Transfer of Credits

Legislative Alert: Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions (HELP) To Mark-Up Higher Education Reauthorization Bill Today

Legislation Contains Costly and Intrusive Provisions That Would Federalize Transfer of Academic Credit.

The Senate HELP Committee is scheduled to take up its version of the reauthorization bill today in preparation for a possible Senate floor vote in a few weeks. In a surprising turns of events, the draft bill introduced on September 6 by Chairman Mike Enzi (R-WY) is cosponsored by the Committee's ranking member, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA). Senator Kennedy's support for the bill virtually ensures its passage, and has alarmed higher education advocates who have pinned their hopes on the Senate for better policy outcomes than those contained in the House version of the reauthorization. Beyond the bipartisan support for the bill, the breakneck pace of Committee action has made it difficult for the higher education community to fully grasp the consequences of the numerous changes made by the legislation. However, several important themes have emerged as particularly troublesome for higher education institutions. AACRAO has joined other higher education groups in raising concerns about several broad policy shifts in the proposed legislation.

As the higher education association most concerned about transfer of credit, we are particularly troubled by the extraordinarily intrusive and poorly configured provisions of the bill on transfer of credit:

First, the bill contains tracking and reporting requirements on transfer that, if enacted, would require significant new campus administrative resources to implement. In provisions amending Section 131 of current law ("Cost of Higher Education"), the bill directs the Secretary to disseminate information on "percentage of students transferring academic credit from another institution of higher education." This mandate on the Secretary would immediately translate into a significant transfer tracking and reporting requirement on campuses.

Second, Section 487 of the bill contains language identical to the House bill, which would prohibit institutions of higher education from basing their credit acceptance policies on the accreditation of sending institution if the accrediting body is recognized by the Secretary of Education. AACRAO continues to object to the inclusion of this mandate, because institutions should be allowed to exercise their best academic judgment with regard to the terms and conditions that their students must meet to earn their credentials. In addition, we are very concerned that by denying institutions the right to set higher standards than the Secretary, the new federal transfer mandate would eliminate an important evaluation tool without providing additional alternatives.

Third, Section 499 of the bill would create a new accreditation requirement on transfer that would turn accrediting agencies into enforcers of the new federal transfer mandate. This heavy-handed enforcement mechanism would subject institutions to indirect federal micro-management of academic policy through the Secretary's exercise of regulatory authority on accrediting agencies, and undermines the assurances of federal non-interference provided elsewhere in the legislation (Section 487(6)).

Finally, a last-minute new addition to Section 499 of the bill would impose a perplexing requirement for accrediting agencies to confirm that each institution's acceptance or denial of academic credit is "decided according to criteria established in guidelines developed by the institution's admissions committee."

AACRAO members are urged to review the impact of the proposed changes on their institutions, to inform institutional decision-makers, and to apprise their Senators of their views.