Joint Boards Articulation Commission
Student Transfer Committee

Meeting Summary Notes
February 22, 2001
OIT Metro
Portland, OR

Members Present
Dave Phillips, Clatsop Community College, Chair
Jim Arnold, OUS Academic Affairs
Jim Buch, University of Oregon
Mickie Bush, Concordia University
Rod Diman, Portland State University
Abbie Allen (for John Duarte), Oregon Institute of Technology
Pat North, Eastern Oregon University
Glenda Tepper, Clackamas Community College
Elaine Yandle-Roth, Department of Community Colleges & Workforce Development
Diane Watson, Linn-Benton Community College

Dave Phillips called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.

1. Introductions

Members introduced themselves. Abbie Allen is substituting for member John Duarte and Diane Watson joins the group now that Johnnie Stokes has retired.

2. Minutes of the February 8, 2000 Meeting

The minutes of the February 2000 meeting were approved as submitted.

3. Associate of Science Oregon Transfer Degree Discussion

Given that the main topic of the day was scheduled to be a discussion of the possibility of developing a A.S. Oregon Transfer degree, Jim Arnold had assembled a packet a materials to be used as reference for that discussion. He briefly inventoried the materials for those in attendance, which included: models of A.S. transfer degrees from other states, a comparison chart of OUS business program requirements/recommendations at the lower-division level, and an updated version of the OUS general education requirements comparison chart. Arnold then outlined the process whereby the group finds itself again considering this topic. The December 2000 OUS-CC conference was structured in such a way as to provide information to JBAC regarding possible policy initiatives. One of the topics that emerged was the Associate of Science transfer degree. Three of the discussion leaders for different "tracks" of the conference day are represented in the Transfer Committee membership and Arnold asked those three (Jim Buch, Dave Phillips, Elaine Yandle-Roth) to share their experiences of the OUS-CC conference.

Buch led conference participant groups in "current issues in articulation and transfer." Among the issues raised were: "truth in advertising" regarding the AA/OT (ensuring that accurate information about the degree is disseminated and understood by everyone); the 108-credit hour limitation on transfer credits; three- to four-credit conversion; the quality of college high courses; and common course numbering.

Yandle-Roth led groups in "common course numbering, course outcomes, and course equivalencies." The issues discussed in this group were fairly similar, starting with common course numbering, although common course content is the bigger issue. A lot of attention was on the AA/OT degree and the need for better communication to students and between campuses. That discussion led to the possibility of an Associate of Science transfer degree to meet the needs of students, such as those in business, engineering, and the sciences, who might be better served by such a degree. Some of the problems also identified for transfer of credits had to do with "custom designed courses" (such as "physics for chemists" vs. "physics for computer scientists"). A need was expressed to revisit agreements about the content of commonly numbered courses and concerns were expressed about students who attempt to transfer sequences of courses. Yandle-Roth reminded the group that as the topic of an AS transfer degree evolves, it would naturally need to include discussion with the Board of Education, a body that historically has not wanted to use a (program of study) designation with the AS degree.

Phillips led groups in discussion on the history of the JBAC and articulation and transfer in the state (with Buch), then more sessions specifically focused on the AA/OT. The sense was that as OUS general education credits have "migrated" since the inception of the AA/OT, perhaps the transfer degree has not kept pace and needs to be revised/realigned with current OUS requirements. For example, distribution requirements originally were stated as 12-15 credits, but with many OUS campuses instituting four-credit courses, maybe that course range is not appropriate. And the AA/OT is not that effective for students in engineering, sciences, and business; perhaps an AS/OT would be more appropriate.

The possibility of an AS/OT was discussed at the January and February JBAC meetings and the STC was admonished to not move too fast without bringing in the other stakeholders for discussion.

Phillips indicated that business was chosen as the discipline to start with in considering an AS/OT degree, since many conference participants thought that that degree would be desirable as well as possible. Perhaps general education requirements in an AS degree would look different than the AA degree.

Pat North briefly described the conference sessions she attended, which focused on advising for pre-education students. She has developed a matrix of education courses that apply to students studying within the realm of EOU, BMCC and TVCC.

It was noted that LBCC has developed an AS degree based on OSU program requirements, including the "perspectives" courses of the OSU general education core. Students who earn such a degree may transfer it directly into OSU.

Phillips noted that although the possibility of an AS transfer degree has been addressed in previous years by the Transfer Committee, it appears that the time is right for further examination given the widespread interest. Is there a reason, though, that we shouldn't do this? In the past, we did not feel it was necessary, that students could be served by customizing the AA/OT.

In examining the range of courses for business at the lower-division level (from the matrix provided by Arnold), it appears that an AS in business might be possible. For example, the two Economics courses (201, 202) seem to be a common theme in lower-division requirement/recommendations.

Arnold explained some models that are available for AS degrees. Washington state's comparison chart shows the requirements for an AA transfer degree built on general education requirements and an AS built on program-specific requirements. Arizona offers three transfer degrees, an AA, AS and A Bus, each with its own corresponding general education core.

The group then considered various options for what might be included in an AS degree in business. One possible degree structure, developed after much discussion, consisted of the following elements:



General Education Components


Writing (121, Composition; BA214, Business Writing)




Math (111, Algebra; 241, Calculus; 245 Math for Management, Social Science)


Social Sciences (ECON201, 202, plus one additional social science course)


Arts & Letters (4 courses with no more than 3 from the same prefix)


Physical Science (3 laboratory science courses)


General Education Credit Subtotal


Business-Specific Components


101, Intro to Business


211, 213, Financial, Managerial Accounting


131, Business Data Processing


230, Business Law (or other business elective)


Business Credit Subtotal


Degree Credit Total




Phillips will take this proposed degree outline back to JBAC with the recommendation that business program chairs come together to discuss its feasibility. At some point the Board of Education will be consulted as such a degree may take an OAR change to implement.

Are there possibilities for other AS transfer degrees? For example, as in the Washington state transfer degrees: their "degree #2" covers engineering. Possibilities for Oregon might also include engineering, computer sciences, environmental sciences, and "sciences in general."

Arnold was charged with constructing matrices of lower-division requirements in other disciplinary areas (perhaps loosely parallel to Washington's degrees #1 and #2) as was done for the business requirements for today's discussion. This information will be available for the next Transfer Committee meeting (see below for date, place, and time).

4. Possible Revision of the Associate of Arts/Oregon Transfer Degree (AA/OT)

Phillips indicated that the current structure of the AA/OT has been challenged recently, specifically by the participants of the fall OUS-CC conference. Issues that have arisen include:

With respect to the WR214 issue:

This is a proposal that comes primarily from Linn-Benton Community College. Their WR214 course is titled "Business Communications" and is purported to have course outcomes comparable to portions of both WR122 and WR123. Questions expressed included: (1) Does this fit into the first-year writing outcomes as provided by OWEAC?, (2) Does STC/JBAC have the authority to decide on this matter?

The STC would like OWEAC to address this issue. Questions that need to be answered include:

The STC requests that the JBAC prepare a letter to the OWEAC chair asking for guidance on this so that information could be shared statewide. This request will be taken to the JBAC at the March 2001 meeting.

With respect to accommodation for 4 and 5 credit courses in an AA/OT, the following new guidelines were proposed:

Current AA/OT Credit Requirements


Proposed AA/OT Credit and Course Requirements



8-9 credits



4 credits



3 credits


Arts & Letters

2-4 courses (from at least two disciplines), 10-12 credits


Social Sciences

3-5 courses (from at least two disciplines), 15-16 credits


Science/Math/Computer Science

15 credits minimum, including 3 lab courses. An approved computer science course must be included if the 3 lab science courses add to less than 15 credits

Arnold will prepare a draft, revised version of the standard AA/OT requirements to reflect these recommendations and distribute to JBAC at the next meeting.

With respect to the question about where interdisciplinary courses fit within the current structure of the AA/OT:

Students who currently take interdisciplinary courses as part of their general education core actually satisfy the breadth requirements of the transfer degree, even if their cousework is all under one prefix. How do we acknowledge that kind of academic work within the current structure of the AA/OT? The proposal was made to strike language from the current AA/OT requirements that state "with no more than nine credits from one discipline."

The groups that would need to review proposed modifications of the AA/OT would include, and start with, the Council of Instructional Administrators and the Academic Council (should the JBAC decided to proceed).

With respect to establishing criteria for inclusion in the various distribution areas of the AA/OT:

Do we have records on this discussion from the time during which the AA/OT was originally developed? Can Yandle-Roth or Buch search their files? Are the "old criteria" still relevant? We need to finish this conversation at the next meeting (see below).

How about studio courses? Are such courses appropriate for the elective category of the AA/OT? But not appropriate for the distribution requirements?

5. Next Meeting

The agenda item regarding articulation tables was deferred until the next meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. The details of the next meeting are as follows:

Friday, May 4, 2001
10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m.
OIT Metro


Prepared by Jim Arnold
OUS Academic Affairs
March 5, 2001