Maryland Transfer Advantage Program (MTAP)

and
Articulation System of Maryland (ARTSYS)

Maryland Transfer Advantage Program (MTAP)

Since 2006, the University of Maryland, College Park (UMCP) has made available to all
Maryland Community Colleges (MCC) the opportunity to participate as partners in the Maryland
Transfer Advantage Program (MTAP) through Memorandums of Understanding (MOU). While
up to now Anne Arundel Community College, Carroll Community College, Chesapeake College,
College of Southern Maryland, Community College of Baltimore County, Frederick Community
College, Montgomery College, and Prince George’s Community College are the eight
participating community colleges, UMCP continues to be open for the other community colleges
to partner.

The MTAP provides a pathway for students at participating community colleges to earn an
undergraduate degree at the University of Maryland, College Park. Students who participate in
MTAP have access to transfer advising resources, can take discounted courses at UMCP, and are
guaranteed admission to the university upon successful completion of the program and
submission of a transfer application by the early action application deadline.
To be eligible for MTAP, students should have graduated from high school and must be enrolled
at one of the aforementioned eight partner community colleges. This program is geared towards
students who intend to complete 30 credits or an associate’s degree at a participating community
college, then transfer to the UMCP to complete a bachelor’s degree. Incoming freshmen who
have been admitted to UMCP for the spring semester are not eligible to apply to MTAP.

While MTAP provides students at participating Maryland Community Colleges a pathway to

earn an undergraduate degree at UMCP, overall the number of MCC students enrolling in
institutions within the University System of Maryland (USM) has grown. To illustrate, Table I –
USM Total Enrollments for Maryland Community College Transfer Students for FY 2014 – FY
2018 Cohorts below shows the growth in MCC transfer enrollment for the past 5 years (USM
Institutional Research Information System-IRIS, 2014 - 2018). During this period, the FY 2018
cohort of 12,256 MCC transfer students reflects 1,325 more enrolled than that of the FY 2014
cohort, which comprised 11,182.

1
 Table I – USM Total Enrollments for Maryland Community College Transfer Students
for the
FY 2014 – FY 2018 Cohorts

FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18

USM Institutions Total MCC 11,182 11,603 11,544 12,154 12,256

Transfer Students

Source: USM Institutional Research Information System, 2014-2018

In addition to the overall growth in headcount, Table II - Maryland Community Colleges

Transfer Students Enrolled in USM by Ethnicity for the FY 2014 -FY 2018 Cohorts below also
shows that the transfer students coming to USM institution from Maryland Community Colleges
comprise an ethnically-diverse student population (USM Institutional Research Information
System-IRIS, 2014 - 2018). During the FY 2014 to FY 2018 period, the transfer student
population at USM institutions comprised an increase of 18 percent in African American/Black
students, 41 percent in American Indian students, 37 percent in Foreign/International students,
29 percent in Hispanic students, and 91 percent in Pacific Islanders/Native Hawaiian students.
Moreover, MTAP remains a critical pathway at UMCP to support the continued and diverse
growth of eligible community college students to seamlessly transfer to the institution and
succeed once enrolled.

Table II - Maryland Community Colleges Transfer Students Enrolled in USM by Ethnicity

for the
FY 2014 - 2018 Cohorts
FY 2014
FY FY FY FY FY - 2018
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Change

% of # of % of # of % of # of % of
# of Transfers Total Transfers % of Total # of Transfers Total Transfers Total Transfers Total

African American/Black 2,729 24% 3,066 26% 2,972 26% 3,273 27% 3,219 26% 18%

American Indian 27 0% 30 0% 31 0% 28 0% 38 0% 41%

Asian 979 9% 913 8% 942 8% 981 8% 985 8% 1%

Foreign 273 2% 311 3% 320 3% 324 3% 374 3% 37%

Hispanic 878 8% 963 8% 944 8% 1,074 9% 1,136 9% 29%

Multiple Races Non-Hispanic 484 4% 471 4% 477 4% 473 4% 508 4% 5%

Pacific Islander/Native Hawaiian 11 0% 17 0% 18 0% 29 0% 21 0% 91%

Unknown 488 4% 453 4% 468 4% 487 4% 489 4% 0%

White 5,313 48% 5,379 46% 5,372 47% 5,485 45% 5,486 45% 3%

Total 11,182 100% 11,603 100% 11,544 100% 12,154 100% 12,256 100% 10%

Source: USM Institutional Research Information System , 2014- 2018

2
Furthermore, while advancing MTAP, UMCP also recognizes that to support today’s varied and
emerging pipeline of transfer students, it is necessary to further expand its opportunities to help
students successfully transfer. Such opportunities further enable community college student to
transfer who have taken a more nontraditional college route, such as entering later than directly
from high school and/or maintaining full-time employment while enrolled, just to name a few.
The subsequent sections will further provide additional information on the performance of
MTAP.

Community College Students Use of the Maryland Transfer Advantage Program

Over the last five academic years (AY), the Maryland Transfer Advantage Program (MTAP)
provided opportunities to many eligible Maryland Community College (MCC) students to obtain
a bachelor’s degree from the University of Maryland College Park. As illustrated in Table III -
Number of MTAP Student Participants for the Academic Years 2014-2015 thru AY 2018-2019,
there is a solid trend in MCC student use of the program. For this period a total of 1,817
participated in the MTAP (UMD Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment, prepared June
2019).

While the program reflects that in most years there are only slightly more than 200 students,
there are definitely several years that illustrate a positive trend in use and some peak years of
greater student participation. The peak years are evident in AY 2018-2019, the most recent year
and AY 2016-2017, with AY 2018-2019 being the largest peak year with 752 students and AY
2016-2017 the second largest peak year with 340 students. The Maryland Transfer Advantage
Program demonstrates that the partnerships between UMCP and the participating community
colleges continue to afford a pathway opportunity for MCC transfer students to earn a
baccalaureate degree at the institution.

Table III - Number of MTAP Student

for the
Academic Years 2014-2015 thru AY 2018-2019

MTAP AY 2014-2015 AY 2015-2016 AY 2016-2017 AY 2017-2018 AY 2018-2019 Total

Students 256 206 340 263 752 1817
Source: UMD Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment, Prepared June 2019

Maryland Transfer Advantage Program Enrollment by Maryland Community Colleges

Fundamentally, the requested period of performance denotes that the eight (8) participating
community colleges all have students originating from their institutions. As shown below in
Table IV - MTAP Transfer Students by Community College, the largest originating community

3
colleges with MTAP students is Montgomery College. Essentially, Montgomery College
comprises 64 percent (1,160) of the total 1,817 students enrolled. While, Anne Arundel
Community College (209), Prince George’s Community College (176) and the College of
Southern Maryland (134) together as originating institutions comprise the next largest number of
participating students. When combined, these three (3) institutions constitute 29 percent (516) of
the students. The remaining four (4) community college represent 7 percent (138). Furthermore,
it is important to acknowledge from this period that there is much opportunity for students from
Carroll Community College, Chesapeake College, Community College of Baltimore County, and
Frederick Community College to participate in MTAP.

Table IV - MTAP Transfer Students by Community College

Community Colleges AY AY AY AY AY Totals

2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
Anne Arundel Community College 20 19 31 36 103 209
Carroll Community College -- -- 2 4 17 23
Chesapeake College -- -- 1 -- -- 1
College Of Southern Maryland 15 12 21 18 68 134
Community College Of Baltimore 2 -- 7 8 24 41
County
Frederick Community College 1 -- 7 10 55 73
Montgomery College 192 158 227 162 421 1160
Prince George Community College 26 17 44 25 64 176
Total 256 206 340 263 752 1817

Source: UMD Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment, Prepared June 2019

MTAP Students Declared Majors at UMCP

The most popular declared majors of MTAP students at the time of graduation as displayed in
Table V – Most Popular MTAP Majors below include 1) engineering comprising of programs in
aerospace, bioengineering, chemical, civil, computer, electrical or mechanical, 2) criminology
and criminal justice, 3) accounting, 4) economics, 5) finance, and 6) psychology. These majors
represent students who entered during the period of Fall 2010 through Fall 2014 and graduated in
4 years or fewer. The major at the time of graduation for students who entered in later cohorts
are not yet available.

For the most part, engineering is the most popular major and psychology is the least popular the
MTAP graduates for the Fall 2010 through Fall 2014 period. Additionally, it is important to
recognize that the MTAP students who graduate with an engineering degree will positively
contribute to the STEM workforce needs in the state and region.

4
 Table V – Most Popular MTAP Majors

Major at the time of graduation Count

Engineering (Aerospace, Bioengineering, Chemical, Civil, Computer, Electrical or 22

Mechanical
Criminology and Criminal Justice 18
Accounting 17
Economics 16
Finance 15
Psychology 10
Source: UMD Office of Institutional Research, Planning Assessment, Prepared June 2019

MTAP Student Performance for Fall 2008 through Fall 2017:

Retention and Graduation Rates

The performance of MTAP students entering UMCP in Fall 2008 through Fall 2017 reflect that
during the first-year of enrollment these students have slightly better retention and graduation
rates than their transfer counterparts (i.e. community college transfer students and all new
transfer students). With that said, after the first year of enrollment the retention and graduation
rates of MTAP students vary. Additionally, at the end of the second year of enrollment the rates
for the MTAP students begins to trend closer to their transfer counterparts. Even more so when
comparing the transfer cohort rates for both the 3rd and 4th years of enrollment, the MTAP
students entering in Fall 2010 through Fall 2014 perform better than their community college
counterparts. And finally, when the MTAP rates are compared to the new transfer cohorts’ last
year enrolled, the 3rd year, it is found that MTAP has the better outcomes. In general, the
performance of the MTAP students show that their performance is quite competitive in
relationship to their transfer student counterparts enrolled in the same Fall semesters.

To further illustrate, Tables VI, VII and VII as follows display individually the retention and
graduation rate for each cohort of transfer student enrolled at UMCP in Fall 2008 through Fall
2017. The tables are 1) Table VI - MTAP Retention and Graduation Rates Cohorts, 2) Table VII
- Undergraduate Retention and Graduation Rates Community College New Transfer Cohorts,
and 3) Table VIII - Undergraduate Retention and Graduation Rates All New Transfer Cohorts
(UMD Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment, prepared June 2019).

5
 Table VI - MTAP Retention and Graduation Rates Cohorts
Fall 2008 – Fall 2017

Cohort Term Cohort Size Retain or Graduated Graduated Graduated

Graduated after 2 years after 3 years after 4 years
after 1 year

Fall 2008 41 97.6% 41.5% 68.3% 75.6%

Fall 2009 98 89.8% 34.7% 66.3% 74.5%
Fall 2010 67 92.5% 49.3% 80.6% 88.1%
Fall 2011 40 87.5% 57.5% 87.5% 90.0%
Fall 2012 40 92.5% 45.0% 80.0% 85.0%
Fall 2013 109 93.6% 52.3% 81.7% 87.2%
Fall 2014 112 90.2% 50.0% 80.4% 86.6%
Fall 2015 63 92.1% 42.9% 71.4% --
Fall 2016 105 93.3% 46.7% -- --
Fall 2017 93 92.5% -- -- -
Note: To compare MTAP graduation rates to the graduation rates of all new transfers, see
https://reports.umd.edu/reportHolder.htm#UGRetentionandGraduationRates/Table and select “New Transfers.”
Students included in new transfer cohorts enrolled as new transfers in any semester but attained junior status in
their cohort fall.
Source: UMD Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment, Prepared June 2019

Table VII - Undergraduate Retention and Graduation Rates

Community College New Transfer Cohorts
Fall 2008 – Fall 2017

Cohort Term Cohort Size 1 Year After 2 Years After 3 Years After 4 Years After
Junior Status: Junior Status: Junior Status: Junior Status:
Retained or Graduated Graduated Graduated
Graduated
Fall 2008 625 77% (483) 54% (336) 69% (430) 71% (446)
Fall 2009 628 79% (497) 49% (306) 68% (424) 71% (444)
Fall 2010 638 74% (474) 47% (300) 65% (415) 68% (433)
Fall 2011 689 75% (514) 45% (312) 65% (447) 68% (467)
Fall 2012 768 72% (550) 43% (332) 61% (470) 64% (491)
Fall 2013 856 75% (639) 48% (410) 67% (570) 69% (587)
Fall 2014 853 74% (634) 45% (388) 65% (551) 67% (575)
Fall 2015 820 76% (624) 45% (368) 65% (533) --
Fall 2016 892 78% (691) 46% (408) -- --
Fall 2017 859 77% (664) -- -- --
Source: UMD Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment, Prepared June 2019

6
 Table VIII - Undergraduate Retention and Graduation Rates
All New Transfer Cohorts
Fall 2008 – Fall 2017
Cohort Term Cohort Size 1 Year After Junior 2 Years After 3 Years After
Status: Retained or Junior Status: Junior Status:
Graduated Graduated Graduated

Fall 2008 1,039 76% (789) 54% (557) 68% (710)

Fall 2009 1,062 77% (821) 50% (533) 68% (720)
Fall 2010 1,031 73% (749) 48% (490) 64% (663)
Fall 2011 1,055 72% (758) 55% (475) 62% (656)
Fall 2012 1,074 70% (748) 45% (484) 60% (649)
Fall 2013 1,138 73% (832) 48% (541) 65% (734)
Fall 2014 1,104 70% (768) 44% (482) 62% (684)
Fall 2015 1,133 74% (842) 44% (495) 63% (714)
Fall 2016 1,257 75% (947) 45% (561) --
Fall 2017 1,184 76% (901) -- --
Source: UMD Institutional Research, Planning & Assessment, Prepared June 2019

ARTICULATION SYSTEM OF MARYLAND (ARTSYS)

ARTSYS, the state-wide 24/7 online articulation data system, continues to support transfer and
articulation in Maryland. Currently, ARTSYS affords community college students the
opportunity to explore their options to transfer to a public or participating private four-year
college or university in Maryland to complete their bachelor's degree. In addition to supporting
community college students with transfer pathways, ARTSYS supports students currently
enrolled at a four-year institution to transfer to another four-year institution in the State. At this
time, ARTSYS comprises a data system of more than 850 recommended transfer programs and
10,000 plus transfer course evaluations from thirty-eight (38) Maryland higher education
institutions. The participating institutions are the Community Colleges (16) and University
System of Maryland Universities (11), Maryland Independent Colleges and Universities (9),
Morgan State University, and St. Mary’s College of Maryland.

ARTSYS remains physically housed at the University System of Maryland (USM) and is owned
by Sunrise Software Arts, Inc. At USM the Office of Academic and Student Affairs and Office
of Information Technology have responsibility for ARTSYS. Specifically, within the Office of
Academic and Student Affairs, the Academic Programs, Academic & Enrollment Services and
Articulation unit manages the database information received from the participating institutions.
The USM Office of Information Technology supports the aging ARTSYS platform.
Additionally, it is important to report that the continuous management of ARTSYS is not the sole

7
responsibility of these USM offices but is one that is shared with the community colleges and
participating four-year universities and colleges.

Essentially since the inception of ARTSYS in 1988. it has always been the obligation that the
statewide student articulation system would be maintained through a sustained collaboration
between the community colleges, participating four-year institutions and colleges, and USM.
This collaborative management of the now 24/7 online transfer data system comes with multiple
levels of responsibilities, ongoing communication and training, frequent evaluations, and regular
auditing by USM. The Academic Programs, Academic & Enrollment Services and Articulation
unit within the USM Office of Academic and Student Affairs serves as the central oversight
office to interface with every institution to secure the needed campuses data base curriculum
pathways and independent course evaluations, which are the heart of the program.

For more than 30 years, USM through ARTSYS, has enabled thousands of students to transfer to
four-year universities and colleges within Maryland to complete a bachelor’s degree. Over this
period of time, the demands for ARTSYS have increased three-fold. For example, during any
given 9-month academic period, ARTSYS receives over 10,000 requests from students, advisors,
and faculty. This is a significant increase since the October 2014 MHEC ARTSYS: A Review of
Maryland's Articulation System, Reporting Requirement of the College and Career Readiness
and College report. ARTSYS continues to grow as institutions make available more
comprehensive statewide transfer and articulation initiatives to better serve transfer students.
There is no question that the growth in use and programs for ARTSYS is most beneficial to
students and the workforce needs of the state and region. But with growth of this magnitude
comes the need for additional major resources to be committed beyond USM to support the
updating and enhancement of ARTSYS as a statewide platform for student transfer.

ARTSYS Improvement Needs

Focus groups were conducted in AY 2018 and 2019 by USM staff with students, staff, faculty,
and administrators about ARTSYS. The feedback received resulted in strong recommendations
for a robust upgrade to the program immediately to further support student transfer in the state.
Specifically, it was voiced that robust upgrades to ARTSYS must focus on the ease of use by all
users (i.e. mobile apps, more user-friendly landing page, messaging option, etc.), data analytics
and report capabilities, secure sharing of information between institutions and USM, new
modalities for examining course and degree plan equivalencies, a more transparent database
platform for authorized users, students’ and advisors’ ability to communicate within the program,
and the ability for students to employ multiple transfer evaluations, just to name a few. While
these and several other upgrades are critically-necessary for ARTSYS to support the current and
future statewide transfer needs of Maryland students, resources to do so are not currently
available.

8
At this time, the human resources for the administration of ARTSYS at USM is woefully
lacking. There is only one FTE staff assigned (as a part of a larger set of responsibilities) to
provide administrative and compliance oversight for the entire ARTSYS program. This staff
person has no other personnel support within the USM Office of Academic and Students Affairs
to manage the program because USM is constrained by the number of positions that the system
office is allowed to have. Furthermore, the USM Office of Information Technology (OIT) also
has very limited staff resources to commit to ARTSYS due to the same constraint.

With that said, additional resources are needed to upgrade and to sustain ARTSYS to support the
growing transfer initiatives that institutions provide for students.

ARTSYS Institutional Representatives

All participating institutions have identified staff positions that serve as the stewards of
ARTSYS. Tables IX and X below list the institutional staff positions responsible for the
oversight of ARTSYS. All staff positions at the institutions are occupied. For the most part, the
staff in these positions are located in the Office of Admissions and Recruitment, Office of the
Registrar, Office/Center of Student Success, Office of Articulation, Academic and Transfer
Advisement, or Office of Career Services. Staff responsible for ARTSYS are afforded the
opportunity to interact with staff, faculty, and administrators on their campuses to support
transfer students.

Table IX - ARTSYS Institutional Representatives at Maryland Community Colleges

Institutions Institutional Representatives

Allegany College of Maryland Director of Student Success

Anne Arundel Community College
Baltimore City Community College
Community College of Baltimore
County
Carroll Community College
Cecil College
Chesapeake College
College of Southern Maryland
Frederick Community College
Garrett College
Assistant Director for Transfer Advising
Articulation Coordinator
Catonsville- Transfer Coordinator
Dundalk – Assistant Director for Student Success
Essex - Assistant Director for Academic Advisement
Owings Mills – Senior Academic Advisor
Director of Advising and Transfer
Transfer Academic Coordinator (Advising)
Assistant Director of Records and Registration (Articulation)
Academic Advisor
Coordinator of Transfer and Articulation
Director of Advising, Career and Transfer Services
Transfer Services Counselor
Academic Success Advisor – Transfer Specialist

9
 Hagerstown Community College Academic Advisor and Transfer Specialist
Harford Community College Academic Advisor Career and Transfer Services
Howard Community College Associate Director and Transfer
Montgomery College Articulation and Transfer Specialist
Prince Georges Community College Academic, Transfer and Career Advisor
Wor Wic Community College Associate Registrar

Source: USM ARTSYS, http://artsys.usmd.edu/partinst.html

Table X – ARTSYS Institutional Representatives for Four-Year Universities and Colleges

Institutions Institutional Representatives

Bowie State University Articulation Coordinator
Capital Technical University Associate Director of Admissions
Coppin State University Transfer Coordinator (Articulation)
Assistant Director of Admissions for Recruitment (Admissions)
Frostburg State University Transfer Coordinator
Goucher College Registrar (Articulation)
Assistant Director of Admissions for Recruitment (Admissions)
Hood College Admissions Counselor (Admissions)
Registrar (Articulation)
McDaniel College Senior Associate Director of Admissions (Admissions)
Coordinator (Articulation)

Mount St. Mary’s University Associate Director of Admissions/Transfer Coordinator (Admissions)

Associate Registrar (Articulation)
Morgan State University Associate Registrar

Notre Dame of Maryland Director of Admissions

University

Salisbury University Assistant Director of Transfer Admissions (Admissions)

Transfer Credit Evaluation (Articulation)
St. Mary’s College of Maryland Transfer Evaluation Coordinator (Articulation)
Admissions Counselor (Admissions)
Stevenson University Assistant Director of Transfer Admissions

Towson University Associate Director of University Admissions

University of Baltimore Evaluator for Transfer (Articulation)

Assistant Vice President for Undergraduate Recruitment and Strategy

10
 University of Maryland, Baltimore Dept. of Medical and Research Technology - Admissions Counselor
and Assistant Professor
School of Pharmacy – Director of Admission, Records and
Registration
School of Nursing – Assistant Director of Admissions
School of Physical Therapy – Admissions Coordinator
School of Social Work – Dean of Admissions
School of Dental Hygiene – Director of Recruitment and Advising and
Clinical Assistant Professor

University of Maryland, Baltimore Assistant Director for Transfer Student Recruitment, Admissions and
County Partnership (Admissions)
Transfer Specialist, Office of the Registrar (Articulation)
University of Maryland, College Transfer Credit Services, Office of the Registrar
Park
University of Maryland Eastern Transfer Credit Counselor (Articulation)
Shore Admissions Counselor and Recruiter (Admissions)

University of Maryland Global Information and Enrollment Team

Campus (Effective July1, 2019,
formerly UMUC)
Washington Adventist University Admissions Advisor for Transfer and International Students
(Admissions)
Registrar (Articulation)
Washington College Senior Associate Director (Admissions)
Registrar (Articulation)

Source: USM ARTSYS, http://artsys.usmd.edu/partinst.html

Whether on the campuses or within USM, the management of ARTSYS is an immense and
complex responsibility. In the next sections, the institutional and USM responsibilities are
described.

ARTSYS Responsibility

As mentioned earlier, the responsibilities for ARTSYS occur at multiple levels to include the
community colleges, four-year universities and colleges, and USM. ARTSYS is audited
internally by USM. The audits are used to determine what upgrades to course evaluations and
degree plans are needed from institutions. The currency of ARTSYS is highly-dependent on the
provision of updated course evaluations and degree plans that the institutions must provide, as
they are the authors of the curriculum that comprises the database. To adequately portray all the
responsibilities for ARTSYS, the specific roles involved are described below.

11
Institutional Responsibilities of the Community Colleges

Fundamentally, all community colleges are seen as “sending institutions” with the responsibility
to provide the foundation courses (100 and 200 level course) for the ARTSYS database system.
They must regularly communicate with USM about the new courses that have been added, as
well as any changes made to already existing courses in the database. Such changes by the
community colleges include the classification of general education courses, discontinuation or
reactivation of courses, and changes to credit hours, course title or numbering, and curriculum
content, just to name a few. So, in order to maintain the currency of the ARTSYS database, this
information must on a regular basis come to USM from the community colleges. The assessment
and approval of new courses and course changes for ARTSYS is the responsibility of the faculty
who must provide the information to the designated institutional ARTSYS staff to submit to
USM.

Beyond the provision of new courses and needed changes to courses, the community colleges
have the responsibility to ensure that all courses can be searched in the ARTSYS database. At
least once a year, the courses being taught at the community colleges and those in the database
are evaluated to ensure currency for use by students, advisors, and faculty. As indicated, the
responsibilities of the community colleges involve sustained monitoring and communication
with USM.

Institutional Responsibilities – Four-Year Universities and Colleges

In contrast to the community college, the four-year universities and colleges are recognized as
the “receiving institutions.” They are accountable to continuously evaluate courses submitted to
the database by sending institutions, transfer equivalency of the courses they offer, and courses
that may come from other four-year institutions. The course evaluations undertaken by the four-
year institutions allow students to identify the courses that they have taken or will need to take to
receive transfer credits. In addition, the four-year institutions are to provide and keep current all
articulated transfer degree plans. These transfer degree plans are identified in ARTSYS as
“Recommended Transfer Programs (RTP)”. The RTPs allow students to further identify a
complete pathway to follow to transfer to the four-year institution of their choice.

Additionally, as the four-year institutions evaluate courses, they are to notify USM of any
changes they make to courses at their institutions that allow students to receive transfer credits
and the courses from a sending institution that is a transfer equivalent at their institutions. Much
like the community college, four-year institutions are to inform USM of the semester and year
that they make changes to courses on their campuses. These changes may include, but are not
limited to, course title and/or numbering changes and the classification of general education
course. Furthermore, these institutions are responsible to provide and update the RTPs and

12
course equivalencies by working with the faculty and staff on their campus with the authority to
develop new and review existing plans. Finally, once every two years along with the updating of
their academic catalog, all four-year institutions are required to review the equivalent transfer
courses and RTP degree plans. As presented, the four-year institutions must be steadfast to
evaluate and update transfer courses and programs, which requires engagement of faculty in all
disciplines affected by course updates.

USM Responsibilities

USM is the central oversight and coordinating office for ARTSYS. In this role, USM has the
responsibility to update course evaluation data and recommended transfer programs in the data
base as provided by the sending and receiving institutions; to conduct educational sessions and
training with all stakeholders; to maintain quality control; to sustain open communication with
all institutions; and to provide software programming.

The assigned responsibilities of USM are ongoing and have increased considerably with the
steady implementation of more comprehensive statewide transfer and articulation initiatives.
The extent of USM responsibilities includes updating the databases when the participating 38
institutions provide the necessary course data needed to keep ARTSYS current. This
responsibility also involves making all the RTPs easily accessible in ARTSYS to students,
engage in continuous communication with institutional staff and faculty responsible for the
degree plans, regularly audit degree plans and courses with notification to institutions, and to
keep weblinks updated. Also, in conjunction with auditing degree plans, USM confirms that
course evaluations are in compliance with COMAR.

Beyond monitoring and maintaining and auditing the academic courses and degree plans from
participating institutions, USM provides individual, group and statewide training sessions and
meetings to campus staff, advisors, and faculty, offers administrative presentations to
institutional deans and department chairs, and respond to student inquiries about possible course
options to fulfill academic requirements. Additionally, the USM OIT is responsible for
maintaining the ARTSYS aging technology platform.

ARTSYS Oversight Meetings

As noted above in the USM Responsibilities, there are face-to-face and web meetings held with
institutional staff who have administrative responsibilities for ARTSYS. These face-to-face
meeting occur, at a minimum, three time a year during the USM Inter Campus Committee Fall
and Spring Meetings and the Spring Transfer Professionals Day. Additionally, the web meetings
include webinars and the use of group list serves to communicate administrative oversight
information to all participating institutions about best practices. The participating institutions’

13
representatives consistently participate in the face-to-face and web oversight meetings
throughout the years.

SUMMARY

In conclusion, the information as requested reflects that MTAP and ARTSYS are valuable
instruments in the academic success toolbox available to transfer students continuing their
pursuit of higher education opportunities within the State of Maryland. These systems make the
transfer process easier, provide sustainable pathways to solid academic performance, and
represent the power of collaborative relationships between two- and four-year institutions.

However, maintaining these benchmarks and significantly improving ARTSYS will require that
the State commit additional substantial resources for necessary upgrades to ARTSYS’ usability,
portability, and system capacity. Such an investment in the continued relevance of ARTSYS will
help ensure the educational and career success of a vital and growing population of Maryland
students to contribute to the workforce needs of the State and region.

14