IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reihed/v66y2025i3d10.1007_s11162-024-09831-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The College Transfer and Articulation Network: How are These Statewide Policies and Bilateral or Dyadic Partnerships Structured Across the United States?

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel S. González Canché

    (University of Pennsylvania)

  • Jiayi Arthur Qiu

    (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill)

  • Kaiwen Zheng

    (Harvard University)

  • Mingbo Gong

    (SixThirty for Education)

  • Chelsea Zhang

    (University of Pennsylvania)

Abstract

Every academic year, millions of college students change institutions before degree completion, confronting the challenge of validating credits across colleges. Despite state-level efforts to legislate strategies for smoother transfers, actual credit recognition relies on non-state-regulated bilateral partnerships that are more (i.e., articulation agreements) or less (general transfer partnerships) specific as policies or guides to avoid credit loss. This study comprehensively sheds light on the USA nationwide structure of transfer and articulation agreements by focusing on statewide policies and in-state and out-of-state informal bilateral partnerships as units of analyses. The spatial configuration of both statewide policies and institutionally driven partnerships enabled testing for economic spillovers as well as measuring whether distance is a factor that may impact the formation of these partnerships. Data were retrieved from CollegeTransfer.Net (N = 18,260 partnerships and 1163 colleges), the Education Commission of the States (118 statewide policies), the IPEDs, and the US Census Bureau. Findings at the state-level revealed economic spillovers in two of four statewide policies, highlighting greater structure of program-specific articulation agreements over general transfer partnerships (i.e., agreements that do not require program continuation). Regarding institutionally driven agreements, the analyses indicated that general partnerships were the most prevalent form, which, compared to more structured articulation efforts, may be less effective in the avoidance of credit loss. We also found that shorter distances are a significant but impractical partnership-forming factor, for the average distance reduction among partnering colleges is 30 miles across models. Combining state and institutional datasets, we found that neither individual nor combined statewide policies actively predict institutional partnership formation. All databases and code created (statewide policies: https://cutt.ly/uwHyvkWQ , institutionally driven agreements: https://cutt.ly/7wHtPkEA , replication codes: https://cutt.ly/JwGRmVDu , https://cutt.ly/EwG1VbaW ) may be used in future analyses to address questions of transfer effectiveness and transferring financial costs, which although important go beyond the scope of our study.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel S. González Canché & Jiayi Arthur Qiu & Kaiwen Zheng & Mingbo Gong & Chelsea Zhang, 2025. "The College Transfer and Articulation Network: How are These Statewide Policies and Bilateral or Dyadic Partnerships Structured Across the United States?," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 66(3), pages 1-46, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:66:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s11162-024-09831-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11162-024-09831-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11162-024-09831-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11162-024-09831-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:66:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s11162-024-09831-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.