Admission requirements for transfer and non‐transfer students: should one size fit all?

Abstract

PurposeTo examine the efficacy of admission requirements as predictors of academic success in core business coursework, and as a rationing mechanism for limited course capacity, for both transfer and non‐transfer students following integration of the core business curriculum.Design/methodology/approachRegression analysis is used to test the efficacy of admission standards in explaining transfer and non‐transfer student performance in the core business curriculum, before and after substantial curricular revision. Fisher's r‐to‐z transformation is used to test differences between student groups and core curriculum formats. Stepwise regression was used to identify an accurate predictor of transfer student performance for the integrated business core.FindingsEfficacy of the admission standard decreased for transfer students following introduction of the new curriculum. While adequate for all students taking the traditional business core, it is a much less effective predictor of success for transfer students under the new curriculum. A modified admission standard for transfer students restored efficacy to previous levels.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper considers only one school's experience with revision of its core curriculum.Practical implicationsRe‐examination of admission standards following curricular revision is necessary to ensure effective screening of transfer students. The root problem, however, may not be addressed in its entirety by a unique transfer student admission standard. Non‐transfer students benefit from acculturation as freshman and sophomores, as well as prerequisite courses specifically modified to prepare them for the integrated curriculum.Originality/valueThis paper documents a potential problem for business schools that have, or are considering, significant curricular revisions.