"Heather Perfetti, the president of MSCHE, stated that she doesn't want accreditors to be seen as barriers to credit transfer; if anything, they're urging a shift in the burden of proof for credit transfer from yes to no. That's good, as far as it goes, but the key word is "urging." Urging is not requiring. Kay McClenney famously noted that "students don't do optional." I've seen too many cases of universities not doing optional when it comes to accepting credits in transfer."
"Credit loss upon transfer is a chronic issue on which accreditors have historically been muted; serious attention would be welcome. It was ... frustrating My colleagues and I tried afterward to isolate actual concrete changes and came away befuddled. It reminded me a bit of "strategic plans" that say things like, "We will achieve excellence." OK, but that's neither a strategy nor a plan. At best, it's an intention."
Three regional accreditors held a session on AI and transfer credit that left observers frustrated and unclear about concrete policy changes. Credit loss during transfers remains a chronic problem with accreditors historically muted on the issue. Accreditation leaders are urging a shift of the burden of proof for credit transfer from affirmative acceptance toward presumption of denial, but the guidance remains nonbinding. Academic departments often resist accepting transfer credits due to economic self-interest. Meaningful change typically occurs only when higher administration or state legislatures mandate policies. Accreditors could impose stronger enforcement to change practice, but no clear enforcement mechanism was indicated.
Read at Inside Higher Ed | Higher Education News, Events and Jobs
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]