More than a third of students enter higher education at a community college; most aim to earn a baccalaureate. Drawing on sense-making theory and longitudinal qualitative data, we examined how community college students interpret state transfer policies and how their interpretations influence subsequent behavior. Data from 3 years of interviews revealed how students adjudicate between multiple intersecting policies. The higher education context, where institutions provided competing signals about policies, left students to navigate complex messages to achieve their transfer goals. Students’ approaches to understanding transfer policies primarily followed one of two patterns: adopting policy signals as step-by-step procedures or adapting and combining policy signals to create a customized transfer pathway. Both approaches had important implications for students’ transfer outcomes.
AllenJ. M.SmithC. L.MuehleckJ. K. (2014). Pre- and post-transfer academic advising: What students say are the similarities and differences. Journal of College Student Development, 55(4), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2014.0034
2.
AlmeidaD. (2016). Low-income Latino students and California's Early Assessment Program: The role of sensemaking in the use of college readiness information. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 15(4), 310–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192715612549
3.
AndersonG.SunJ. C.AlfonsoM. (2006). Effectiveness of statewide articulation agreements on the probability of transfer: A preliminary policy analysis. Review of Higher Education, 29(3), 261–291. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2006.0001
4.
BahrP. R. (2008). Cooling outin the community college: What is the effect of academic advising on students’ chances of success?Research in Higher Education, 49(8), 704–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9100-0
5.
BaileyT. R.JaggarsS. S.JenkinsD. (2015). Redesigning America's community colleges: A clearer path to student success. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674425934
6.
BaileyT. R.JenkinsD.FinkJ.CullinaneJ.SchuddeL. (2017, January). Policy levers to strengthen community college transfer student success in Texas (Report to the Greater Texas Foundation). Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED573075.pdf
7.
BakerR. (2016). The effects of structured transfer pathways in community colleges. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 38(4), 626–646. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373716651491
8.
BehringerL. B. (2009). Remedial education at the community college: A study of student sensemaking (Publication No. 3346260) [Doctoral dissertation, New York University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
9.
BertrandM.MarshJ. A. (2015). Teachers’ sensemaking of data and implications for equity. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 861–893. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215599251
10.
BettingerE. P.BakerR. B. (2014). The effects of student coaching: An evaluation of a randomized experiment in student advising. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373713500523
11.
BustillosL. T. (2017). The transfer maze: The high cost to students and the state of California. Campaign for College Opportunity.
CoburnC. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145–170. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737023002145
14.
CoburnC. E. (2005). The role of nonsystem actors in the relationship between policy and practice: The case of reading instruction in California. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(1), 23–52. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737027001023
15.
DaviesT. G.DickmannE. M. (1998). Student voices in the transfer process: Do we hear them? Do we listen?Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 22(5), 541–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/1066892980220507
16.
DuncheonJ. C. (2018). Making sense of college readiness in a low-performing urban high school: Perspectives of high-achieving first generation youth. Urban Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085918756712
FinkJ.JenkinsD. (2017). Takes two to tango: Essential practices of highly effective transfer partnerships. Community College Review, 45(4), 294–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552117724512
19.
Garcia FalconettiA. M. (2009). 2+2 Statewide articulation policy, student persistence, and success in Florida universities. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 33(3–4), 238–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920802581109
20.
HagedornL. S. (2010). The pursuit of student success: The directions and challenges facing community colleges. In SmartJ. C. (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 25, pp. 181–218). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8598-6_5
21.
HandelS. J.WilliamsR. A. (2012). The promise of the transfer pathway: Opportunity and challenge for community college students seeking the baccalaureate degree. College Board. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED541978.pdf
22.
HerreraA.JainD. (2013). Building a transfer-receptive culture at four-year institutions. New Directions for Higher Education, 2013(162), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20056
23.
HodaraM.Martinez-WenzelM.StevensD.MazzeoC. (2017). Exploring credit mobility and major-specific pathways: A policy analysis and student perspective on community college to university transfer. Community College Review, 45(4), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552117724197
24.
HosslerD.ShapiroD.DundarA.ZiskinM.ChenJ.ZerqueraD.TorresV. (2012). Transfer and mobility: A national view of pre-degree student movement in postsecondary institutions (Signature Report No. 2). National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.
25.
JainD.BernalS.LuceroI.HerreraA.SolorzanoD. (2016). Toward a critical race perspective of transfer: An exploration of a transfer receptive culture. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(12), 1013–1024. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2016.1213674
26.
JainD.HerreraA.BernalS.SolorzanoD. (2011). Critical race theory and the transfer function: Introducing a transfer receptive culture. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 35(3), 252–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2011.526525
27.
JenningsJ. L. (2010). School choice or schools’ choice? Managing in an era of accountability. Sociology of Education, 83(3), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040710375688
28.
LewthwaiteB.WilsonK.WallaceV.McGintyS.SwainL. (2017). Challenging normative assumptions regarding disengaged youth: A phenomenological perspective. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(4), 388–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1252867
29.
LipskyM. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (Updated ed.). Russell Sage Foundation.
30.
MazmanianD. A.SabatierP. A. (1983). Implementation and public policy. Scott Foresman.
31.
McLaughlinM. W. (1976). Implementation as mutual adaptation: Change in classroom organization. Teachers College Record, 77(3), 339–351.
32.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldañaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
33.
National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. (2018). Table 303.70: Total undergraduate fall enrollment in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by attendance status, sex of student, and control and level of institution: Selected years, 1970 through 2028. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_303.70.asp
34.
PattonM. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Sage.
35.
PernaL. W.FinneyJ. E. (2014). The attainment agenda: State policy leadership in higher education. Johns Hopkins University Press.
36.
PersonA. E.RosenbaumJ. E.Deil-AmenR. (2006). Student planning and information problems in different college structures. Teachers College Record, 108(3), 374–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00655.x
37.
RoksaJ. (2009). Building bridges for student success: Are higher education articulation policies effective?Teachers College Record, 111(10), 2444–2478.
38.
RoksaJ.KeithB. (2008). Credits, time, and attainment: Articulation policies and success after transfer. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 236–254. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373708321383
39.
RootM. (2013). Essential elements of state policy for college completion: Statewide transfer policies (SREB Policy Brief). Southern Regional Education Board.
40.
SandfortJ.StoneM. (2008). Analyzing policy fields: Helping students understand complex state and local contexts. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 14(2), 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2008.12001516
41.
Sattin-BajajC. (2018). On the same page: A formal process for training multiple interviewers. The Qualitative Report, 23(7), 1688–1701.
42.
SchuddeL.BradleyD.AbsherC. (2020). Navigating vertical transfer online: Access to and usefulness of transfer information on community college websites. Community College Review, 48(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552119874500
43.
SchuddeL.BrownR. S. (2019). Understanding variation in estimates of diversionary effects of community college entrance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sociology of Education, 92(3), 247–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040719848445
44.
SchuddeL.Goldrick-RabS. (2015). On second chances and stratification: How sociologists think about community colleges. Community College Review, 43(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552114553296
45.
SchuddeL.JabbarH.ChevalierA. (2018). To improve community college transfer in Texas, students need better information (PRC Research & Policy Brief Series). http://hdl.handle.net/2152/71426
46.
SchuddeL.JabbarH.HartmanC. (2021). How political and ecological contexts shape community college transfer. Sociology of Education, 94(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040720954817
47.
Scott-ClaytonJ. (2011). The shapeless river: Does a lack of structure inhibit students’ progress at community college? (CCRC Working Paper No. 25). Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center.
48.
SenieK. C. (2016). Implementing transfer and articulation: A case study of community colleges and state universities. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(4), 269–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2015.1038667
49.
ShapiroD.DundarA.HuieF.WakhunguP. K.YuanX.NathanA.HwangY. (2017). Tracking transfer: Measures of effectiveness in helping community college students to complete bachelor's degrees (Signature Report 13). National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.
50.
SpillaneJ. P.AndersonL. (2014). The architecture of anticipation and novices’ emerging understandings of the principal position: Occupational sense making at the intersection of individual, organization, and institution. Teachers College Record, 116(7), 1–42.
51.
SpillaneJ. P.ReiserB. J.ReimerT. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387–431. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072003387
52.
TaylorJ. L.GianiM. (2019). Modeling the effect of the reverse credit transfer associate's degree: Evidence from two states. Review of Higher Education, 42(2), 427–455. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0002
53.
TaylorJ. L.JainD. (2017). The multiple dimensions of transfer: Examining the transfer function in American higher education. Community College Review, 45(4), 273–293. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552117725177
TownsendB. K.WilsonK. B. (2006). “A hand hold for a little bit”: Factors facilitating the success of community college transfer students to a large research university. Journal of College Student Development, 47(4), 439–456. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2006.0052
59.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2017). Higher education: Students need more information to help reduce challenges transferring credits (GAO-17-574). https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-17-574
60.
WangX. (2020). On my own: The challenge and promise of building equitable STEM transfer pathways. Harvard Education Press.
WeickK. E.SutcliffeK. M.ObstfeldD. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0133
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
