Policy Details

Date of Last Update

Approved By
  • University Academic Senate / Provost

Responsible Office
Provost Office


Print Policy
Export Policy As PDF

Policy on the Establishment and Revision of Credit by Exam Requirements

SG 2.10

  1. Policy
  2. Policy Statement
  3. Definitions
  4. History


Every unit offering credit for exams (including but not limited to AP, CLEP, DANTES, and IB exams) should periodically review the current required scores to ensure that they are set at appropriate levels.

Policy Statement

1.  Individual units should identify the data required to determine appropriate levels. In other words, there is no prescriptive data set requirement since it is ultimately the responsibility of the the originator or the change proposal to make the case for a change in a required score.  Other units and offices may request that a particular unit review a current score or level, but only the unit responsible for a course may submit proposals for changes in exam scores required for credit in that course.  If there is not appropriate unit to review the scores, the most closely associated College will perform this duty.

2.  The units’ review must include members of the office of the Registrar and Admissions in order that those offices may be informed and so that those offices may provide input as to how a particular score might have a larger impact across the university.

3.  In order to suggest a change in a current score, or for recommended changes in the future,  the following guidelines should be followed:

a.  The proposal should include

i.  Rationale for the proposed change.

ii.  Data that provide a comparative analysis to similar credit for exam scores from peer and competitive institutions.

iii.  Admissions, Registrar and Institutional Analysis data (or statements) that project the impact on enrollment and course offerings.

iv.  An implementation plan.

v.  Approval from the Dean of the college where the proposal originates.

b. The timeline for proposals should follow:

i.  in September for a change two academic years later (e.g., September, 2016 for a change in August, 2018).

ii.  Passed through the process outlined below by March one calendar year ahead (or else the start date is postponed a year) in order that appropriate planning for and advertising of the new required score or level can be enabled.

c.  Allowances should be made for expedited review and change of scores upon request of the units. However, the proposal, as outlined above, is still required.

d.  The process for changing a qualifying score proceeds as follows:

i.  Unit proposal prepared with required elements, as above.

ii.  To the Academic Affairs Committee for Oversight of Credit by Examination for information regarding potential impact of score change and for a recommendation. This committee includes:

  • Assistant/Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs (that oversees advising)
  • Vice President for Enrollment Development
  • The chair of UCC (or designate)
  • Director of General Education

iii.  To the Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs.

If the recommendation for change is approved, the Registrar, the Director of Admissions, the Student Academic Success Center, ECS and the Provost’s Cabinet are advised.


An “appropriate level” should be considered a score that adequately positions the student for success in subsequent courses.


January 9, 2019 - FH 2.04 Q retitled to SG 2.10

May 30, 2018 - Kept FH 2.04Q in Curriculum group; removed it from all others

UAS Support on March 31, 2017

Formerly called "Policy on the Establishment and Revision of AP Scores"