Every once in a while, a well-intended effort to expand opportunity ends up tangled in the fine print. Across our region, community colleges and universities are working together to create smoother transfer pathways for students in traditionally non-transfer degrees, like the Associate in Applied Science (AAS).

That’s good news. These pathways open the door for students who start in technical or applied program fields like welding, advanced manufacturing, or health sciences to continue toward a bachelor’s degree. But there’s a catch: when universities send their standard Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for these transfer programs, they often include the same language used for general education transfer, requiring that all courses be taught by faculty holding a master’s degree.

Here’s where we need to pause and separate law from lore.

What the Law Actually Says

SACSCOC’s Principles of Accreditation are clear: institutions must justify and document the qualifications of their faculty members. The Principles don’t prescribe a specific degree for every context. Instead, they require institutions to ensure that each faculty member is qualified to teach the courses assigned through education, experience, or a combination of both.

The Principle most often cited is:

“The institution justifies and documents the qualifications of its faculty members.”

That’s it. There’s no rule that every instructor teaching a course for transfer credit must hold a master’s degree. Instead, the expectation is that the institution awarding the credit has a defensible process that aligns with its mission, curriculum, and policies.

Where the Lore Comes From

When a university applies its general education transfer standards to a technical program, the MOU language can unintentionally create barriers for community colleges. In fields like welding or mechatronics, it’s rare, if not impossible, to find instructors with a master’s degree. Yet many of these instructors are industry experts with decades of experience, certifications, and teaching excellence.

Here’s the nuance: while SACSCOC expects institutions to maintain academic rigor, it also recognizes that qualifications look different across disciplines. A welding instructor’s professional background may demonstrate far greater subject-matter expertise than a formal academic degree ever could.

Unfortunately, when universities require a blanket “master’s degree or higher” for all courses in a transfer pathway, they’re not responding to SACSCOC policy they’re reacting to lore.

What This Means in Practice

As institutions collaborate to expand transfer opportunities for students in applied programs, clarity and communication are essential.

• General education courses that transfer as traditional academic credit should meet the same faculty credential expectations applied across the university.
• Technical courses, however, often fall under applied or professional standards. In these cases, documented industry experience, recognized credentials, or professional licensure can serve as the qualifying evidence of expertise.

The key is documentation and consistency, not conformity.

Universities and community colleges share a common goal: supporting student success and maintaining academic integrity. Achieving that doesn’t require rewriting accreditation law, it requires understanding it.

Law vs. Lore

✅ Law: Institutions must justify and document that faculty teaching courses for transfer credit are qualified by education or experience, consistent with their mission and policies.

❌ Lore: All instructors teaching courses that transfer to a university must hold a master’s degree.

The Pruitt Perspective

Expanding transfer opportunities for students in applied programs represents progress and it’s something worth celebrating. But as we build these bridges, we must also ensure the planks fit the path. I used the example of welding for ease, but the same applies in more complicated programs such as an Associates in Arts and Sciences (AAS) in programs like business leadership, healthcare management, or computer and network technology. These discipline areas have more common content overlap with more traditional transfer pathway associate degree programs. For these programs, faculty from both institutions may need to meet regularly to make intentional decisions about program alignment and credential requirements for specific courses within the program. Broad statements, either way, do not communicate the value of thoughtful faculty conversations to assure student learning and preparedness to take more advanced coursework.

Rigid credential expectations, applied without context, can unintentionally close doors for students and institutions alike. Accreditation should protect quality, not create unnecessary barriers.

The real question isn’t whether an instructor has a master’s degree. It’s whether that instructor has the knowledge, skill, and experience to teach the material effectively and help students succeed at the next level.

At SACSCOC, we stand behind that principle: uphold rigor, honor expertise, and never let misunderstanding masquerade as law.

Let’s keep clearing away the lore so innovation and opportunity can do what they’re meant to do: help more students keep moving forward.