Administrative Burdens in Higher Education: A deep-dive into California’s Cross-enrollment policy.

• In Event: Administrative burdens: inequitable burdens, inequitable access.

Abstract

College students must continually navigate a myriad of institutional policies and procedures to complete tasks as routine as course registration or as complex as credit transfer (de Los Santos & Sutton, 2012). The navigation of these institutional barriers is part of the administrative burdens experienced by students.  Burdens such as these force them to learn what is necessary to comply with a policy or complete a process, and then subsequently complete whatever steps they must undertake as a result (Burden et al., 2012).  Even the most well-intentioned programs and policies, designed to support student success, can create burdens, limiting uptake, particularly for disadvantaged student groups (Herd & Moynihan, 2018; Baker & McCloud, 2023).  

Policy ambiguity—defined as the presence of multiple, often conflicting interpretations of the same policy or circumstance (Feldman, 1989)—further exacerbates these challenges. Ambiguity is frequently embedded in policies to achieve political consensus during the drafting process, allowing stakeholders to agree on broad goals while avoiding contentious details (Zahariadis, 2014; Davis & Stazyk, 2015). However, this intentional vagueness shifts the burden of interpretation to administrators and frontline implementers, who must operationalize policies within their specific contexts (Fowler, 2020; Lipsky, 2010). When ambiguity remains unresolved, it disproportionately burdens service recipients who must navigate the resulting inconsistencies (Olshfski & Cunningham, 2009). In large public systems of higher education, these burdens can end up falling on students, who are left to decipher and comply with unclear or inconsistent policies across institutions.

One such example is California’s statewide policy permitting cross-enrollment in higher education.  Under current California law, community college students can enroll simultaneously (cross-enroll) in classes at public four-year universities without formal admission and with minimal costs (California State Senate, 1994). Like similar policies and programs promoting simultaneous enrollment, California’s cross-enrollment policy has the potential to improve transfer rates and other student outcomes by providing community college students with an opportunity to preview their future four-year college experience prior to transfer (Johnson & Cuellar Mejia, 2019). 

However, to successfully cross-enroll, students must navigate a complex series of institutional policies and procedures at both their home community college and at the destination four-year university (Grubb, 2006; Rosenbaum et al., 2006) Although the California legislature has codified cross-enrollment in the education code, including specific eligibility criteria and basic responsibilities of the institutions to facilitate cross-enrollment, the specifics around implementation remain ambiguous, omitting accountability on mechanisms. Individual UC and CSU campuses have considerable latitude to determine their own additional requirements, course-related fees, and application deadlines.

This paper combines the theoretical frameworks of policy ambiguity and administrative burden, specifically focusing on learning and compliance costs, to examine the barriers created through local policy implementation in thirty-two undergraduate-serving public four-year institutions. To do so, we analyzed the CE-relevant information found on these institutions’ websites (e.g., application requirements, deadlines, forms). 

Author

• Michael Hill, University of the Pacific
  Presenting Author