Let me tell you about Andrew’s aggressive student who graduated high school with impressive double enrollment credits. After a year at a private university and spending some time at work, he reignited his educational ambitions at community college. With about 30 credits left in his bachelor’s degree, he applied to an R-1 university to prepare for his journey.
It should be a seamless transition to an unexpected challenge. Despite submitting transfer jobs in October and checking regularly with consultants, Andrew found out in January that after class (study already started), he faced “at least three years of course work” instead of the expected one year of graduation.
This is not a rare situation or some administrative abnormality. Instead, it is a norm for individuals who do not pursue a traditional four-year degree. Higher education talks endlessly about completion and student success while maintaining systems and policies that actively undermine these goals.
Andrew’s story represents a key opportunity for higher education. Although his family successfully advocated for refunds and found another institution that better recognizes his previous studies, his experience highlights the fundamental challenges we must address collectively.
The scale of the challenge
We have 42 million Americans with college credits but no degrees. We transition to civilian life every year 200,000 military personnel. We have an economy that urgently needs highly skilled workers. However, higher education’s response to credit liquidity remains based on outdated policies and processes that cannot meet the needs of today’s students, institutions, or labor.
Many institutions have made meaningful progress in supporting diverse student needs through parenting services, flexible arrangements and online selection. These are important steps. Now we must extend the same commitment to the academic evaluation process that directly affects students’ time in their degree and financial investment.
Disconnect
Transfer pronunciation protocols (where they were attacked) have created valuable avenues, but their implementation often lacks the consistency and transparency that students should have. When the agreement includes qualified language without a strong commitment, students will not be able to effectively plan their educational trips or make informed financial decisions.
The contradiction is astonishing: We are concerned about student debt and extended time, questioning why students only need 120 to earn 150 credits when they graduate. Meanwhile, our credit assessment process remains opaque, slow and often expensive.
Current reality – students often have to apply, pay deposits or even register before they can understand how their previous academic work will be valued – creates unnecessary barriers. We can do better, and frankly, must. It’s like buying a car and finding out the price after you sign the paperwork. In which other industries is this acceptable?
Chance
If we fully accept credit liquidity as the cornerstone of student success, consider the possibilities:
- Financially, students can make informed decisions about their educational pathways.
- Institutions can demonstrate their commitment to affordability by acknowledging previous learning.
- Graduation rates will increase as students avoid unnecessary repetition of courses.
- The workforce will benefit from the entry of skilled professionals faster.
Resolve objections
There are usually three categories of objections to credit mobility:
- Teacher’s workload: Asking teachers to do more and assess credits for prospective students can be an unnecessary burden. But if more students can see their studies valuable, then their degrees can reach, and they don’t have to regain the courses they already master? This shift in perspective can transform the assessment process from burden to opportunity.
- Lost income: Focus on enrollment often obscures the reality that only 50% of students actually finish college in six years. What if our goal is to expand opportunities so that more students can complete their degrees? What if students take courses that really increase their experience and build confidence instead of repeating what they have learned?
- Quality issues: Quality is often considered a reason for delayed evaluation. In fact, transparent assessments support teachers’ desire to maintain academic standards. A clear process allows for informed decision-making and data collection to ensure focus is placed on student outcomes.
AI Opportunities
The advent of artificial intelligence provides a huge opportunity to enhance our credit assessment process – increasing time and cost issues while creating transparency in data analytics. A new study just released by AACRAO on the role of AI in credit mobility presents a compelling case of why the technology can help unlock new ways of working. We can leverage technology as a powerful tool to support teacher decision-making and administrative resource allocation. AI can:
- Determine potential course efficiency based on learning outcomes.
- Highlight relevant information in the transfer document.
- Simplify the evaluation process so that human experts can focus on complex cases.
- Give leaders insights on where credit mobility works effectively.
- Identify areas where additional resources or training are needed.
With proper implementation and training, AI can be a tool to achieve our goals at scale and achieve them, reducing the cost and timeline of graduation.
The way forward
If we truly believe in access and completion, then credit mobility must become a common priority for higher education. This means:
- Provide course information, learning outcomes and easy access to the course.
- Expand understanding of a variety of learning experiences, including micro-records, company training, internships and apprenticeships.
- Establish and respect a clear schedule for credit assessment.
- Eliminate financial barriers to credit assessment.
- Provide updated pronunciation and equivalent tables in easy-to-find locations on the admissions website.
Andrew’s experience should be the exception, not the rules. Universities and universities that accept this challenge will not only serve students better, but will also provide their own place for long-term sustainability amid increasingly competitive circumstances. Those who resist the risk of change have nothing to do with students who are designed to serve and continue the difficult problems of cost and time.
Call for action
The question before us is not whether credit liquidity matters, but whether we have a collective will to make it a reality, not just a few institutions, but across systems and all institutions. We must recognize that our students are learning in new ways, in new schedules, and bringing knowledge faster than our courses. In any case, our students deserve the full commitment we recognize their learning.
So, I would ask: How much do you have to make a large-scale credit mobility? Your answer shows you how to do everything in college seriously.
