Student Swirl and Its Impact on Higher Education
Student’s Name
Institution
Course Name
Instructor’s Name
Date
Student Swirl and Its Impact on Higher Education
Introduction
The idea of the traditional student has been out of the picture for a very long time. The common notion is that the college process includes starting at an institution and staying there for roughly four years until completion. However, the reality on the ground is that every student’s path is different. Different things come up, such as financial issues and personal issues that may cause students to switch their institutional arrangements. Part time students who accumulate degree credits over a period longer than the designated four-year course length are commonplace. In fact, the percentage of students enrolling in multiple institutions is more than half of the undergraduate population. This process of back and forth enrollment at different institutions is what is known as student swirl. This paper will examine what student swirl is and how it impacts degree completion and higher education generally.
Student Swirl
The journey to getting a degree is not all crystal clear, as it seems. A 2012 report released by the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center shows that more than a third of students transfer institutions before completing their bachelor’s degrees (Shapiro et al., 2014). Of this number, more than half transferred more than once. Students make a deliberate choice to transfer schools to improve their degree, or because they initially made a poor match with the institution or because they went through some financial and academic problems over time.
As four-year institutions’ price continues to soar and family incomes stagnate, students are moving to community colleges and other institutions. Two-year colleges are easier for students since they have lower tuition rates, smaller classes, and a chance to explore different majors before committing to what they like (Johnson & Muse, 2012). However, most four year colleges do not collaborate effectively with two-year colleges to provide a pathway to a combined four-year degree. Only a few states have clear partnerships, with the best one being the Direct Connect program in Orlando. This program ensures admission to graduates of two-year institutions in the University of Central Florida. Such clear set agreements allow students to follow a more affordable and flexible pathway to getting a degree.
Students who cannot effectively transit from a two-year college to a four-year college tend to give up over time. There are too many hurdles for students who want to attend two institutions to complete their degrees eventually. 80% of community college students intend to transfer to a four-year college to earn their degree. However, only 40% of them do manage to transfer, with only 17% getting their degree in six years (Shapiro et al., 2014). Many such students end up with credits but no degree. There are roughly 45 million Americans who make up this demographic.
A further 2.2 million individuals already have more than half the credits needed for a bachelor’s degree, people who are considered no better than high school graduates who did not attempt college. The problem lies in a lack of evidence to support the idea that four years are necessary for a degree (Borden, 2004). Institution leaders claim that students must attend a four-year college to receive the full experience of their degree. Furthermore, four-year colleges have more motivation and financial incentives to persuade students to stay longer in college rather than accept credit transfers in school for a shorter period.
Student Transfers And Reverse Transfers
Student swirl is caused by different factors, such as increased online learning and changing student demographics. Student transfers and reverse transfers are affected by two main factors- student retention and transfer policies (Borden, 2004). While institutions want to reduce the number of students who transfer, they also need to find ways to serve transferring students best. In terms of retention and reducing the number of student transfers, institutions need to be willing to research and find out why students are leaving. Some issues could include dissatisfaction, academic problems, or financial matters.
The increase in student swirl means that many institutions have a lot more transfer students to deal with. Studies show that how an institution handles this demographic can significantly change its image and satisfaction levels among students (Shapiro et al., 2014). If an institution cannot effectively help its transfer students fit in and adapt their credits to the school, this can lead to dis-enrolment and more transfers.
Reverse transfers occur when a student moves from a four-year college to a community college. This scenario occurs mainly when financial hurdles exist. Students also reverse transfer when they need the flexibility that comes with a community college in terms of picking majors, timings, or easy commutes (Johnson & Muse, 2012). This is especially true when people need to work and study simultaneously and cannot manage a regular day schedule offered by four-year institutions.
Swirling affects degree completion by increasing the amount of time it takes to complete a four-year degree. Students generally take longer to complete the degree since some institutions may not allow the transfer of credits or financial hurdles cause them to stay out of school for a while. There are too many people with uncompleted degrees and credits due to the occasional inconsistency of swirling.
Factors Influencing Student Swirl
Today’s student goes through a different educational journey as various factors come into play. The main factors include race and income. Income inequality is historically more prevalent amongst people of color, no different for students of color. Many four year institutions are not affordable or accessible for students from low-income backgrounds and students of color (Brown, 2011). As students struggle to keep learning amongst these hurdles, swirling becomes the best option for them. When possible, students can transfer from a two-year college to a four-year one, but they have to reverse transfer to a community college when things get tough.
Institutions must ensure they have some form of help for this specific demographic as research shows they are the most under-serviced in higher education. There is a general practice where institutions refuse to release transcripts for students with unpaid fees, which unwittingly targets this demographic. This practice feeds into the cycle of students having credits but no degree (Brown, 2011). Debt forgiveness for students who re-enroll has been a new strategy sweeping into some institutions which combat this. It allows students to stay on track as getting a degree will enable them to get better opportunities, which can be utilized to pay back loans.
Government budget cuts can have a significant impact on swirling. Institutions tend to increase tuition fees, increasing the already heavy financial burden on students. Students enrolled in four-year colleges end up reverse transferring to more community colleges. Without a precise arrangement for credit transfers into four-year colleges, more students end up leaving school altogether, having credits but no degree.
Conclusion
Student swirl will continue to increase as student needs change. This is especially true with the pandemic and consequent financial uncertainty. More students will move from four-year colleges to more flexible and affordable options to further their education. Higher education institutions should streamline the transfer process to avoid locking out students from opportunities.
References
Borden, V. M. (2004). Accommodating student swirl: When traditional students are no longer the tradition. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 36(2), 10-17.
Brown, A., R. (2011). Swirling: An examination of time-to-degree, reasons, and outcomes associated with multi-institutional transfers.
Johnson, I. Y., & Muse, W. B. (2012). Student swirl at a single institution: The role of timing and student characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 53(2), 152-181.
Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Yuan, X., Harrell, A. T., Wild, J. C., & Ziskin, M. B. (2014). Some College, No Degree: A National View of Students with Some College Enrollment, but No Completion (Signature Report No. 7). National Student Clearinghouse.