This paper explores the relationship between for-profit higher education institutions and accreditation. Two sets of research questions are examined. The first set of research questions looks at the characteristics of for-profits regionally accredited versus nationally accredited. The second set of research questions looks at the characteristics of for-profits that keep accreditation versus those who lose accreditation. Analysis is conducted using panel longitudinal data that has been merged together from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the Office of Federal Student Aid, and the Postsecondary Education Participation System (PEPS). Both descriptive statistics and logistic regressions are used to explore the hypotheses in this paper. The findings contribute to the field’s understanding of for-profits and accreditation. This paper found in general for-profits are not losing accreditation. Regionally accreditors in particular are not revoking accreditation. Larger for-profits are more likely to be regionally accredited. Revenue, enrollment, and number of campuses, in particular seem to keep institutions from losing accreditation. Policy continues to be created (or reversed) to address concerns over for-profits but it has done so without enough statistical analysis to backup those decisions. The relationship between for-profits and accreditation is mutually beneficial and therefore needs to be further researched and addressed.

This project examines the systemic causes of transfer shock, the phenomenon wherein students transitioning onto a university campus from a community college experience a drop in their grade point average (GPA) in their first semester of transfer. Previous research has focused on student characteristics that are predictive of transfer shock, but few researchers have approached this topic from the perspective of the students themselves. This study seeks to understand how transfer students experience the initial transition onto the four-year university campus and the interactions with managerial professionals, and how those interactions impact the likelihood of students experiencing transfer shock or not. I used the work of Tinto (1975) and Deil-Amen (2011), as well as interviews with 15 transfer students, to theorize that students' procedural interactions are significant for their socio-academic integration. This study demonstrates the process of socio-academic integration and highlights the ways that the institution can support or impede student academic performance and success.