Support for the Continuation of a Planning Process to Re-envision the Lower Division Transfer Patterns (LDTP) Project
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University (ASCSU) endorse current efforts to re-envision the LDTP project in a manner that builds upon the work completed by CSU discipline faculty to date; and be it further
RESOLVED: That these efforts be undertaken in recognition that the project, as currently configured and defined, has become larger and more complex than current budget realities can sustain; and be it further
RESOLVED: That a guiding principle for these efforts be the preservation and continuation, to the extent possible, of the curriculum and articulation work by CSU faculty and staff designated to facilitate the successful transfer of fully prepared students to the CSU; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the ASCSU support continuation of discussions with representatives of the California Community College (CCC) system to outline details for a potential merger of the appropriate aspects of the LDTP project with the CCC sponsored C-ID project, with the goal of maximizing the benefit for students to be achieved through such an intersegmental collaborative effort; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the LDTP Steering Committee provide the leadership for this re-envisioning/revision process and be charged to report a detailed plan to the ASCSU at the November 2009 Plenary; and be it further
RESOLVED: That in addition to the Chancellor and Board of Trustees, the ASCSU send copies of this resolution to the California Community College and University of California Academic Senates.
RATIONALE:The compelling case for California’s higher education system to produce more bachelor’s degrees is again made in the newly published report by the Institute for Higher Education Leadership and Policy1. The report cites recent analyses that conclude that current graduation rates will fall short of supplying the estimated one million or more college graduates needed by the year 2025 to meet the projected demand in California’s economy.
The state’s community college system provides a major access point to the bachelor’s degree. In 2007-08, roughly 55,000 students transferred to campuses in the CSU. In addition, transfer students received over half of the bachelor’s degrees awarded. However, only a small percentage of students that begin in the community college system actually transfer; a problem that is not unique to California. There are estimates that between 25 to 40% of the students intending to transfer actually do.
The intent of Lower Division Transfer Patterns (LDTP) Project has been to provide standardization of transfer requirements and thereby facilitate the transfer process. Discipline faculty from across the CSU have invested significant time and effort defining recommended patterns to facilitate successful transfer into the CSU by students fully qualified to enter upper division major courses in specified disciplines. CSU faculty have further devoted considerable effort to define course descriptors for courses included in the LDTP Patterns and even more time and effort reviewing community college course submissions for the purpose of certifying their congruence with said descriptors. The purposes of the LDTP project and the associated T-CSU numbering system, by which certification can be communicated are to facilitate the major preparation and smooth transition to the CSU by transfer students. There are currently 44 statewide patterns and more than 1000 campus specific patterns approved and posted; 82 course descriptors and approximately 2500 community college courses approved as meeting the descriptor criteria and thus available for articulation and transfer purposes.
The body of work in course review process alone that has been achieved to date is significant and a credit to the more than 120 faculty from 33 disciplines representing 22 campuses.
1 Crafting a Student-Centered Transfer Process in California: Lessons From Other States, Colleen Moore, Nancy Shulock and Cristy Jensen, Institute for Higher Education Leadership and Policy, August 2009
Approved Unanimously – September 10-11, 2009