Office of Academic Affairs TO: Chief Academic Officers FR: Central Office of Academic Affairs RE: Pathways Year-Three Review DT: September 1, 2017 The June 2011 Board of Trustees resolution on Pathways stipulated that Pathways policies and processes be reviewed and evaluated each year for three years beginning in 2013, and every three years thereafter, to modify them as necessary to improve them or to meet changing needs. In September 2016 the Central Office of Academic Affairs released the Pathways Year-Two review that summarized findings of an evaluation of available data after completion of the second full year of Pathways implementation. At that time, and at subsequent meetings, the year-two faculty review committee presented the Central Office of CUNY with a number of questions and requested data on various aspects of Pathways. The data provided in response to these queries formed the content of the second-year review and was used as a guide to the structure and content of the year-three review. Attached is the Pathways Year-Three Review. The Central Office of Academic Affairs compiled this report after the completion of the third year of implementation with contributions from the year-two faculty review team, the chairs and faculty members of the Common Core Course Review Committee, the college Pathways appeals officers, and the student focus group participants. We will make the Pathways Year-Three Review accessible to the CUNY community via the OAA Pathways web site. The Central Office of Academic Affairs will continue to monitor, track, and make public Pathways data on an annual basis. While the next mandated review is scheduled for 2019-2020, efforts are underway to explore options for a comprehensive external review and analysis of Pathways implementation and effectiveness.
Transcript
0
Office of Academic Affairs
TO: Chief Academic Officers
FR: Central Office of Academic Affairs
RE: Pathways Year-Three Review
DT: September 1, 2017
The June 2011 Board of Trustees resolution on Pathways stipulated that Pathways policies and
processes be reviewed and evaluated each year for three years beginning in 2013, and every three
years thereafter, to modify them as necessary to improve them or to meet changing needs. In
September 2016 the Central Office of Academic Affairs released the Pathways Year-Two review
that summarized findings of an evaluation of available data after completion of the second full
year of Pathways implementation.
At that time, and at subsequent meetings, the year-two faculty review committee presented the
Central Office of CUNY with a number of questions and requested data on various aspects of
Pathways. The data provided in response to these queries formed the content of the second-year
review and was used as a guide to the structure and content of the year-three review.
Attached is the Pathways Year-Three Review. The Central Office of Academic Affairs compiled
this report after the completion of the third year of implementation with contributions from the
year-two faculty review team, the chairs and faculty members of the Common Core Course
Review Committee, the college Pathways appeals officers, and the student focus group
participants. We will make the Pathways Year-Three Review accessible to the CUNY
community via the OAA Pathways web site.
The Central Office of Academic Affairs will continue to monitor, track, and make public
Pathways data on an annual basis. While the next mandated review is scheduled for 2019-2020,
efforts are underway to explore options for a comprehensive external review and analysis of
Pathways implementation and effectiveness.
1
Pathways General Education Initiative
Year-Three Review
City University of New York Office of Academic Affairs
September 2017
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Background and Rationale ........................................................................................................................... 3
Table 1: Number and Percent of First-Time Freshmen and Transfer Students Enrolled in CUNY Baccalaureate Programs ....................................................................................................................... 3
Overview of the Pathways Initiative ........................................................................................................... 4
Table 2: Pathways General Education Common Core Requirement .................................................. 5
Seamless Transfer .................................................................................................................................... 6
Common Core Course Review Committee ................................................................................................ 6
Approved Pathways Common Core Courses ............................................................................................ 7
Table 3: Number of Pathways Common Core Courses by Area (as of December 2015) ..................... 8
Undergraduates Enrolled in Pathways ..................................................................................................... 8
Figure 1: Percent of Degree-Seeking Undergraduates Enrolled in Pathways, Fall 2015 ..................... 8
Student Knowledge about Pathways ....................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2: Students’ Self-Reported Familiarity with General Education Requirement ......................... 9
Figure 3: Students’ Self-Reported Familiarity with Course Transfer Guarantees ................................. 9
Major Gateway Course Transfer ............................................................................................................ 10
Table 4: Transfer Status of Incoming Major Gateway Courses at Receiving Colleges, Spring 2016... 11
Table 5: Transfer Status of Incoming Major Gateway Courses at Receiving Colleges, by Major ...... 12
Student Appeals Process Review ............................................................................................................ 12
Early Outcomes of the Pathways Initiative .............................................................................................. 15
Efficiency of Credit Transfer .................................................................................................................... 15
Table 6: Credits Transferred for and Accumulated by Transfers Within CUNY .................................. 15
GPA and Credit Attainment after One Year ........................................................................................... 16
Table 7: GPA and Credit Accumulation of First-Time Freshmen and Transfers Within CUNY............ 16
Retention Rates and Transfer Type ........................................................................................................ 17
Table 8: One-Year Retention Rates of First-Time Freshmen ............................................................. 17
Table 9: Trends in Transfers into CUNY Baccalaureate Programs ..................................................... 17
Course-Taking Patterns by Discipline ..................................................................................................... 17
Table 10: Trends in First-Time Freshman Course-Taking, by Discipline ............................................. 18
Table 11: Trends in Undergraduate Course-Taking, by Discipline ...................................................... 19
Next Steps .................................................................................................................................................. 20
3
Background and Rationale
The Pathways Initiative was designed to strengthen curricular alignment across CUNY’s undergraduate
colleges and improve the efficiency of credit transfer throughout the system to ensure that all students
can complete a meaningful and rigorous program of study in a reasonable and timely manner.
The Pathways Initiative aims to:
• enhance transfer students’ progress toward degree completion;
• maintain CUNY’s commitment to the highest academic standards and the faculty’s special
responsibility for courses and curriculum; and
• provide colleges with the flexibility to maintain their distinctive identities and traditions.
June 27, 2011 Board of Trustees Resolution on Creating and Efficient Transfer System
The CUNY-wide common curricular structure created through Pathways allows the smooth and efficient
transfer of students’ credits from any CUNY college to all other CUNY colleges. Prior to its
implementation in Fall 2013, students who transferred would often find that some course credits
earned at one college did not match course requirements at another college; as a result, the credits
were not applied to degree requirements. In some cases, credits were applied as elective credits, which
may have done little to help students advance toward degree completion. In other cases, CUNY colleges
rejected course credits outright, awarding zero credits for completed coursework.
The increase in both the number and proportion of transfer students entering CUNY contributed to the
need to create a University-wide common curriculum structure. As shown in Table 1, since 2009, the
majority of students enroll in a baccalaureate program at CUNY having transferred from another college,
while only about one-third of all students enter as a first-time freshman. The Pathways Initiative was
CUNY’s response to serve its students better, especially transfers and future transfers.
Table 1 Number and Percent of First-Time Freshmen and Transfer Students Enrolled in CUNY Baccalaureate Programs
Academic Year
2009- 2010
2010- 2011
2011- 2012
2012- 2013
2013- 2014
2014- 2015
Number of First-Time Freshmen 13,289 12,798 12,761 12,620 12,763 13,141
% of First-Time Freshmen 37.2 36.1 34.3 33.8 34.6 32.9
Number of Transfer Students 22,478 22,641 24,465 24,701 24,158 26,775
% of Transfer Students 62.8 63.9 65.7 66.2 65.4 67.1
Total New Students 35,767 35,439 37,226 37,321 36,921 39,916 Data Source: Institutional Research Database (IRDB)
4
Overview of the Pathways Initiative
Following the 2011 Board of Trustees Resolution, or the Pathways Resolution, the Pathways Initiative
was to be fully implemented beginning in Fall 2013 for all CUNY first-time freshmen and transfer
students. Students who entered CUNY prior to Fall 2013 could opt in to the new curricular requirements.
The Pathways Resolution provides transfer credit guarantees for all three components of the
curriculum—general education, majors, and electives. These guarantees apply for all students,
regardless of the type of degree program they are transferring from or into, or whether they have
earned a degree or not prior to transfer.
1. The Resolution specifies that general education at CUNY consist of a 30-credit Common Core
requirement for all colleges across the University, with up to 12 additional credits, 1 referred to
as the College Option, required for students enrolled in baccalaureate programs. A University
Task Force proposed a flexible, yet uniform, curricular structure for general education and the
early part of the major that would allow for seamless transfer. A broad curricular framework
would provide the flexibility needed for CUNY colleges to design their own general education
program and maintain many of their existing requirements and course offerings. The Task Force
developed a set of broad Learning Goals for each distribution area that were modeled after the
Essential Learning Goals developed by the Association of American Colleges and Universities
(AACU) Liberal Education and America’s Progress (LEAP) initiative.
This common structure reduced the number of required general education credits at most CUNY
colleges.2 The 30-credit Pathways Common Core framework stipulates credit distribution by
area, as shown in Table 2. While specific learning outcomes are associated with each area, a
wide variety of courses and disciplines are included. The Pathways transfer guarantees ensure
that once a student successfully completes a course in a particular Common Core area, the
credits transfer to and satisfy the requirements for that Common Core area at any other CUNY
college.3 Requirements for the College Option vary across colleges, and in some cases, vary
across different schools within the same college.
1 http://www2.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/undergraduate-studies/pathways/gened/college-option/ 2 Prior to Pathways, on average, CUNY colleges required 52 general education credits, with some schools requiring as many as 63 credits. 3 Further detail about the Common Core areas, including the learning outcomes associated with each, can be found in the CUNY Pathways Task Force’s Final Recommendation to the Chancellor (http://www1.cuny.edu/mu/academic-news/files/2011/12/CommonCoreStructureFinalRec.pdf).
Table 2 Pathways General Education Common Core Requirement
General Education Number of
Credits Number of
Courses
Areas of Required Common Core 12 4
English Composition 6 2
Mathematical and Quantitative Reasoning 3 1
Life and Physical Sciences 3 1
Areas of Flexible Common Core 18 6
World Cultures and Global Issues 3 1
U.S. Experience in Its Diversity 3 1
Creative Expression 3 1
Individual and Society 3 1
Scientific World 3 1
One additional course from any one of the five areas above 3 1
2. Pathways provides transfer guarantees for gateway courses in selected majors with high
numbers of transfers. As of June 2016, those majors are: Biology; Business; Criminal Justice;
Economics; English; Nursing; Political Science; Psychology; Sociology; and Teacher Education.
Each college identified between three and six Major Gateway courses in each of the selected
majors that should be accepted as entry-level courses for beginning the major at any CUNY
college offering the major.
3. Pathways guarantees that all courses completed for credit at one CUNY college be accepted for
credit upon transfer to any other CUNY college, with the understanding that courses that do not
meet the Common Core or major requirements may count for elective credit.
6
Implementation
Seamless Transfer
Before Pathways, thousands of courses from CUNY colleges were not accepted for credit at other CUNY
colleges. That is, students who had completed such coursework did not receive elective credit or any
other type of credit upon transfer. In Fall 2013, the University Registrar’s Office collaborated with each
campus Registrar to recode such courses so that these courses now at least receive elective credit upon
transfer.
In addition to ensuring that credits earned at one CUNY college transferred for credit to any other CUNY
college, Pathways addressed the issue of credit transfer toward degree requirements. Before Pathways,
courses transferred toward degree requirements if they were coded as “equivalent” in the transfer
credit rules within CUNYfirst, the University’s student information system. For example, if College A
required Introductory Biology for the Biology major, a student transferring from College B must have
completed a course deemed equivalent to College A’s Introductory Biology course to receive credit
toward the requirement.
With Pathways, Common Core and College Option courses contain “Requirement Designation” codes in
CUNYfirst that transcend course equivalencies and result in the automated application of these courses
toward Common Core or College Option requirements upon transfer. The coding of Pathways courses
with these Requirement Designation codes has resulted in the seamless transfer of thousands of
courses.
Common Core Course Review Committee
The 2011 Pathways Resolution requires faculty to review all courses to be included in the Common Core
curriculum “to ensure that all learning outcomes are satisfied.” The Common Core Course Review
Committee (CCCRC) was established in 2012 to meet this requirement.
During the early implementation phase, there were eight CCCRC subcommittees, one for each of the
eight areas of the Common Core. When the volume of courses decreased, three subcommittees were
able to cover the Common Core areas. By the fourth year, two subcommittees reviewed course
submissions in all eight areas.
Each subcommittee is composed of faculty members from the CUNY colleges that offer undergraduate
degrees. Each subcommittee is led by a chair, who is a faculty member in that subcommittee. Faculty
members are compensated for their work and serve a 1-2 year term. 4
After CCCRC approval, courses are submitted to the Chancellor’s University Report before being coded
as Common Core courses in CUNYfirst and Degree Works, the degree audit system.
4 Current committee members and college affiliation are posted on the Pathway CCCRC web page. http://www2.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/undergraduate-studies/pathways/about/ccrc/
Colleges fill out Course Submission Forms to explain the course assignments and activities that address
learning outcomes. Colleges also submit a sample syllabus for each course. The CCCRC considers both
the Course Submission Form and the syllabus when determining if a course meets the learning
outcomes. The syllabus should provide additional context, but does not have to repeat all of the same
information included on the Course Submission Form, as long as the two documents do not conflict.
Also, because different course sections will be taught by different professors using different approaches,
the syllabus submitted as part of the CCCRC review process is considered representative.
As part of this third-year review process, the CCCRC chairs worked with their subcommittees to review
and assess their processes. Together, the three chairs developed a set of guiding questions for their
subcommittees, and then each subcommittee wrote a response with recommendations for
improvements.
While the CCCRC agreed that the review process resulted in greater confidence in the overall quality of
the curriculum at the colleges, the subcommittees provided the following recommendations for
improving the review process:
There needs to be better communication between the course review subcommittees and the
faculty who are preparing courses and syllabi for review. While each CUNY campus has a liaison
who uploads course proposals and communicates committee votes back to the campus, there
have been calls for increased transparency about the process and additional clarification about
expectations.
The subcommittees could post on the Pathways website a written set of criteria and guidelines
that detail how each course submission is evaluated according to the learning outcomes.
The subcommittees could be regularly reminded of the scope of their task: determining whether a
given course satisfies the Pathways learning outcomes. Too often, subcommittees evaluate
courses based on pedagogy, content, mode of instruction, and other factors that are not within
the purview of Pathways. An orientation session for faculty new to serving on the CCCRC is
recommended. A written manual would be helpful as well.
Guides could be developed to help faculty at the colleges better understand what information
needs to be submitted.
Approved Pathways Common Core Courses
As of Fall 2016, there are over 2,300 approved Pathways Common Core courses offered across the
University, as shown in Table 3. With the exception of the “STEM variant” courses, these courses have
been approved by the CCCRC. STEM variant courses are not required to be reviewed by the CCCRC
because these courses are required for at least one major at the college and were not specifically
designed to address general education learning outcomes. Although Pathways requires that most
Common Core courses consist of 3 credits, STEM variant courses may be offered with more than 3
credits in the areas of Mathematical and Quantitative Reasoning, Life and Physical Science, and Scientific
World, as long as a sufficient number of 3-credit options are also available to students in these areas.
STEM variant courses allow students who enter CUNY with advanced math or science skills, as well as
8
those in STEM majors with particular math or science course sequencing requirements, to take these
more challenging courses within the general education curriculum. A college may offer a STEM variant
course in more than one Pathways area.
Table 3 Number of Pathways Common Core Courses by Area (as of December 2016)
Number of Courses
Areas of Common Core All (STEM Variant)
English Composition 77
Mathematical and Quantitative Reasoning (MQR) 176 (133)
Life and Physical Sciences 116 (38)
World Cultures and Global Issues 586
U.S. Experience in Its Diversity 223
Creative Expression 285
Individual and Society 335
Scientific World 269 (93)
Life and Physical Sciences or Scientific World1 233 (233)
MQR or Scientific World1 12 (12)
Total 2312 (509)
1 These courses can fulfill the requirements of either of the two areas.
Undergraduates Enrolled in Pathways
As in Figure 1, by Fall 2015, the majority of CUNY students—81 percent of all degree-seeking students—
were following the Pathways curriculum, as would be expected.
Figure 1 Percent of Degree-Seeking Undergraduates Enrolled in Pathways, Fall 2015
Data Source: CBIL (CUNY Business Intelligence Light) Database. CBIL reflects daily refreshed enrollment, based on day-old copies of CUNYfirst tables in the Administrative Data Warehouse (ADW). The enrollment figures from CBIL do not match standard enrollment reports from OIRA.
Student Knowledge about Pathways
Figures 2 and 3 show students’ responses to questions about familiarity with the general education
requirements and course transfer guarantees provided by CUNY’s Pathways Initiative. These responses
were collected in Spring 2015, more than three semesters after Pathways was first launched. An
87.6
74.5
80.6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Associate Program
Baccalaureate Program
Undergraduate Total
%
9
independent consultant led the focus group sessions. There were eight focus groups consisting of a total
of 57 students from four CUNY colleges: two community and two senior colleges. The focus groups
provided a first glimpse of student impressions and understanding of Pathways and general education.
While not intended to be exhaustive or conclusive, the focus groups shed some first light on student
understanding not only of Pathways and general education, but of their understanding of the curriculum
in general and their experience with college life.
Although responses varied across colleges and for different student groups, more than half of all
students, 56 percent, indicated they are “Very familiar” with their general education requirements, as
Figure 2 depicts. However, Figure 3 shows less than one-tenth of the students, 7 percent, said they are
“Very familiar” with the course transfer guarantees, and nearly one-third, 30 percent, answered “Don’t
know anything” about the transfer guarantees.
Students’ responses during the focus group sessions indicated knowledge of the Major Gateway courses
might be especially limited. However, the majority of focus group participants had majors that do not
participate in the Pathways Major Gateway plan.
Figure 2 Students’ Self-Reported Familiarity with General Education Requirement
Figure 3 Students’ Self-Reported Familiarity with Course Transfer Guarantees
7%
20%
6%0% 0%
63% 60%
72%
33%
50%
30%20% 22%
67%
50%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Overall Sample(n = 57)
FTF CommunityCollege (n = 30)
TransferStudents (n = 18)
FTF SeniorCollege (n = 3)
Opt-in Students(n = 6)
"Are you familiar with the course transfer guarantees provided by CUNY's Pathways initiative?"
Very Familiar
Know a little
Don't know anything
56%
77%
28%33%
50%44%
23%
72% 67%
50%
0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Overall Sample(n = 57)
FTF CommunityCollege (n = 30)
TransferStudents (n = 18)
FTF SeniorCollege (n = 3)
Opt-in Students(n = 6)
"Are you familiar with your general education requirement?"
Very Familiar
Know a little
Don't know anything
10
Analysis of the eight focus groups identified several major themes:
1. Most students, regardless of student type or college type, have a neutral to positive opinion of the
general education requirements. Students’ comments included: “The general education
requirements provide me with exposure to a broad range of learning topics” and “(As a first-time
freshman in 2013) I accept the general education program as what is required of me as a college
student.”
2. A minority of students hold a neutral to negative opinion of the general education requirements.
Some students commented: “There are too many requirements” and “I would like to focus more on
my major.”
3. Community college students overwhelmingly hold the opinion that the transfer guarantee policies
will be helpful to them and other CUNY students transferring between CUNY colleges. Students’
comments included: “This will save me time and money when I transfer to a senior college” and “I
wish these guarantees extended to non-CUNY schools.”
4. Transfer students had mixed experiences with their transfer credits. Some students commented:
“The transfer guarantees were helpful to me when I transferred to a CUNY senior college” and “The
transfer guarantees are a good idea but did not work as easily for me as I expected.”
5. Most students do not have an understanding of the College Option component of Pathways.
6. Most students believe that the Major Gateway component of Pathways will be helpful to CUNY
students; many students are unfamiliar with this policy.
7. Perception of advisement varies widely within and among institutions. As a result, some students
felt they received proper advisement about Pathways from their advisors, while others indicated
that they self-educated using Degree Works and their college websites.
Major Gateway Course Transfer
As required by Pathways, faculty committees designated a minimum of three “gateway” courses leading
into several of CUNY’s most popular majors. Students who anticipate pursuing one of these majors can
take the designated courses and transfer them for major credit seamlessly between CUNY colleges that
offer the major. An analysis has been conducted to evaluate whether this component of the Pathways
transfer guarantees is working smoothly.
The analysis examined data from 1,970 CUNY students who have completed at least one Pathways
Major Gateway course, transferred to another CUNY college in Spring 2016, and declared one of the
participating majors. The transfer credit for these Major Gateway courses should have been applied as
credit toward the major or as fulfilling prerequisite requirements for the major. To investigate whether
the transfer guarantee was applied correctly, an analysis of the actual transferred equivalencies at the
receiving institution was conducted. Table 4 shows that 86.9 percent of all incoming Major Gateway
courses were accepted as equivalent Major Gateway courses and were counted toward the major at the
11
receiving colleges. Moreover, 10.6 percent of all incoming Major Gateway courses were accepted as
other credit bearing courses applicable to students’ majors. Overall, 97.5 percent of all incoming Major
Gateway courses were accepted as credit applicable to students’ majors, suggesting a successful
implementation of the Major Gateway transfer guarantees.
Column definitions for Tables 4 and 5 are as follows:
Major Gateway is the course transferring as equivalent to a Major Gateway course at the receiving college;
Other Course is the course transferring as equivalent to a course not identified as a Major
Gateway at the receiving college, for example, ENG 111 (Introduction to College Writing);
Subject Elective is the course transferring for elective credit within a particular discipline, for
example, BIOL 1000E (Biology Elective);
Blanket Elective is the course transferring for blanket elective credit, for example, ELEC 1000
(Elective Credit).
Table 4 Transfer Status of Incoming Major Gateway Courses at Receiving Colleges, Spring 2016
Receiving Colleges
Total Number of Major Gateway
Courses 1
Transfer Status of Incoming Major Gateway Courses at Receiving Colleges
Major Gateway
Other Course
Subject Elective
Blanket Elective
N % % % %
Senior 4,427 87.5 10.1 1.9 0.6
Comprehensive 327 76.1 20.5 2.1 1.2
Community 2 223 90.6 7.6 1.3 0.4
University Total 4,977 86.9 10.6 1.9 0.6
Data Source: Institution Research Database (IRDB) and CUNYfirst
1 Major Gateway courses taken at a sending institution and transferred into a receiving institution in Spring 2016. 2 Because two community colleges conduct credit evaluations manually, their data are not included in this table. Only automatic credit evaluations are presented in current analysis.
Table 5 included the analysis for the ten participating majors. In Criminal Justice, Sociology, and Teacher
Education, Major Gateway courses taken at sending colleges are less likely to transfer as equivalent to
Major Gateway courses at receiving college than in other disciplines. This is due to the more flexible
categories chosen by these faculty committees. It is important to note, however, that the transfer
credits evaluated as Subject Elective or Blanket Elective are also relatively low for Criminal Justice and
Sociology. This analysis points to areas where further research and investigation is necessary to improve
transfer within the majors.
12
Table 5 Transfer Status of Incoming Major Gateway Courses at Receiving Colleges, by Major
Majors Total Number of Major Gateway
Courses1
Transfer Status of Incoming Major Gateway Courses
at Receiving Colleges
Major Gateway
Course Subject Elective
Blanket Elective
N % % % %
Biology 596 89.9 7.0 2.9 0.2
Business 2,003 93.5 5.1 1.3 0.1
Criminal Justice 129 65.9 32.6 0.8 0.8
Economics 97 76.3 16.5 7.2 0.0
English 200 74.5 20.0 3.5 2.0
Nursing 540 87.6 11.3 0.6 0.6
Political Science 65 80.0 15.4 1.5 3.1
Psychology 923 88.0 10.8 1.0 0.2
Sociology 104 63.5 34.6 1.9 0.0
Teacher Education 320 63.8 24.7 6.9 4.7
Total 4,977 86.9 10.6 1.9 0.6
Data Source: Institution Research Database (IRDB) and CUNYfirst 1 Major Gateway courses taken at a sending institution and transferred into a receiving institution in Spring 2016.
Student Appeals Process Review
The Pathways resolution called for the establishment of an appeals process “for undergraduate students
who wish to appeal denial or restriction of transfer credit.” In response, each college appointed an
appeals officer and established a student appeals process. The Central Office of Academic Affairs (OAA)
also adopted procedures for handling student appeals that had received a negative determination at the
campus level. Guidelines and procedures were developed and posted on the CUNY Pathways website5
and on each college website.
In June and July 2016, CUNY Central OAA surveyed 18 CUNY colleges regarding their student appeals
processes and outcomes since the implementation of Pathways (i.e., academic years 2013-14, 2014-15,
and 2015-16). More specifically, colleges were asked about their Pathways Appeals websites for
students, their appeals processes and tracking systems, the numbers and types of appeals they received,
and problems and issues they encountered.
Appeals Survey Findings
Transparency and visibility of appeals processes. Fourteen of the 18 colleges provided links (URLs) to
websites describing some information about their local appeals processes. Of the 14, 11 colleges’
websites provide detailed information about processes; three others show either contact information of
1Consists of students enrolling as a transfer student in the fall semester less than three years since their last enrollment at CUNY.
Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015
Data Source: Institutional Research Database (IRDB)
16
GPA and Credit Attainment after One Year Table 7 includes GPA and the number of credits earned as of the end of first year by first-time freshmen, along with those by transfer students. All four cohorts, before and after the Fall 2013 implementation of Pathways, show stable GPAs in each group. However, while the number of credits after one year for first-time freshmen were relatively unchanged, students who transferred within CUNY had a steady increase in accumulated credits. One side note is that transfer students consistently have a higher GPA one year later than first-time freshmen after their first year, both at senior and community colleges. These outcomes indicate transfer students perform better in more advanced courses during the first year after transfer, than first-time freshmen in entry-level courses during their first year. Table 7 GPA and Credit Accumulation of First-Time Freshmen and Transfers Within CUNY
Groups Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015
First-Time Freshmen at Senior Colleges2
Enrolled (N) 17,182 17,880 18,053 18,413
GPA after One Year 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.77
Credits after One Year 25.3 25.1 25.5 26.2
Transfer to Senior Colleges2 Within CUNY1
Enrolled (N) 8,995 9,093 10,435 10,992
GPA after One Year 2.83 2.83 2.81 2.84
Credits after One Year 76.8 79.1 80.9 81.7
First-Time Freshmen at Community Colleges
Enrolled (N) 18,434 17,742 19,322 19,022
GPA after One Year 2.29 2.33 2.28 2.34
Credits after One Year 15.1 15.9 15.7 15.9
Transfer to Community Colleges2 Within CUNY1
Enrolled (N) 1,783 2,331 2,632 2,934
GPA after One Year 2.44 2.50 2.47 2.59
Credits after One Year 31.3 31.8 33.5 36.6
First-Time Freshmen - Total
Enrolled (N) 35,616 35,622 37,375 37,435
GPA after One Year 2.52 2.54 2.51 2.56
Credits after One Year 20.2 20.7 20.7 21.2
Transfer Within CUNY - Total
Enrolled (N) 10,778 11,424 13,067 13,926
GPA after One Year 2.78 2.77 2.75 2.79
Credits after One Year 70.1 70.5 72.4 73.1
Data Source: Institutional Research Database (IRDB) 1Consists of students enrolling as a transfer student in the fall semester less than three years since their last enrollment at CUNY. 2Includes the three comprehensive colleges
17
Retention Rates and Transfer Type
One-year retention rates have remained consistent since before Pathways was implemented, as shown
in Table 8. These retention rates include students enrolled at any CUNY college in the following Fall
semester, including students who transferred within the CUNY system, before earning the degree
pursued.
Table 8 One-Year Retention Rates1 of First-Time Freshmen
Associate Total 24,865 64.8 23,630 65.2 23,452 66.4 24,681 64.4
Baccalaureate Total 12,000 86.2 11,836 86.3 12,007 87.1 12,521 86.4
Data Source: Institutional Research Database (IRDB) 1 Retention rates are the percentage of students who are still enrolled at any CUNY college in the subsequent fall term and have not yet earned the degree pursued.
The number of transfers at CUNY is on the rise. This increase, as Table 9 shows, is mostly due to an
increase in the number of students with associate degrees who transfer to a baccalaureate program,
especially after Pathways implementation in Fall 2013.
Table 9 Trends in Transfers into CUNY Baccalaureate Programs
Transfer Type Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015
From Within CUNY N N
% increase1
N %
increase1 N
% increase1
With Associate Degree 4,030 4,158 3.2 4,803 19.2 5,293 31.3
Without Associate Degree 2,456 2,078 -15.4 2,571 4.7 2,696 9.8
From Baccalaureate Program 1,545 1,586 2.7 1,866 20.8 1,877 21.5
From CUNY More than 3 Yrs2 891 908 1.9 1,031 15.7 1,172 31.5
From Outside CUNY 5,548 5,628 1.4 5,650 1.8 5,759 3.8
Total 14,470 14,358 -0.8 15,921 10 16,797 16.1 Data Source: Institutional Research Database (IRDB) 1 % increase from Fall 2012 2 Students enrolling as a transfer student in the fall semester more than three years since their last enrollment at CUNY.
Course-Taking Patterns by Discipline
Each Pathways Common Core area accommodates courses from a wide array of disciplines. As a result,
specific courses that had been required in college-specific general education curricula prior to Pathways
could still be offered as general education compliant courses within Pathways’ new flexible structure.
With this in mind, CUNY’s Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA) examined the number
and percentage of first-time freshmen taking courses in particular disciplines during their first year at
CUNY. The analysis includes a comparison of first-time freshmen enrolled at CUNY before and after the
18
Pathways implementation in Fall 2013. Table 10 shows these course-taking patterns vary widely across
disciplines.
The percentages of students who took a course in some disciplines have remained fairly consistent. For
example, course-taking of Foreign Language only ranged between 18.1 percent (Fall 2012 entrants) and
20.7 percent (Fall 2014) across the five-year period. Some other disciplines, including Business, History,
and Social Sciences, also show fairly consistent course-taking patterns.
In contrast, course-taking in disciplines including Math and Natural Sciences has steadily increased. The
percentage of students who took a course in Math increased from 77.9 percent for the Fall 2011 cohort
to 86.3 percent for the Fall 2015 cohort. Respective numbers for Natural Sciences are 27.0 percent and
35.1 percent. Course-taking in disciplines such as Arts, Education, and Speech/Communication, on the
other hand, has steadily declined throughout the five years; for instance, 44.9 percent of the Fall 2011
entrants took a course in Arts, but the number decreased to 34.7 percent for the Fall 2015 entrants. A
close look at the table reveals that both of these changes may have started before the Fall 2013
Pathways implementation. It is possible that multiple variables are responsible for them, which may
include federal and state policy changes, and national trends in terms of increasingly popular/unpopular
disciplines and occupations.
Table 10 Trends in First-Time Freshman Course-Taking, by Discipline
Data Source: Institutional Research Database (IRDB) 1 Proportion of first-time freshmen who took a course in a given discipline in the first fall or spring semester after entrance 2 Spring 2016 data are preliminary
Total First-time Freshmen 37,129 35,616 35,622 37,375 37,446
Took Course during the Academic Year1
Fall 2015/
Spring 20162
Fall 2011/
Spring 2012
Fall 2012/
Spring 2013
Fall 2013/
Spring 2014
Fall 2014/
Spring 2015
19
OIRA also examined course-taking patterns of all undergraduates enrolled in the Fall semester who took
courses in particular disciplines during the Fall and Spring semesters of the academic year (Table 11).
This analysis includes students who were following the Pathways curriculum, as well as students who
were following the prior curricular requirements.
Course-taking among all undergraduates across disciplines has varied only slightly, with the percentages
mostly remaining level throughout the five years. Although a few disciplines, namely, Arts, Education,
and Nursing/Health, show mildly declining patterns, these changes started before the Fall 2013
implementation of Pathways; they may also be attributable to some variables including or other than
the Pathways Initiative.
Table 11 Trends in Undergraduate Course-Taking, by Discipline
Data Source: Institutional Research Database (IRDB) 1 Proportion of undergraduates enrolled in the fall semester who took a course in a given discipline in a fall or spring semester 2 Spring 2016 data are preliminary
