ARTICULATION: Questions and Answers

Why don't we have an articulation agreement with Stanford?
It takes two institutions to formalize an agreement and not all institutions are interested in establishing articulation for various reasons, such as: limited staffing, the # of transfer students they accept do not justify the time and effort it takes to create/maintain agreements, the university prefers to evaluate student records on a case-by-case basis. While Stanford does accept transfer students ("transfer students" also refers to those coming from other 4-year institutions), they accept relatively few each year and they do not have a Transfer MOU with CCC.

I have this wonderful course - why doesn't it articulate?
Transfer GE, course-to-course and major prep agreements are based on requirements established at 4-year institutions. So, an agreement cannot be made if your course doesn't fulfill a specific requirement at a university/college/system.

How can I get course outlines from other institutions?
Some CCC outlines are available within a sub-system of ASSIST called "OSCAR". Go to ASSIST: Directions to Conduct Specialized Research. If the outline you are seeking is not available, you may ask the AO to try to secure it for you. (There is no guarantee the outline will be provided)

Most universities do not provide CCC with outlines (UC/CSU are not required to create them) so it's next to impossible to acquire them. However, more and more faculty are placing course syllabi and expanded course descriptions on their webpages so searching the university's website is highly recommended.

Why can't GE, UC transferable and major prep courses have a mid-year start date?
There are 2 important reasons for this limitation: 1) System-wide and most campus-specific agreements are reviewed cyclically, and the college catalog is used as the baseline reference. 2) Transfer students plan their schedules and determine their transfer eligibility based on a clear understanding of how courses transfer via articulation agreements. For this reason, articulated courses must adhere to a standard cycle so all references to these courses (web, printed material, advising) are uniform and consistent.

Why shouldn't a course be submitted to the Curriculum Committee as a "stand-alone" in order to secure a mid-year start date, then resubmitted for GE, UC and/or major prep consideration?
It's unfair to those students taking the course while it's in "stand-alone" mode because they will not be granted retroactive transfer credit. This can also cause major problems with articulation because some colleges post agreements using a range of courses (e.g. ARTS 1-58C may fulfill a Visual Performing Arts requirement) Courses coming in mid-year could fall within the specified range and students would mistakenly believe these courses articulate.

Why must the AO report course revisions which may result in the lost of agreements?
Articulation agreements are created to identify De Anza courses that are comparable to freshmen/sophomore level courses at specified institutions in order to provide our the students with the adequate means to prepare for transfer - which means BOTH preparing to be admitted to the college/university AND preparing to merge into their respective programs at the junior level (upper-division). It's therefore important to maintain the integrity of our agreements by reporting all substantial curriculum changes to the appropriate segmental offices and institutions.

I’m filling out the New Course request form and it appears my course is not De Anza degree/certificate applicable so this must mean it’s transfer applicable, right?
Not necessarily. To justify a new course based on "transfer", you must show how the course fulfills a specific transfer requirement, specifically: transfer General Education, UC transferable electives, and/or major preparation. Also, a course could be both degree/certificate AND transfer applicable. It's best to design a course with a clear end goal(s) in mind.

I know my course will be transferable to the UC, do I still need to identify a temporary number above 49?
Yes. De Anza has a course numbering system in place distinguishing between UC transferable and non-UC transferable courses - and we cannot indicate a course is "UC transferable" before we receive UC approval. The Cover Sheet allows for two numbers - one "true" number (pending UC review) and one to be used if the course is UC approved. Since UC notifies us of our approved courses after the fall quarter begins, notations are added to the schedule of classes explaining the status of each course that may be misnumbered.

Are De Anza agreements the same as Foothill's?
No. Agreements are established independently with universities and segmental offices. And since curriculum is not developed collaboratively with our sister campus, the fact is that most of our courses are not equivalent to Foothill's. This poses a problem for students, especially when courses are numbered and/or titled the same at both institutions.

Articulation may be based on a sequence of courses (e.g. De Anza's MATH 1ABCD= SDSU's MATH 150, 151, 252) and, as a rule, students should NOT mix and match coursework between De Anza and Foothill without first checking ASSIST to see how the agreements are defined.

Why does De Anza's CSUGE-Breadth pattern differ from other schools' (including Foothill)?
Answer pending