From the Desk of the Articulation Facilitator
First, thank you so very much for all the work you do to ensure that students can successfully transfer between and among Arizona public/tribal postsecondary institutions. As you know, increasing the number of students who not only have access to, but successfully complete postsecondary degrees is on both the state and national agendas. The work you do facilitates this!
As part of my responsibilities, I review your ATF Meeting Report and your Meeting Notes, to see if you identified any items to go to the Academic Program Articulation Steering Committee [APASC] and/or if you have questions or issues that need to be addressed. Additionally, several of the ATFs had questions about the process for implementing the recommended changes that you make at your meetings to the Common Course Matrix and the CEG. Further, you were asked to consider several new agenda items this year. This document is designed to provide the many participants in the Arizona transfer articulation process with some general information, updates, and links to summaries of the responses that have been provided to some of the questions that have arisen at various ATF meetings this academic year.
The Process for Making Changes
Course Equivalency Guide [CEG] changes: At ATF meetings faculty often discuss changes to course equivalencies that are already in the CEG. These discussions frequently result in “upgrading” a prior equivalency (NT to elective, elective to departmental elective, or departmental elective to direct equivalency). The ATAC Facilitator for the meeting enters the agreed upon course change(s) through Arizona Course Equivalency Tracking System (ACETS) for formal approval. The recommended changes are finalized and encoded after review and final approval at the target institution(s). They will show in the CEG after this process is complete. The community college will have access to the change process through ACETS to monitor progress.
Common Course Matrix [CCM] changes: These recommendations are collected by Dr. Michael Hensley, the ATASS Business Analyst, and entered into a document that is forwarded to each institution’s ATAC representative for their review. In most cases your recommendations are approved, however, there are times when a recommendation is not. The approved/modified recommendations are presented to APASC at their final Spring meeting. The information is then entered into the AZTransfer.com website. This process is generally complete by May 30th.
All recommendations are subject to local institutional review.
Attendance: Attendance is recorded at each meeting. A final report is compiled and presented to APASC for their review.
Questions/Concerns: These are generally followed up by either the ATAC Facilitator for that meeting or by the State Articulation Facilitator.
New Agenda Items for Fall 2009
Last fall there were several new items added to the agenda:
· Environmental/Sustainability Workgroup questions:
- For a summary of these discussions link here. (.doc)
· ATF Effectiveness Subcommittee questions:
- For a summary of these discussions here. (.doc)
· International Baccalaureate Programme exams.
- Certain ATFs were asked to consider common cut scores for specific IB exams.
- Almost all ATFs for which there is an associated IB exam asked for more information and time to review the exam materials.
- This will be an agenda item for many in the Fall of 2010.
- Dr. Hensley, who is also the IB Exam Project Coordinator, sent the requested documents about specific IB Programme Exams to ATAC members; your institutional ATAC representative will forward Guides to your appropriate ATF representatives.
· Virtual meetings: Many of the ATF faculty indicated the multiple benefits to meeting face-to-face, and most prefer that option. However, it was also recognized that some faculty cannot participate unless a virtual option is available. A summary of the ATF discussions regarding this topic are posted here. (.doc)
· Cluster meeting: This topic was also discussed by a number of ATFs; a summary of comments is posted here. (.doc) The chairs of those ATFs that expressed an interested in cluster or joint meetings with other ATFs, and the chairs of those ATFs which were identified, will be contacted to see if there is agreement that a collaborative meeting would be desirable, and if so, to determine how to move forward.
Technology Updates
As you may already be aware, we have a very talented technology team including Rebecca McKay, AZTransfer.com Project Manager, and Bryant Castaneda, Principle Technical Support Analyst. The following are just a couple of technology enhancements that have been implemented or are under investigation:
· A science listserv has been developed at the request of a member of the Biology ATF. It includes the members of the following ATFs: Biology, Chemistry Computer Science & Computer Information Systems, Geology, Mathematics, and Physics, Physical Science & Astronomy. Only those on the listservs can send to this new listserv.
· There are discussions regarding the feasibility of ATFs using SharePoint, or another application for ongoing interaction, at the request of the Allied Health/Health Related Professions ATF.
Common Numbering System - Update
In the fall of 2008, a number of the ATFs were asked to discuss a statewide common numbering system. The Joint Conference Committee (JCC) asked for feedback regarding the development and implementation of this. ATF discussions were informative and valuable. Common numbering is done in various ways in a number of different states, and at least two ATFs already have common numbers. However, the majority of the feedback suggested that the Course Equivalency Guide is a very good tool demonstrating how courses transfer, and that it would take significant resources to implement a common numbering system in Arizona. This information was summarized and presented to APASC.
However, it is important that you know that earlier this year legislation was presented in both the House [HB2299] and the Senate [SB1186] to develop and implement such a system.
ACETS Enhancement
Universities are now required to provide feedback to community college faculty, indicating why a class submitted for a direct course equivalency by a community college did not receive that equivalency at the university or universities. This requirement is only for those courses for which direct course equivalencies are requested.
E or Better Policy
The AGEC needs to be comprised of all "Elective or Better" courses, and the Common Courses needed to be Elective or Better at the institutions with the shared majors. In addition, electives need to be Elective or Better at the university to which the student plans to transfer.
Questions or More Information
I hope you find this information helpful. It is important that you know your work is appreciated! If something is missing, or if I missed addressing a concern of yours from the ATF meeting, please feel free to contact me: Ann Huber, ATASS Transfer Articulation Facilitator: Ann.Huber@asu.edu or 520-206-3986, or your institutional ATAC representative. If you don’t know who your ATAC representative is please go to the following website: http://aztransmac1.asu.edu/cgi-bin/WebObjects/ATF.woa/wa/ATF?ATF=ATAC.