


presidents


when


their


participation


this


study


was


requested.


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


university


pres-


idents


also


were


sent


individual


letters


requesting


their


l"-H i:i C /lli ':~ ~ ~ :i ";" i**l ******,.

System


:E,









colleges


and


universities


was


identified


who


was


interested


the


research


proj ect.


The


staff


members


agreed


distribute


and


collect


the


Articulation


Survey.


The


random


sample


community


college


graduates


was


sent


the


Articulation


Survey


the


mail.


Addresses


those


students


selected


from


the


total


population


were


obtained


from


Virginia


public


community


colleges.


cover


letter


from


researcher


(Appendix


was


included


that


urged


the


students


to complete


and


return


the


surveys


stamped,


addressed


envelopes


that


were


provided.


Since


was


anticipated


that


most


the


graduates


would


have


eft


the


addresses


where


they


were


living


when


they


were


gradu-


ated


a year


Immediate


ely,


ago,


was


the no

typed


station,


the


Necessary,


envelopes.


Two


Please

weeks


Forward

after


the


Articulation


Survey


had


been


mailed,


follow-up


letter


(Appendix


and


a second


survey,


with


another


stamped,


addressed


envelope,


was


sent


students


who


had


not


returned


the


survey.


One


staff


member


from


each


the


community


colleges


and


transfer


ins


titutions


studied


was


asked


to di


tribute


a cover


letter


(Appendix


and


an Articulation


Survey


(Appendices


to each


subject


that


institution.


These


staff


members


then


collected


and


returned


the


com-


pleted


survey


the


res


earcher.


A follow-up


letter










The

Transfer


Survey <


Students


Policies


(Appendix


Affecting


and


Community


a letter


College


(Appendix


were


sent


directly


to chief


student


affairs


administrators


at Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and universities,


second


survey


and


a follow-up


letter


(Appendix


were


sent


those


who


did


not


respond


the


first


mailing.


Data


Analys


When


analyzed,


the


responses


the


i temsrn


the


Artic-


ulation


Survey


answered


the


first


three


research


questions.


These


estions


asked


articulation


problems


were


per-


ceived by the r

the respondents


respondents

affected


and

their


certain


perceptions


characteristics


articulation


problems.


To determine


whether


a given


factor


such


as community


college


where


employed


or gender)


caused


subjects


completing


the


Articulation


Survey


indicate


differing


perceptions


to whether


articulation


problems


existed


Virginia,


the


subjects


variance.


responses


the


were


analyst


tested


yie


with


Aided


a one-way


an F-ratio


analy


significant


the


level,


differences


were


considered


significant.


The


responses


to individual


items


the


Articulation


Survey


IEEE"


.... I


"ii"X
Ik,:::"
kC:
: i







59


Survey


for


all


subjects


based


on the


factors


membership


the


three


groups


studied,


gender,


race,


and


self- reported


degree


knowledge


concerning


articulation


procedures


Virginia.


one-way


analysis


variance


was


used


test


differ-


ences


community


college


and


transfer


institution


respond-


ents


the


existence


articulation


problems


Virginia


based


the


following


factors


position,


institution


where


employed,


degree


level,


and


whether


at least


one


undergradu-


ate


year


was


completed


at a community


college.


For


student


subjects,


a one-way


analysis


variance


was


used


test


differences


respondents


to perceptions


of articulation


problems


Virginia


based


the


following


factors


type


degree


earned,


curriculum


completed,


commu-


nity


college


from


which


student


was


graduated,


age,


whether


the


graduate


attended


a four-year


college


or university


before


being


graduated


from


a community


college,


college


univer


sity


presently


attending,


number


admi


ssions


rejec-


tions


from


transfer


institutions,


and


intended


baccalaureate


major.


The


responses


the


items


the


Articulation


Survey


were


further


analyzed


according


these


three


groups


respondents


community


college


graduates,


community


collecre


faculty


and


staff


members.


and


' -. .


four-year


college




*1 Ui:?" s : E;::~:": :" "" """ R """"g""""Ei~


differently.


difference


the


level


was


considered


significant.


The


Survey


Policies


Affecting


Community


College


Transfer


Students


allowed


four-year


colleges


and


univer-


siti


to report


their


policies.


The


items


from


the


Articulation


Survey


chosen


for


the


Survey


Polici


Affecting


which


Community


an objective


College


evaluation


Students


could


were


made


problems


to whether


they


exi


sted.


The


other


items


the


Articulation


Sur-


vey


were


more


attitudinal


nature


impossible


measure


objectively.


Instruments


The

developed


Articulation


Survey


researcher


(Appendi


ces


measure


the


& C)


subjects


was


percep-


tions


articulation


problems


experienced


Virginia


public


community

four-year


college

colleges


graduates

and univ


who


ersit


transfer

ies. The


to Virginia


survey


public


consists


a general


question


and


possible


specific


articulation


situations


identified


the


professional


literature


and


through


discussions


with


national


experts


involved


the









Completed


Community


College


Graduates


(Appendix


Part


(Appendices


A & B)


on each


the


forms


requests


demographic


data


from


the


subjects.


Part


(Appendix


identical


on each


the


two


forms


and


asks


the


subjects


indicate


situation


whether


exi


sts


they


perceive


Virginia


that


a particular


and,


the


articulation


degree


perceived


as a problem.


The

Transfer


Survey


Students


Policies

(Appendix


Affecting


was


Community


developed


College

the


researcher


to gather


information


concerning


actual


policies


affecting

Virginia


common


public


ity college

four-year c


transfer


colleges


students


and


that


university


exi


Items


the


Survey


Polici


Affecting


Community


College


Transfer


Students


are


restatements


items


number


, 17,


, 11,


and


from


Articulation


Survey.


These


items


were


chosen


from


Articulation


Survey


because


they


involve


situations


whose


existence


or nonexistence


Virginia


could


be determined


an objective


manner.


To establish


the


content


validity


the


struments


this


study,


they


were


sent


to a panel


four


individual


who


are


familiar


with


articulation


problems


general


and


spec


ifically


problems


that


exist


Virginia.


The


panel


included


a Virginia


public


community


college


president


who


61




:X": BaL1B""
Th I~E:I" )yr~""~ ~~~;::i:i""X"i;s


2 : *
** *


public


universe ity
"' **

academic


dean


who


serves


on
03


inter-


institutional


articulation


committee,


a Virginia


public


community


college


Dean


for


Student


Services


who


serves


the


Admission


Virginia

in Higher


State


and


Articulation


Council


Education


from


on Higher


the


Advisory


Committee


Education,


University


and a pro

California


the


fessor


I405


Angeles


who


the


nationally


recognized


authority


on artic-


ulation.


This


panel


experts


was


asked


answer


the


following


questions


concerning


the


Articulation


Survey:


Does


the


Articulation


Survey


seem


cover


adequately


the


problems


that


Virginia


community


college


graduates


might


face


when


transferring?


Are


the


items


worded


clearly


the


Articulation


Survey?


you


recommend


additional


items


the


Articulation


Survey?


you


have


any


additional


comments


or suggestions?


The


following


questions


were


asked


concerning


the


Survey


Policies


Affecting


Community


College


Transfer


Students:


Are


the


questions


stated


clearly


the


Survey


Policies


Affecting


Community


College


Transfer


Students ?


you


concerning


have

the


any a

Survey


additional


Policies


comments


Affect


or suggestions

ing Community


College


Transfer


Students?


The


responses


this


panel


experts


were


utilized


a revi


sLon


the


two


instruments.


:". ... i ii ~X









insure


the


reliability


the


Articulation


Survey,


the


pilot


study


described


below


was


completed.


Perceptions


articulation


problems


Virginia


were


collected


twice


with


lation


a one-week


Survey,


interval


correlated


items


positively


on the


the


Articu-


level


significance,


establishing


the


reliability


the


Articula-


tion


Survey.


Pilot


Study


A pilot


study


utili


zing


the


Articulation


Survey


was


conducted


for


a number


reasons.


While


the


instrument


had


been


validated


a panel


experts,


the


reliability


the


items


survey


needed


to be


established.


Therefore,


test-retest


exerci


was


conducted


and


the


two


sets


responses


each


item


were


correlated


to establish


the


reliability


the


Articulation


Survey


. A


second


reason


for


the


pilot


study


was


that


an administration


the


instrument


a group


subjects


would


allow


feedback


to be


gathered


the


mechanic


administering


the


survey


before


the


actual


research


project


was


undertaken.


Finally,


the


pilot


study


allowed


an analysis


the


data


to be


performed


test


the


stati


stical


methods


selected


for


the


actual


study.


Form


A of the


Articulation


Survey


was


administered


to


;p"i


the










These


faculty


members


did


not


participate


the


actual


study.


They


generally


did, however,


prepares


teach


community


college


an academic

e graduates


divis ion


for


that


transfer


to four-year


colleges


and


universe


cities.


Nine


the


faculty


members

week in


completed


terval


the


between


Articulation


admini


Survey


stations.


twice


Four


with


faculty


a one-

members


responded


the


survey


only


once.


The


responses


the


nine


subjects


who


completed


the


instrument


twice


were


corre-


lated


to establish


the


reliability


the


Articulation


Survey.


The


firs


surveys


completed


the


13 faculty


members


were


utilized


trial


run


data


analysis.


The


two


separate


responses


the


items


the


Articula-


tion


Survey


were


correlated


using


the


Pearson


product


moment


correlation.


The


response


choices


the


survey


comprise


continuum


problem


severity.


When


both


variabi


are


con-


tinuous,


Isaac


and


Michael


(1971)


suggest


that


the


product


moment


correlation


utili


zed


for


most


stable


results.


Also,


according


Isaac


and


Michael,


value


.6666


indicates


a significant


correlation


the


level


sig-


nificance.


Fox


(1969)


say


that


when


attitudes


are


surveyed,


responses


will


somewhat


flexible


and


changeable.


therefore


suggests


that


correlations


the


.7000


range


would


acceptable


establishing


the


reliability


if;xr:


""iE


f


-is









The


Pearson


product


moment


correlation


coefficients


each


the


items


the


Articulation


Survey


are


pres


ented


Table


The


reliability


of the


instrument


established


since


only


three


the


items


yielded


values


of 1


ess


than


.7000.


Responses


to 15 items


correlated


above


.9000,


an additional


items


had


values


between


.8000


.9000.


A careful


check


the


content


and


wording


three


items


that


fell


elow


.7000


did


not


provide


explanation


the


correlations


The


items


were


felt


be appropriate


and


were


retained


the


survey.


significant


change


was


made


to the


Articulation


Survey


as a result


the subj


ects


' reactions


instrument when


was


admini


stered


during


the


pilot


study.


Several


faculty


members


sugge


sted


that


a seventh


choice


added


to the six


response


choices


that


were


available


during


the


pilot


study


on Part


II of


the


survey


They


expressed


a need


to indicate


they


were


not


familiar


with


some


artic


ulation


situations


Pursuant


suggestion,


a seventh


"not


familiar


response


choi


was


added.


scoring


respon


ses


after


the


instrument


was


admini


stered


during


actual


study,


response


"not


familiar


to me"


was


scored


sub-


ject


did


not


indicate


a response.


Although


only


faculty


member


responses


to the Artic-


ulation


Survey


were


coll


ected,


the


pilot


study


provided


to me"












FROM TWO ADMINISTRATIONS OF THE ARTICULATION SURLgY


I tae CmaLbernO Coefficient

1. .8126*
2. .8744*
3 .8651*
4 .8655*
5 .8387*
6 .8596*
7 .7806*
8 .9413*
9 .9643*
10 .7829*
11 .8339*
12 .8686*
13 .8617*
14 .7695*
15 .9646*
16 .9006*
17- .9499*
18 .9037*
19. .6546
20 .7766*
21 .8947*
22- .8260*
23. .7232*
24 .7682*
25 .9233*
26 .8827*
27 .6815
28 .9398*
29 .7171*
30 .8062*
31 .7092*
32. .7413*
33 .9055*
34 .6511
35 .9558*
36. .9400*
37. .9524*











CHAPTER

RESULTS


The


data


were


analyzed


determine:


whether


all


respondents


perceived


articulation


problems


differently


based


on four


separate


characteristics ?


whether


1978-


1979


graduate


respondents


from


Virginia


public


community


colleges


perceived


articulation


problems


differently


based


on eight


separate


characters


tics?


whether


faculty


and


staff


respondents


from


Virginia


public


community


college


four


-year


colleges


and


universe


perceived


articulation


problems


differently


based


on four


separate


character


stics


and


how


respondents


' perceptions


articulation


problems


Virginia


compared


to articulation


situations


reported


chief


student


affairs


administrators


Virginia


public


four-


year


colleges


and


universities?


The


computer


facility


the


Alexandria


Campus


Northern


Virginia


Community


College


were


utili


employing


the


Statistical


Package


the


Social


Sciences


(SPSS)


sub-


programs


developed


et al.


(1975).


The


results


the


analysis


are


described


below


both


narrative


and


tabular


form.




0""";:3l:i~~iiiE""~Eii":B
0 4 0ii
0; ;I"' "'':;3:::"F" "" ;l"::li;:I;*"
:ii ," EX i ""~: l""0d
""; D ,r~i"~ F";iI:,~i, ;i ~, P ;i0
0B 0
~""i.. i ;~ias .X;"" o >;r
+v~xiiB~i,,0
0, V 0
683


Response


Rate


subj ects


sent


the


Articulation


Survey,


(73.2%)


returned


usable


data.


The


first


request


complete


the


surveys


yielded


.535


(55.2%),


and


a reminder


sent


two


weeks


later


produced


more


responses.


The


1978-1979


graduates


of Virginia


public


community


colleges


returned


(63.9%)


the


eighty-eight

community co


faculty


lieges


and


were


(Table


staff

asked


Three


members at

to complete


hundred


Virginia


Articulat


and


public

ion Sur-


veys


and


(86.3%)


responded


(Table


the


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


university


faculty


and


staff


asked


to participate,


(65.2%)


returned


completed


surveys


(Table


Thirteen


the


chief


student


affairs


administrators


Virginia


public


four-year


colleges


and


Survey


Police


provided in

s Affecting


formation

Community


requested

College


the


Transfer


Students.


Demographic


Data


The


demographics


Table


lists


of subjects


all


are


presented


according


Tables


to member-


ship


three


groups


studied


(community


college


gradu-


surveys


universities


respondents












TABLE


RESPONSE


RATE


OF COMMUNITY


COLLEGE


GRADUATES


Number


Community


College


Surveyed


Number
Respon


ses


Response
Rate


Blue


Ridge


Central
Dabney


Virginia
. Lancas


ter


Danville
Eastern
Germanna


Shore


J..Sargeant
John Tyler
Lord Fairf


Mountain


Reynolds


ax


Empire


New


River


Northern
Patrick


Paul


Piedmont


Virginia
Henry
Camp
Virginia


Rappahannock


Southside
Southwest


Thomas


75.0


Virginia
Virginia


Nelson


Tidewater


Virginia
Virginia


Highlands
Western


Wythevi le


TOTAL


75.0





I" 9::":;i:: '""iaIE :'B~ii~l"i iiB .~EEi"": '""" i
: Sf ': : !. !M : .
I~c '" .'si ;" ** ** .M-. ji
.~~fE ..~:E "E i:
: ~I"" *I:""EIE~ -. ..: 3!i ^ .:
8 "K : K*


TABLE


RESPONSE


RATE


FACULTY AND


STAFF


AT COMMUNITY


COLLEGES


Number


College


Surveyed


Number


Responses


Response
Rate


Ridge


Central
Dabney


Danville
Eastern
Germanna


J.,Sargeant


John
Lord


Mountain
New Rive
Northern
Patrick


Paul


Piedmont


Rappahannock
Southside Virginia
Southwest Virginia


Thomas


78.6%
86.7
70.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
74.1
90.9
70.0
90.9
100.0
87.4
88.9
100.0
100.0
88.9
70.0
86.7
94.7


Tidewater


79.5


Virginia
Virginia


Highlands
Western


Wytheville


TOTAL


86.3%


Community


Blue


Virginia
.Lancaster


Shore


Reynolds


Tyler
Fairfax


Empire
r


Virginia
Henry
Camp
Virginia


Nelson


100.0
75.0
100.0












TABLE


RESPONSE


RATE


FACULTY


AND


STAFF


AT FOUR-


YEAR


COLLEGES


AND


UNIVERSITIES.


Number


Four-Year


College


or Universe


Surveyed


Number


Responses


Response
Rate


Chris
Clinc


George
James


topher
h Vail


Mason


Madi


Longwood


Mary


Newport
ey Colle


Univer


Univer


son


Coll


Washingt


Norfolk


Old


State


Dominion


Radford


Universe


College
ge
sity


sity


68.8
36.4


ege
on College
University
University


ity


University


Virginia


Virginia
Virginia
and
Virginia


The


Commonwealth
Polytechnic


State
State


College


Univer
Univer


William


University
Institute


sity
sity


and


92.3


Mary


TOTAL




:" 1: : ::
...,,,,, "~
E:E ":
i" ::
:: E, E" ::
I


TABLE


DEMOGRAPH IC


DATA


FOR ALL


RESPONDENTS


(N=709)


Variable


Number


Percentage


Group


Membership:


Graduates
Community
Four-Year


Faculty


College
College


and


Faculty


and


Staff


and


32.4
47.2


Staff


University


20.3


Gender:


Male


Female


response


59.7
39.9
0.4


Race:


Black
White


8.5
89.:8


Asian or
Hispanic
American


Pacific


Islander


Indian/Alaskan


Native


Other


response









according


type


degree


earned,


curriculum


completed,


community


college


from


which


student


was


graduated,


gender,


age,


race, whether the


graduate


attended


a four-year


college


or universe


ity


before


being


graduated


from


a community


college,


admit


college


ssions


or universe


rejections


ity


from


presently

transfer i


attending,


institutions,


number

and


intended


baccalaureate


ma3or.


Table


lists


college


and


univer


sity


faculty


and


staff


respondents


according


position,

community


institution


college,


where


years


employed,


employed


years


emplo


at a four-year


yed at

college


a

or


univer


sity,


degree


level,


gender,


race,


and


whether


least


one


undergraduate


year


was


completed


at a community


college.


Analysis


the


Results


Fir


a general


overview


the


subjects


' responses


the


Articulation


characters


tics


Survey


will


pre


which


the


sented.


subj ects


Then


are


grouped


a summary


the


responses


the


Survey


of Policies


Affecting


Community


College


items


Transfer


the


Students


Articulation


will


Survey


given.


will


Finally,

analyzed


the


individ-


; i i ;; ;:" ":I" ii; ": "E




,"I N"

lila uN "N; IN :I .rA.A.IAA.A..I.... *11


TABLE


DEMOGRAPHIC


DATA


FOR


COMMUNITY


COLLEGE


GRADUATE


RESPONDENTS


(N=230)


Variable


Number


Percentage


Degree


Earned


Associate
Associate


in Arts


(A.A.)


(A.S.)


Both


Curriculum:


Education


Business


Art


Education (
Engineering
Fine Art (A


General
Liberal


Music


(A.A.)
A.S.)
(A.S.)
.A.)


24.8
.4
17.4
3.9
0.9
25.7
7.4


(A.A.)


(A.A.)


Photography


(A.A.)


Science
Theatre


Other
More


(A.S.)


Arts


One


No Response


Gender:


Male


Female


46.1
53.5


123


No Response


Age


Below


60.9
17.4
8.3


Over


No Response

Race:


ml "r, 1


Science


Art


(A.A.)


Admini


11.3
86.1


History


station


(A.S.)


Studies


Arts


(A.S .)


(A.A.)


Than









TABLE


11--CONTINUED_


Variable


Number


Percentage


Attendance


versitfy


at Four-Year


Before


Community


College
College


or Uni-


Graduation:


22.2
77.8


No Response


College


or University


Presently


Attending:
Christ
Clinch
George
James


Longwood


opher N
Valley
Mason
Madison


ewport


College


College
University
University


0.4
1.7
10.0
2.6


College


Mary


Washington


College


Norfolk


Old


State


Dominion


Univer


Univer


sity


sity


Radford
Universi
Virginia
Virginia
and
Virginia


The


Univers


ity
'irginia


Commonwealth
Polytechnic


State
State


College


Univer


University
Institute


sity


University


William


and


Mary


Private
Ins
Private


Virginia Transfer
titution
Out-of-State Transfer


Institution


Public


Out


-of


-State


Transfer


Institution


Community


Coll


ege


None
No Response


Application
None


30.9


Rejections:


86.5


One
Two


Three
Four


Plus


No Response




i~~I~l~i9~;;; ii"~~~~ is;%ri"""":" i;"I sni; ;,;;,
,li~EEEiE
'"18"""
::~r: Jaa :~iiEi"Ei ii"
~:a: IE,,::iB""IF""" ~"5 ~":k" ii"i"""ii"i IE"xi:I"EE
,8, ~E
I"EEEB:" ,,E"B
"""" :~EE::


11--CONTINUED


Variable


u Nmber


Percentage


Intended


Baccalaureate


Major:


Agriculture
Business
Education
Engineering


Fine


0.9
26.5
15.7
5.7
4.3
0.9


Arts


Forestry
Health-Related


Home


Field


3.0
0.4


Economics


Journalism


Liberal


Arts


Mathematics
Undecided


Other
Do Not


Intend


or Science


12.6
5.2


to Earn


A Baccalaureate


Degree


No Response


""" e:E : ":


: :"..EE: E.
xi ""









TABLE


DEMOGRAPHIC


DATA FOR


FACULTY
(N=479)


AND


STAFF


RESPONDENTS


Com.
Col.


Variabi


-Year


Col.


Univ.No.


P~ErT


centage


Position:


Community
Community


Admi


College
College


ssIons


and


Counselor


147


30.7


Coordinator
Records


Community
person
Community
Four-Year
Admissi
Four-Year


Department


Four-Year
Faculty

Community C


College


College
College


ons


Divi


sion


Faculty


Chair-


Member


or Univers


18.2
15.7


ity


Officer


College


10.0


or Univers


Chairper


College
Member


college


ity


son


or University


10.4


Experience:


or More


Full


to 9 Full-Time


to 4


Full


No Full-Time


-Time


Years


-Time


Years


21.3


Years
Years


19.2


But


More


Part


Time


Years


No Experience
No Response


17.5
7.3


Four-Year


Experience:
10 or More


College


Full


to 9 Full-Time


to 4 Full


-Time


or University


-Time


Years


Years
Years


10.2
17.1


No Full


-Time


Years


, But


or More


Part-Time


Years


No Experience
No Response


Highest


Degree:


34.4


Associates
Bachelors


Masters


56.8


F~an- 1r 4 n.L


f










TABLE


12--CONTINUED


CoBm.
Col,


Variable


4-Year


Col. or
Univ.No.


Per


centage


Gender:


Male


66.2
33.4


Female


No Response


Race:


Black
White
Asian


Hispanic
American


88.7


or Pacific


slander


Indian/Alaskan


Native


No Response


Community
Yes


College


Attendance:


91.4


No Response


x.: "'i"'" :""""'" "" :: """"
EEEE .E:,E ""


E:
::i;:";~
i""








The


response


choices


the


items


the Articula-


tion


Survey


with


their


corresponding


scores


were


not


a problem,


a problem


of minor


significance,


a prob-


lem


below


average


significance,


a problem


average


significance,


a problem


above


average


significance,


a problem


major


significance,


and


not


familiar


me.


If a respondent


chose


that


score


was


not


included


tabulating


the


mean


that


item.


The


higher


the


score,


the


more


severe


the


respondent


perceived


the


articulation



Differences


situation


Responses


as a problem


to Articulatio


Virginia.



n Survey


All


Respondents.


Perceptions


the


articulation


situation


Virginia


were


compared


respondents


according


to membership


three


groups


studied,


gender,


race,


and


self


-reported


degree


knowledge


concerning


articulation.


variance


The


comparisons


results


are


these


found


one-way


Tables


analysis


and


Responses


Virginia


the


public


items


community


the


college


Articulation


graduates,


Survey


Virginia


public


community


college


faculty


and


staff,


and


Virginia


public


four-year


college


and


universe


faculty


and


staff


are


compared


Tabl


The


responses


these


three




*E""" N r:N:EE":8::Nh;"" :"r :H ""r' 41 A" """ ""nflI Ai i; rr ""I":"hI.AhIr;~rl(


TABLE 13

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF GROUP MEMBERSHIP FOR ALL RESPONDENTS


Group 1
Group 2
Group 3


= Community College Graduates
= Community College Faculty and Staff
= Four-Year College and University Faculty and Staff


Item
No.


Group 1
Mean


Group 2
Mean


Group 3
Mean


F-Ratio


Significant
Interaction
(Tukey)


1 (183)
2 (195)
3 (147)
4 (157)
5 (154)
6 (198)
7 (172)
8 (117)
9 (176)
10 (196)
11 (151)
12 (155)
13 (184)
14 (174)
15 (155)
16 (107)
17 (128)
18 (124)
19 (173)
20 (184)
21 (177)
22 (171)
23 (117)
24 (178)
25 (163)
26 (115)
27 (125)
28 (89)
29 (99)
30 (96)
31 (92)
32 (151)
33 (144)
34 (153)
35 (1211


.1475
.0256
.3537
.2739
.6169
.6616
.3430
.6496
.7955
.3061
.2914
3419
.5435
.5345
.1161
.8037
.2813
.4516
.0636
.2935
.7853
.5088
.5726
.2584
.8037
.3217
.5600
.2022
.6768
.2292
.6413
.2583
.1528
.2222
-9421


(317)
(319)
(279)
(291)
(317)
(327)
(318)
(279)
(297)
(317)
(237)
(213)
(306)
(230)
(228)
(145)
(224)
(178)
(303)
(311)
(296)
(290)
(258)
(279)
(243)
(149)
(148)
(96)
(119)
(112)
(113)
(195)
(266)
(239)
(1 751


.1514
.9498
.1290
.7045
.8170
.5596
.1478
.7025
.6700
.8013
.7046
.4930
.1536
.7478
.7675
.3310
.5759
.3427
.8251
.9196
.0946
.5517
.7287
.6631
.8765
.3758
.1892
.9792
.8403
.2321
.5929
.9179
.2669
.5816
S,71 &


(125)
(103)
(87)
(91)
(88)
(122)
(124)
(100)
(116)
(119)
(113)
(109)
(120)
(115)
(113)
(88)
(103)
(99)
(87)
(92)
(59)
(94)
(83)
(107)
(106)
(76)
(81)
(50)
(73)
(75)
(86)
(110)
(87)
(101)
(R41


.3200
.1748
.9655
.8681
.4091
.6311
.1774
.5800
.5086
.7899
.0442
.4587
.7667
.3043
.2124
.9545
.4951
.7677
.3793
.1739
.1864
.8936
.6506
.4206
.4434
.5526
.1975
.0600
.6575
.6667
.6047
.7273
.5632
.5149
_RAqOn


.152*
.600*
.381*
.382*
.422
.966*
.765*
.602*
.980
.816*
.336*
.645*
.955*
.046*
.143*
.791*
.884*
.639*
.989*
.839
.110*
.268*
.041*
.343*
.749*
.753*
.757*
.347*
.766*
.700*
.824*
.279*
.692*
.408*
-04*.


2X1,2X3
2X1,3X1
2X3,2X1
2X1,3X1

2X3,2X1
2X3,1X3
1X3,2X3


2X3
2X3
1X3
1X2
2X3
1X3
1X3
1X3
1X3
3X2

1X2
1X3
1X3
1X3
1X3
1X3
2X3
2X3
1X3
1X3
2X3
1X3
1X3
1X3
lIv


,1X3,1X2

,2X3
,3X2,3X1

,2X3,2X1
,2X3,2X1
,2X3
,2X3,2X1


,3X2
,2X3
,2X3
,2X3
,2X3
,2X3
,1X3
,1X3
,2X3
,2X3
,1X3
,2X3
,2X3
,2X3
-Y1


,2X1







,2X1









TABLE 14

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF GENDER, RACE,
AND DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL RESPONDENTS


Item
Number


Gender
F-Ratio


Race
F-Ratio


Degree of
Knowledge
F-Ratio


.472
3.967*
.978
.010
.695
1.700
4.408*
3.876*
.729
2.613
.079
2.994
.799
.734
4.725*
.219
6.052
.228
.744
1.107
.563
1.326
2.820
2.435
3.786*
1.406
.904
.076
1.189
2.348
1.021
.761
.161
.223
2.153
.193
2.985
I *)f


4M


1.007
.252
2.522*
.991
.732
.969
.597
.783
.354
1.622
.599
1.043
1.022
1.167
.966
1.387
1.040
.676
1.748
1.434
.482
1.273
1.109
.771
.559
2.186
1.830
1.608
.633
1.295
1.541
.442
.933
1.070
.416
.136
.598
CA1


4.731*
2.'385*
.766
2.145
.676
1.724
.930
1.864
.180
.838
1.050
2.952*
1.992
3.983*
2.016
5.095*
1.389
2.207
.944
2.917*
1.890
1.246
1.973
2.494*
1.579
2.938*
1.155
2.275*
.554
1.086
4.139*
1.404
2.258*
1.394
1.664
1.708
2.196
1 A -




Hi~ ~~ A:AA ~



82

disagreement among these groups as to whether articulation

situations exist in Virginia and to the extent they pose

problems.

Item 1 on the Articulation Survey asked respondents

to indicate their perceptions of the articulation situation
a -~~~ a----.-


Virginia


general.


Community


college


faculty


and


staff


recorded


the


highest


mean


score


(4.1514)


on a 6 point


scale.


The


and


mean


staff


score


was


four-year


3.3200.


college


Community


and


college


university


graduates


faculty


perceived


articulation


Virginia


less


a problem


than


the


other


two


groups


with


a mean


score


3.1475.


A post-hoc


Tukey


test


the


responses


revealed


that


the


perceptions


community


college


faculty


and


staff


often


significantly


individually


with


different


the


the


level


four-year


when


college


compared


and


university


faculty


and


staff


and


community


college


graduates.


The


mean


scores


community


college


faculty


and


staff


were


the


highest


the


three


groups


on 24


the


remaining


items.


seven


these


items,


the


scores


the


community


college


faculty


and


staff


were


significantly


higher


when


compared


individually


with


the


mean


scores


the


other


two


groups.


In contrast,


the


mean


scores


community


college


graduates


and


four-year


college


and


uni


were


responses









college


faculty


and


staff


perceive


articulation


as more


a problem


than


the


other


two


groups


studied


Information


regarding


the


gender,


race,


and


self-


reported


procedure


degree


knowledge


Virginia


was


concerning


gathered


the


all


articulation


respondents.


The


F-ratios


from


a one-way


analysis


variance


each


these


characters


tics


are


presented


Table


For


gender,


responses


to each


the


items


on the


Articulation


Survey


were


analyzed


to determine


whether


differences


existed


among


respondents


who


indicated


they


were


male,


female,


failed


indicate


their


gender.


were


Responses


significantly


seven


different


items


the


the


Articulation


level


when


Survey


analyzed


gender.


Female


respondents


perceived


articulation


prob-


lems


as more


severe


than


male


respondents


on six


the


seven


items.


Only


one


the


items


the


Articulation


Survey


was


answered


differently


subjects


according


their


race.


Race


did


not


seem


to influence


the


respondents


' perceptions


articulation


problems


Virginia.


Respondents


the


Articulation


Survey


were


asked


rate


their


degree


knowledge


concerning


articulation


problems

(II None


in Virginia


Xis


tsfl tt


' r-. J


according


flelow


the


Avsr"ace -


following


1 1 f


scale

(4,


Ahous


A vi~ r~ a FI










knowled e
H~ ~ ~ MM tb


Significant
o -yfiL xucant L


di erences


the


level


significance

of knowledge


were

to ll


found


the


responses


items


according


the


to degree


Articulation


Survey.


Generally,


respondents


reporting


a high


degree


knowledge


concerning


articulation


Virginia


perceived


specific


articulation


problems


as less


severe


than


respond-


ents


reporting


a low


degree


knowledge.


Communi ty


College


Graduates.


one-way


analysis


variance


was


utilized


a comparison


perceptions


the


articulation


situation


Virginia


for


Virginia


public


com-


munity


college


students


who


were


graduated


during


the


1978-


1979


academic


year.


Responses


were


compared


according


following


variables:


type


degree


earned,


curriculum


completed,


community


college


from


which


the


student


was


graduated,


age,


whether


the


graduate


attended


four-year


college


or university


before


being


graduated


from


a commu-


nity


college,


college


or university


presently


attending,


number


admissions


rejections


from


transfer


institutions,


and


intended


baccalaureate


major.


Results


these


compar-


isons


are


found


on Tables


and


Whether


graduate


received


an Associate


Arts


(A.A.) ,


an Associate


Science


or both


degrees


did


""," '8
i"""^^







85

TABLE 15

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF TYPE OF DEGREE EARNED, CURRICULUM
COMPLETED, COMMUNITY COLLEGE FROM WHICH STUDENT WAS
GRADUATED, AND AGE FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE GRADUATES


Item
Number


Type of
Degree
Earned
F-Ratio


Curriculum
Completed
F-Ratio


Community
College From
Which Student
Was Graduated
F-Ratio


Age
F-Ratio


1.138
.923
.064
.725
.407
1.750
.511
.010
1.171
.297
1.667
.351
1.214
.601
.239
.300
2-.725
.387
.861
.264
2.354
.280
.492
.089
.411
.241
.316
.753
.749
.490
.312
1.647
.976
.248
.258


a


1.231
1.784
.938
.900
.878
1.219
.685
.981
1.080
.886
.710
3.115*
.917
.962
1.063
3.233*
1.528
.738
.862
.601
.988
.885
1.072
1.378
1.606
1.264
.672
1.114
.815
.777
1.223
1.247
.618
.957
.695


.974
1.457
.827
1.687
1.740*
1.265
.757
1.227
1.079
1.570
1.051
.875
1.146
1.217
1.147
1.051
1.435
.774
1.246
1.191
1.099
1.306
1.299
1.678*
.777
1.647
1.263
1.648
1.207
.965
2.074*
1.811*
1.055
1.068
.949


1.976
1.120
.892
1.038
.208
1.225
1.108
.327
1.452
.905
.157
1.174
.076
1.666
.621
1.010
.461
.295
.593
1.486
.793
.639
.558
.364
1.258
1.186
3.190*
2.511
.284
1.371
1.131
.323
.920
.309
1 .940


: ; i """ ; II r i ; i




< l"""i"':~':iE ;il~il ~::" C"r;r : ;;;. "i"i ;xi ;
e:,,,"""""":~;jji,~,,,i'~'86


TABLE


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF WHETHER GRADUATE ATTENDED FOUR-YEAR
COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY BEFORE BEING GRADUATED, COLLEGE
PRESENTLY ATTENDING, NUBER OF TRANSFER APPLICATION
EJECTIONS, AND INTENDED BACCALAUREATE MAJOR
FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE GRADUATES


Item
No.


Whether Graduate
Attended 4-Year
Col.or Univ.Before
Being Graduated
F-Ratio


College
Presently
Attending
F-Ratio


Number of
Transfer
Application
Rejections
F-Ratio


Intended
Bacca-
laureate
Major
F-Ratio


1.006 .752 2.550* 1.702
.227 .433 1.710 2.583*
.005 .822 1.949 1.351
4.839* 1.214 1.425 1.090
.123 .919 .719 1.509
1.017 1.738* 1.463 .901
2.646 .910 2.272 1.058
.052 .854 1.680 1.221
4.210* .640 1.305 1.473
4.276* .947 .750 1.054
.000 1.029 .793 1.510
1.048 1.161 1.184 2.491*
.402 .579 5.210* .756
.085 1.251 .517 .860
.154 1.377 2.513* 1.720
3.135 1.036 .152 1.521
.035 .948 1.166 1.643
.251 1.227 2.949* .929
.008 .639 .771 .897
.027 .713 1.087 .525
.135 .740 .283 1.260
1.033 .805 .275 1.164
.053 .823 .278 1.348
.001 .926 .665 1.043
2.050 1.317 1.033 1.064
.011 .870 .105 .955
.429 1.251 .554 .712
.952 1.798* .676 .879
.204 1.270 .596 .713
.568 1.156 1.028 .584
.905 1.918* 1.061 1.164
.057 1.419 2.504* 1.167


- -










only


two


were


responded


to differently


according


the


type


degree


earned


respondents.


Graduates


according"


were


the


divided


curriculum


into

they


the follow

completed


w


ing 12

at their


groups

r commu-


nity


colleges


Art


Education,


Business


Administra-


tion,


Art


History,


Education,


Engineering,


Fine


Arts,


General


Studies


, (8)


Liberal


Arts,


Music,


(10)


Science,


(11)


completed


more


than


one


curriculum,


and


(12)


no response


indicated.


Graduates


had


significantly


different


perceptions


articulation


situations


three


the


items


the


Articulation


Survey.


Therefore,


the


curriculum


which


a community


college


student


was


gradu-


ated


did


not


seem


affect


the


graduate'


perceptions


articulation


problems


Virginia.


Graduates


from


all


the


Virginia


public


community


colleges


were


included


the


study.


The


community


college


from


which


students


were


graduated


affected


their


perceptions


articulation


problems


the


items


on the


Articu-


lation


Survey.


There


was


no pattern


the


differences


perceptions


these


five


items.


Graduates


who


were


surveyed


were


divided


into


the


following


age


groups


Below


-30,


-40,


and


-60.


Significantly


different


responses


X 87


m


*JI