The City University of New York

Summary of Feedback on CUNY Pathways Proposal

Prepared by the central Office of Academic Affairs The City University of New York

May 2011

1

Summary of Feedback on CUNY Pathways Proposal

Background § CUNY is considering changes in the way in which transfer credits are awarded within the

University. The full draft proposal can be found online: http://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/ue/degreepathways/text-draft.html.

§ In order for the CUNY community to provide feedback on the proposal, the University created an online tool to accept open-ended comments about the proposal. Comments were accepted from February 2, 2011 to April 30, 2011 on this website: http://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/ue/degreepathways/feedback-form.html.

§ Potential respondents were told that their confidential responses would be analyzed and shared with the larger CUNY Community. This report contains a summary of the comments.

Respondents § The website’s comment instrument received a total of 627 submissions. Thirty-three people

submitted more than once so their duplicate responses were combined. The total number of unduplicated submissions was 594. There were 51 blank submissions; all but four of the blank submissions were from students. The remaining 543 responses were analyzed.

§ Most of the respondents were students (46%) or faculty members (36%). There were responses representing 22 CUNY campuses and the Central Office. See Tables A and B in the Appendix for the distribution of respondents.

Categorization § All responses were read multiple times to determine themes. An analysis was conducted by

making a subjective judgment of each respondent’s comments. To avoid having one person’s opinion weighted more heavily than another’s opinion, each person was counted only once. Comments about the draft policy were coded into one of five categories: “pro,” “con,” “concern about foreign language requirements,” “unclear” (comments that mentioned the topic of transfer or the draft policy but were unclear in terms of the respondent’s opinion about the policy), and “other comments” (comments that did not have to do with the policy).

§ Representative quotations from respondents are included throughout the report. Personally identifiable information in the comments was omitted from direct quotations in order to maintain respondent anonymity.

Key Findings § The most common topics mentioned were concern about how foreign language requirements will

be handled and the time and money students spend having to re-take courses that do not transfer. § Overall, approximately 60% of respondents provided positive or supportive comments about the

policy, 34% provided concerns specifically about foreign language requirements, 4% provided “other” comments, 3% provided negative comments or opposition toward the policy, and 1% provided comments that were unclear regarding their stance on the policy (see table below).

2

§ Of the 252 students who responded, 91% were supportive of the policy and only one (.4%) was

opposed to it. Of the 36 alumni who responded, 97% were supportive and none were opposed. Of the 196 faculty who responded, 85% cited a specific concern that the policy would eliminate a foreign language requirement. Of the remaining faculty, 10 were in favor, 16 were opposed, and three wrote other comments.

§ Six submissions (five of which were from students) contained comments that were unclear if the respondent was in support of the policy or not; 15 people offered “other” comments.

Observations § There was a great deal of concern, confusion, and misinformation in the comments indicating that

the implementation phase of the policy is being confounded with the policy itself. People may have a different opinion about the policy once they see the results of the actual implementation phase. For example, one respondent said that CUNY already eliminated a foreign language requirement, which it has not done.

§ The policy and the faculty role in this process should continue to be clarified by CUNY’s central administration.

Detailed Analysis

Supportive of Proposed Policy § Of the 543 respondents, 323 (60%) provided comments that were supportive of the proposed

policy. § Of the students who provided comments, 91% expressed an opinion in favor of the policy. They

cited financial and time concerns but also said that CUNY is one system and that we should ensure all courses are transferable. They see it as the university’s responsibility to make sure all course credits are transferable.

§ A student from Hunter College said, “I am a transfer student with ‘Advanced Standing,’ intending to pursue [major omitted] through the Masters degree. It seems to me I am being required to complete almost half a baccalaureate in the Hunter transfer program, which is very

3

costly in dollars and potential lost earnings. I thought possessing a CUNY degree would suffice for a more seamless educational process. Sadly, I was very wrong. I believe my experience underscores the fact that higher education is 1.) big business and 2.) designed to impede certain types of people's progress in education and careers. I hope the University and Hunter College, in particular, will very seriously reconsider the ‘excess credits’ impact on transfer students at CUNY schools who transfer within CUNY. Anecdotally, I sincerely believe retention and graduation rates will improve with minimal deleterious impact on academic rigor and academic integrity.”

§ A student from Kingsborough Community College said, “The University Student Senate is working hard to inform the student community and build support for this Draft Resolution. Thank you for your efforts in improving the student experience at CUNY!”

§ A student from Baruch College said, “I strongly, heartily support this resolution. As a student transferring from [a CUNY community college] to Baruch, it created delays in evaluating credits. This made it hard for me to know what to take and forced me to take classes I did not need. Because of this I was not eligible for financial aid and VESID refused to pay for classes.”

§ Another student from Baruch College said, “When you transfer from one CUNY college to another, it isn't as simple as you may think. As a [CUNY community college] student I found it more difficult transferring from one CUNY to another than attending a whole other University. I was astonished to find out that courses completed at one CUNY institution were unrecognized by another, and credits earned toward a degree at one school was meaningless at Baruch. To find out after a great effort that my achievement would go unrecognized was devastating to me.”

§ A student from Medgar Evers College said, “CUNY credits are CUNY credits, they should count towards any school. Our classes should be more equivalent and fair.”

§ A student from Hostos Community College said, “I do not know how many credits will be counted towards my major at a senior college although I know the credit is accepted at the college. Time and money are at risk. Meanwhile I am taking the proper steps to be successful. This is something I have to worry about meanwhile still trying to pass my class with an A letter grade. It can be improved as well. All of this service is paid for by the students and we should be treated with more respect and comfort. This system should not even have been built in this manner; it is just making the students more nervous!”

§ A student from Queens College said, “As a Queens College student I have heard stories from friends who have transferred from QCC and other CUNY schools and have lost valuable time towards their degrees because so many of their earned credits are not accepted. Not only is time lost, but also money; when classes have to be retaken, more money is spent. There is a dire need for a new transfer policy.”

§ A student from New York City College of Technology said, “I personally have suffered from the difficult transition from one CUNY college to another. I transferred from one CUNY college to another and lost a number of credits. As a result my graduation was delayed and my financial aid package was affected. Let us work together to find a better way to work with the CUNY colleges to help students transfer within CUNY.”

§ A student from John Jay College of Criminal Justice said, “That is one of the main reasons why it is taking me so long to graduate. I have had to take several classes over.”

§ An alumnus from Borough of Manhattan Community College said, “It becomes so difficult as a student to complete a course that you have already worked hard to achieve. I believe that all students should have their hard earned credits matter. It also becomes a financial issue when a student has to pay extra for additional courses.”

4

§ An alumnus from John Jay College of Criminal Justice said, “As a student, I remember the struggles I faced in some of my courses and I really had to fight hard to earn my required credits that I needed to graduate. It's very difficult to take courses that I worked hard in over again. It also becomes a problem financially to pay for additional classes. I hope that the transfer policy becomes a success.”

§ An alumnus from York College said, “I am a graduate from York College. I remembered how hard it was for me as a student to complete certain courses and the financial issues I faced. It becomes difficult to repeat courses over again and not have all earned credits valued.”

§ An alumnus from City College said, “CUNY shouldn’t allow credits to not be transferred to other CUNYs. There shouldn’t be elitism within colleges as they are all CUNY. School is meant to give education and fairness to all.”

§ A member of a non-faculty/student/alumni group (“other” group) from Bronx Community College said, “I hope that all students have the option to have their earned credits count. It’s difficult and costly to take additional courses over again. As a result, students deserve to have all their hard earned credits count.”

§ A staff member from Baruch College said, “This proposal makes sense for a unified system. A lot of time is lost waiting for decisions on credits and students get discouraged. It appears thorough in addressing many questions which would be raised from people sharing a variety of viewpoints.”

§ A faculty member from Hunter College said, “The proposed plan would certainly be to the advantage of students who seek to transfer. It is good to know that faculty input is being sought. One must stress that faculty consensus across CUNY is necessary. There must be widespread agreement about what the pathways should be and what completion of steps in the pathways means. Otherwise, students who believe they have completed steps in the pathway at a given CUNY college may find that what they have completed has now prepared them sufficiently for the level of work expected of them at the transfer college. This is especially crucial for pathways in majors.”

Concerns Regarding Foreign Language Requirement § A total of 182 respondents mentioned concerns about the foreign language requirements; 167 of

these respondents were faculty, seven were students, one was an alumnus, one was a staff member, and six were other respondent types. Of these 182 respondents, 162 stated: “At a time when both national and CUNY data show unprecedented interest in foreign language study on college campuses, the drat resolution on transfer of credit and General Education requirements across CUNY is of great concern to us. This policy essentially standardizes and is likely to reduce prerequisites for majors in the humanities. It is further likely to prevent students from obtaining the linguistic preparation they need at a time when such competence is critical for success in this age of globalization. Thus, as a member of the faculty/ student/ alumnus/ alumna/ staff of (name of institution), I concur with the position of CUNY Council on World Language Study and support a two-year requirement (12 credits) for foreign languages as the minimum standard for graduation from CUNY with a baccalaureate degree.”

§ As another example of how these concerns were expressed, a faculty member from York College said, “There is no doubt or disagreement that knowledge of foreign languages is mandatory in our global economy, and even for those who work in either Queens (the most diverse county in

5

the US) or New York City. I am concerned that the draft policy will both standardize and essentially reduce the number of prerequisites for majors in the Humanities. Thus, as a member of the faculty of York College, I concur with the position of the CUNY Council on World Language Study and support a two-year requirement (12 credits) for foreign languages as the minimum standard for graduation from CUNY with a baccalaureate degree. Thank you for taking this into consideration.”

Opposed to Proposed Policy § Of the 543 respondents, 17 (3%) provided a negative comment about the draft policy that was

unrelated to the foreign language requirement issue. § Two respondents criticized the proposal by saying the process was moving too quickly, e.g., a

faculty member from Staten Island said, “SLOW DOWN! This draft resolution is a rushed and ill considered move. Faculty must be involved to ensure the quality of the changes being proposed and the long-range impact on students.”

§ Twelve respondents expressed concern was that the policy would lower standards, e.g., a faculty member from Baruch College said, “This proposal would have a very negative impact on Baruch's curriculum and academic standards. This is a disservice to our students as it implies lowering educational standards. It would constitute a watering down of our students' educational development.” As another example of this concern, a faculty member from Hunter College said, “I have many times received requests to evaluate course equivalency for the purposes of transfer credit at Hunter. Most requests concern [type of course omitted] courses. Many of the syllabi I have seen from other campuses, and especially from the community colleges, are-- to be blunt-- appalling. They are lacking in rigor, reflect antiquated views of the field, and don't really demand excellence or even any work at all from the students. Naturally I am concerned that system-wide ‘articulation’ would bring my department poorly prepared student majors and would diminish whatever regard might attach to a Hunter degree or a Hunter [type of major omitted] major.”

Other Comments

Of the 543 respondents, 15 (3%) provided other types of comments. There were no repeating themes in these comments.

6

Appendix Table A: Frequency of responses by campus affiliation

7

Table B: Frequency of types of respondents

8

Table C: Frequency of types of comments

9

Table D: Frequency of coded responses by campus affiliation. (Row percentages)

10

(Column Percentages)