Articulation Agreement Development Guidelines

Why create articulation agreements?

To help students to achieve their goals in the most effective manner possible, post-secondary institutions must develop consistent pathways to allow students to maximize their time, effort, and financial resources. Transfer agreements are one of the most actionable ways institutions can assist students in meeting those goals. (AACRAO, 2019).

• Remove barriers related to transfer
• Loss of credit
• Missing academic requirements
• Cost
• Clearly communicate student requirements
• Increase on-time graduation rates for both institutions

What is the difference between an articulation agreement and an MOU?

MOUs or Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) are typically more transactional and business focused in nature, focusing on specific outcomes or responsibilities between parties. MOUs are usually short-form agreements formalizing business relationships between institutions. MOUs may be used to set up general broad terms between parties. MOUs will often contain information around financial or resource obligations, such as tuition, faculty exchanges, space rental, data sharing, or other legal issues.

Articulation agreements are more commonly used to formalize transfer relationships between institutions. These agreements focus on academic processes and policies that guide transfer and impact students, such as credit transfer between schools and curriculum alignment.

Articulation Agreements can be:

Course to course – Course equivalency agreements that determine how individual courses match each other in terms of content, learning outcomes, relevance, and value.

Program to Program

Structure of agreements may be

• 2+2 (60 credits NIC + 60 credits University)
• 3+1 (90 credits NIC + 30 credits University)
• 1+3 (30 credits NIC + 90 credits University)

Components

The essential components of an articulation agreement might include:

● Participating institutions, or divisions of institution, which are party to the agreement.

● Specification of degree types and alignments, such as Associate of Arts with Bachelor of Arts, Associate of Applied Science to Bachelor of Science, or even Bachelor’s to Master’s programs.

● Conditions for admission. For example, elements such as the number of earned/transferrable credits, GPA, deadline dates, and/or forms required to establish participation.

● Matriculation dates at both institutions that establish the academic requirements to be followed and completed.

● Specific transfer policies that may be different for students under the agreement (for example, if there is a certain time after which credit earned in certain technical fields is no longer eligible for credit and an explanation as to how these policies apply).

● Identification of the catalog upon which the articulation was based, relative to each school.

● Any course-to-course equivalencies, degree equivalency grids, or curricular crosswalks aligning the programs to be articulated between the two institutions, substitutions for such (if appropriate), and recommended choices for electives that will facilitate on-time completion. Individual program alignment spreadsheets for visual ease and student understanding might be provided.

● Other degree requirements such as standardized test scores (e.g. PRAXIS), required clinical hours outside the coursework, residency requirements, etc.

● Clear illustration of expected credits and/or time to graduate when possible.

● Dates of applicability as well as length of the agreement and conditions for renewal and/or for termination.

● Non-academic opportunities (or exclusions), e.g. on-campus housing, honors, guaranteed admission, scholarships, advising, etc.

● Data sharing requirements, opportunities, and limitations.

● Legal language as required by the institution, state, or other entities.

● General section that references that students coming in vis-à-vis this agreement are subject to all other university policies and requirements not otherwise specifically addressed in the agreement.

● Agreement marketing process and responsibilities.

● Point of contact for both institutions.

● Assessment policy, including which data will be shared, what the measures of success (and failure) are, and how to identify next steps to improve the agreement.

● Signatories – those officially acknowledging and accepting the agreement on behalf of their institution include all of the following: Division Chair, Dean, and Provost.

Process:

• Division Chair contacts the partner institution or is contacted by partner institution.
• With program faculty, review two- and four-year degree plans with representative at partner institution
• Map the courses. Review course plan term by term to confirm that all requirements have been satisfied.
• Identify any missing required courses and discuss plans for how that can be addressed. Can they be substituted or waived? Can they be incorporated into Year 1 and Year 2, or can they be moved to Year 3 and Year 4? Implement corrections, if necessary.
• Develop and draft the proposed articulation agreement. NIC or partner institution can draft the agreement.
• Forward the articulation agreement to the respective NIC Division Chair, Dean, and Provost for signatures.
• Submit the final articulation document, complete with all signatures to the Provost’s Office.
• Identify time period for review and individual responsible for maintaining and updating the agreement. Recommend review no less than every three years.
• Once an agreement is established Provost’s Executive Assistant should notify additional offices to ensure communication and promotion to students:
• Academic Advising (inform all academic advisors)
• Admissions (inform prospective students)
• Registrar (update course equivalency database)
• Communications and Marketing (update website, share on social media)

AACRAO (2019). Guide to Best Practices Articulation Agreements