This paper describes a study of native and transfer students conducted at an urban doctoral-granting university (Southern University, Louisiana) to determine the comparability of commonly numbered coursework between a two-year college and the university within the same state system of higher education. Using a cluster analytic model, the study examined stratified samples of graduating seniors composed of transfer students and those who had earned their entire credits (the so-called "natives") at Southern University. Differences were found between the groups in the gains the students demonstrated in student incoming abilities, general learned abilities, and differences in coursework patterns in which they enrolled. In general, community college students showed greater gains than did natives and took a more discrete set of courses from a more limited array of choices. Additionally, the cluster analysis did not find clearly discrete and logical sets of general education coursework. The results did not support the efficacy of a statewide core curriculum and common course numbering system, but did support the current use of a wide range of options in a distributional general education requirement. These findings suggest the need for greater academic advising in undergraduate course selection or greater prescription in the curriculum. Contains 20 references. (GLR)