Preventing Student Veteran Attrition: What More Can We Do?

Abstract

Student veterans face many challenges when transitioning to college. This two-phase study first examined their retention and persistence through the use of archival data at one Midwestern public university. Results indicated a 50% graduation rate, comparable to the national average and above that for nonveterans at the same university. The second, phenomenological study entailed interviewing degree-seeking student veterans about personal, administrative, or academic issues related to college success. Emerging themes included (a) transitioning to civilian life; (b) managing multiple identities; (c) attitudes about civilian peers, faculty, and staff; and (d) medical or psychiatric issues that may interfere with retention or persistence. Interviewees recommended the university might help student veterans succeed by offering a faculty and student orientation on military culture, increasing interdepartmental communication within student affairs’ various offices, and expanding services provided by the campus veteran’s resource center.

Keywords

student veterans college retention persistence military culture

The transition from soldier to student, from combat to campus, is often a difficult one (Burnett & Segoria, 2009; Ford, Northrup, & Wiley, 2009; Rumann & Hamrick, 2010). As troops have been drawn down after more than 15 years of the Global War on Terror, the number of student veterans on U.S. college campuses will increase. More needs to be understood about this vulnerable population, and what colleges can do to ensure academic success (Ellison et al., 2012; Ostovary & Dapprich, 2011). This study was conducted to assess what one university was currently doing, and what it could do better, from the perspective of student veterans.

Strategies to Help Veterans Persist in College

Many universities utilize various strategies to help student veterans and service members (herein referred to as VAMS) transition back to civilian and student life (McCaslin, Leach, Herbst, & Armstrong, 2013). At the Midwestern, urban research university where this study was conducted, VAMS represent 3% of the student body (Institutional Research, 2014). There has been an Office of Veterans Affairs (OVA) on campus since 2009, the first year data began to be collected on military or veteran status. An armed forces student group, a ROTC program, and an undergraduate degree in military science are available (Burnett & Segoria, 2009; Summerlot, Green, & Parker, 2009). A Veterans Resource Center, mostly financed by alumni veterans, recently opened. The Vet Center houses a computer center, meeting space, and a student lounge and provides students with financial aid and academic advising, and peer counseling.

Additional strategies this urban research university employs to increase VAMS’ success include waiving certain student fees, military transcript review for transfer credits, access to early registration for classes, enrollment in several veterans-only course sections, and designated financial aid personnel specializing in veteran and military educational benefits (Bauman, 2009; Ford et al., 2009). Further, the Director of the OVA meets individually with veteran or active service members who apply to the university.

There was a twofold purpose to this study: to ascertain retention and persistence rates of students who had identified themselves as VAMS from archival records and to obtain current VAMS’ perspectives on factors that may affect their academic success, through semistructured interviews. The university’s Department of Institutional Research provided de-identified student records for VAMS enrolled from Fall 2009 through Spring 2014. Graduation rates were assessed as of Summer 2014.

Theoretical Framework

The lived experience of current degree-seeking undergraduate VAMS was explored in Fall 2014 through semistructured interviews and small focus groups. While focus groups and semistructured interviews are not traditionally part of the phenomenological process, these techniques permitted the researchers to obtain students’ subjective accounts of any personal, administrative, or academic concerns that may affect their persistence toward graduation. Narrative inquiry, including textual coding, emerging theme development, and memoing, was the basis for the analysis of transcript content (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006).

Social constructionism theory holds that reality is coconstructed by members of a particular society at a particular period of time, through language and shared understandings (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2011). Because the military contains its own culture, language, values, and traditions, the decision was made to recruit male and female VAMS and those from both combat and noncombat experiences in order to give interviewees an opportunity to express shared worldviews with one another.

Focus group membership was divided by combat or noncombat status, as it was expected that the combat veterans might have had additional stressors than those who had not served in combat zones. Seven students participated, including two females. The primary investigator (PI) and research assistant (RA) conducted the focus groups jointly, and the RA transcribed the audiotaped interviews. The study was approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board and supported through access to Institutional Research data, a faculty research grant, and an RA.

Factors Affecting VAMS’ Retention and Persistence

Questions for interviews were derived from the literature. Some of these elements included nontraditional student status; social isolation; medical and psychiatric issues and help-seeking stigma; and interactions with civilian peers, faculty, and staff on campus.

Nontraditional Student Status

Since many VAMS enroll in college after leaving the armed services, they usually are older than traditional-age students (18–24) and are categorized as nontraditional students. Nearly half are married and raising dependent children (47%), and most work at least part time while attending college, according to the Million Records Project (MRP; Cate, 2014). Thus, concerns about prioritizing and managing multiple roles; juggling external stressors related to homework, part- or full-time work, finances, housing, and childcare; and internal stressors, such as emotional or physical health problems, may affect VAMS more than other students.

Social Isolation

Social isolation has been shown to affect college persistence (“Transition 2.0: Using Tinto’s Model,” 2011; “What Matters to Veterans,” 2011). VAMS’ transition to civilian life may at times be made more difficult if they are socially isolated rather than integrated. The university is an urban research university that is predominantly a commuter campus. Student interactions with faculty outside of the classroom have been shown to be directly related to college persistence (“Transition 2.0: Using Tinto’s Model,” 2011). Since commuter students usually come to campus only to attend classes and rarely attend campus activities, they infrequently meet with their instructors outside of class. Commuter students tend to be less socially engaged compared to those who live on campus (Morrow & Ackerman, 2012). During 2009 to 2013, only 26 (3.2%) of 826 VAMS lived on campus (Institutional Research, 2014).

Medical, Psychiatric, and Interpersonal Problems

Classroom behavior and academic achievement can be affected by students’ physical and mental health (Ellison et al., 2012; Ostovary & Dapprich, 2011; Shea & Fishback, 2012). Up to one quarter of returning Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom, veterans have reported symptoms of post-traumatic stress, PTSD, anxiety, or depression (RAND, 2008). Some combat veterans also may be dealing with postconcussive traumatic brain injury, or vision or hearing loss (RAND, 2008). These issues have been shown to affect focus, cognitive processing, retention, and memory in terms of ability to learn, all of which may affect their ability to succeed academically in order to persist to graduation (Ostovary & Dapprich, 2011; Shea & Fishback, 2012).

Help-Seeking Stigma

Military culture instills a belief that seeking help is a sign of weakness (Hall, 2011; Kim, Thomas, Wilk, Castro, & Hoge, 2010; Pietrzak, Johnson, Goldstein, Malley, & Southwick, 2009). Some combat veterans who do acknowledge psychiatric symptoms such as depression, anxiety, sleep-wake disorders, misuse of substances, or suicidal ideation may feel too stigmatized to ask for help. According to the U.S. Department of Defense (2013), the Pentagon has made recommendations to turn this stigmatizing belief around by encouraging an environment where help seeking is viewed positively and where receiving behavioral health care will not interfere with promotion in rank or security clearance. Further, based on the rising rate of military and veteran suicides, suicide prevention has become a priority for the U.S. military and Veterans Affairs (U.S. Department of Defense, 2013).

Methodology

Archival Data Source

The PI accessed archival data of all self-identified VAMS enrolled between Fall 2009 and Spring 2014, including graduation data through Summer 2014. Institutional Research employed randomized identifiers to protect student data under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Data included age, gender, race, marital status, and college major. Number of semester hours served as a stand-in for academic year. Earned associates’ and bachelors’ degrees and certificates were listed. Types of military- or veteran-related financial aid received during the study period were also reported. These included Montgomery GI Bill, Vocational Rehabilitation, Post 9/11 Revised GI Bill, the Guard-Reserve version of Montgomery GI Bill, the Guard/Reserve Educational Assistance Program (REAP), Ohio National Guard, Army Tuition Assistance Program, and Air Force or Marine educational benefits (Institutional Research, 2014).

Archival Sample

A total of 826 self-identified VAMS enrolled between Fall 2009 and Spring 2014 (Institutional Research, 2014). Undergraduates who had previously served or were serving in any of the U.S.-armed forces, including any of the Reserve or National Guard components comprised the archival sample. Included in the total were 119 new student veterans who first enrolled in Spring 2013. As they were not expected to have earned a degree by Summer 2014, when graduation rates were calculated for this study, they were removed from the sample, leaving 707 VAMS.

VAMS’ Persistence to Graduation

For the archival study, graduation was defined as VAMS who were enrolled as of or after Fall 2009 who earned at least one certificate or diploma by Summer 2014. Many students at public universities often take longer than 4 years to complete a bachelor’s degree (Cate, 2014). The MRP reported that 44% of all VAMS took longer than 2 years to complete an associate’s degree and 39% took longer than 5 years to complete a bachelor’s degree (Cate, 2014). Cate reported the graduation rate for VAMS in public 4-year institutions of higher learning was 51.7%. This rate was used as a benchmark for the archival study. For the Fall 2007 cohort of 640 undergraduates (the most recent available for review), 635 aged 24 and under earned a degree (35.71%) within 6 years and 5 of 141 aged 25 and older earned a degree in that time period (3.55%; Institutional Research, 2014, 2016).

Data Analysis

Archival data from 2009 to 2014 (Institutional Research, 2014) revealed the 6-year graduation rate for VAMS (n = 707) was 50.5% or 357 students—only 1.2% lower than the benchmark (Cate, 2014). The 6-year 2014 graduation rate for VAMS was also significantly higher (+17.1%) compared to all undergraduates in the 2007 cohort. Three-hundred and thirty-six VAMS (94.1%) completed a certificate, an associate’s degree, or a bachelor’s degree; the other 5.9% are still in the process of completing their degrees (Institutional Research, 2014).

Lack of Persistence

Attrition

VAMS withdraw for a variety of reasons: interpersonal, financial, medical, or mental health issues are typical (Hoyt & Winn, 2004; Morrow & Ackermann, 2012; Rumann & Hamrick, 2010). Nearly half (350, 49.5%) of the 707 VAMS in the archival study withdrew from the university; of those, three passed away (Institutional Research, 2014). The university did not state reasons for withdrawal for the remaining 347 students.

VAMS were considered “dropouts” if they attended for at least one academic year during the study period (2009–2013) but did not reenroll during that period. It is possible that some students presumed to have withdrawn from the university may have reenrolled after Summer 2014. Because students are not required to notify the university if they decide to drop out, without contacting students to ascertain their real reason for leaving school, the PI could only conjecture about their reasons for withdrawing.

Stopping out

Stopping out has been defined as taking time off from college temporarily with the intention of returning to complete a degree (Cate, 2014; Morrow & Ackerman, 2012). Reasons for stopping out may include military redeployment or mobilization, transferring to a military base in a different time zone, military or civilian promotion with an accompanying increased work demand, going on a religious mission, having a child, or a major medical event (Bauman, 2009; Hoyt & Winn, 2004). Some universities track the reasons for temporary withdrawals; others do not.

Results and Discussion

The PI culled through the details of the remaining 347 VAMS who did not graduate within 6 years to identify any patterns that might indicate steps the university might take to prevent future dropouts. Between 2009 and 2014, some VAMS stopped out for one academic year; others for 2, 3, or 4 years, and then returned. Data showed that several students changed their major upon returning, and that VAMS experience changes in their military- or veteran-related educational financial aid packages; some students changed both financial aid packages and majors. Three examples of stopouts are discussed later.

Change of Financial Aid

The majority (86.6%) of the 357 VAMS who graduated by Summer 2014 financed their educations through veteran- or military-related financial aid, such as the Montgomery GI Bill or the revised Post 9/11 GI Bill; only 45 (13.4%) had not utilized any veteran- or military-related educational benefits (Institutional Research, 2014). One reason people drop out of college is financial, so this possibility was explored as the archival data were mined for the impact of financial aid on retention and persistence of VAMS.

However, a review of financial aid utilized by the 347 dropouts revealed a majority had in fact been financially supported through various veteran- or military-related benefits. Just over 60% of the 347 apparent dropouts (212) had been funded by the Revised 9/11 GI Bill, 118 (33.7%) used the Guard/Reserve Montgomery GI Bill, 88 (25.1%) were financed through the Montgomery GI Bill, 87 (24.9%) used Ohio National Guard benefits, 37 (10.6%) used Vocational Rehabilitation benefits, 20 (5.7%) used Guard/Reserve REAP, 10 (2.9%) were financed by Army Tuition Assistance Program, and 2 (0.6%) were funded by the National Guard (Institutional Research, 2014). Some were funded by two or more of these sources. Thus, it is unlikely that these VAMS dropped out solely for financial reasons.

Case Examples

Stopout 1

An education major was funded through the Revised 9/11 GI Bill in Fall 2010. He then stopped out for 1 year. When he returned in Fall 2012, he switched majors. The next fall his funding remained the same, but he again changed his major (Institutional Research, 2014). Because this student changed majors three times, he might have benefited from additional academic advising.

Stopout 2

In Fall 2010, this student was supported through the Revised 9/11 GI Bill and majored in a Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) field. He then stopped out for 2 years. It is possible he had been injured during this period because when he returned, he was then funded through Vocational Rehabilitation. He also changed his major to fine arts (Institutional Research, 2014). If he qualified for vocational rehabilitation benefits, he may have become ill or injured during his stopout. Whether that was due to a combat deployment, a car accident, or a workplace injury is unknown. The change from STEM to fine arts is also an interesting shift. His changes in ability, major, and funding source indicate he might have benefited from meeting with the campus Office of Disability to receive any necessary classroom accommodations, as well as receiving both academic and financial aid advising.

Stopout 3

A Chemistry major funded through the Guard/Reserve Montgomery GI Bill as well as the National Guard stopped out for 1 year. This leave may have been due to mobilization or deployment, because when he returned the following fall, his funding changed to Guard/Reserve REAP. He also changed his major from chemistry to business. The next year, he kept his major and funding type, but the following year, both changed. He changed to a business specialization and his benefits changed to the Revised 9/11 GI Bill (Institutional Research, 2014). This student might have benefited from both academic and financial aid advising.

Based on the earlier examples, it could be argued that some additional advising might have assisted students adjusting back to college after a stopout. Some of these students could have benefited from assistance in clarifying their career goals, identifying any necessary prerequisites for a change in major, or managing financial aid changes.

Interview Participants

Population, Sampling, and Recruitment

The OVA Director reported 374 VAMS of all academic ranks enrolled in Fall 2014; of those, 275 were undergraduates. He personally e-mailed these 275 to invite them to participate in focus groups on VAMS’ retention and persistence.

Recruitment of Female VAMS

In the MRP, Cate (2014) reported that 21.1% of student veterans are female. The U.S. military reported that 283,000 women served in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom and that more women have served in combat zones since October 2001 than ever before (Hamrick & Rumann, 2012). While women have only recently been permitted to serve in combat, many have been deployed to combat zones as medics, pilots, or convoy drivers. Women have witnessed injuries and fatalities of their comrades—and some have been injured or killed (“Women Warriors: Supporting Female Student Veterans,” 2011). Therefore, the PI actively recruited females and was able to interview two women.

Student Interviews

Those unable to attend a scheduled focus group were invited to be interviewed via an e-mailed questionnaire. Questions for groups and in e-mails were similar. All interviewees completed a demographic questionnaire, including military status, number of deployments, employment status, knowledge of campus resources, and use of veteran- or military-related financial aid. Participants were asked open-ended questions pertaining to factors that might affect persistence to graduation. Interviews ended with a request for students’ recommendations for how the university might retain VAMS and sustain them through graduation.

Response Rate

The OVA Director e-mailed 275 undergraduate VAMS to participate in interviews. Of those, two women (28.6%) and five men (71.4%) were interviewed, for a 2.5% response rate. Four were interviewed during focus groups and three were e-mailed questionnaires. Focus groups were audiotaped and transcribed. All participants signed informed consent, which contained an additional signature line to indicate consent to be audiotaped during focus groups. Written responses to e-mailed questions were typed up as narratives.

Focus Groups

One focus group for combat veterans and one for noncombat veterans were held in Fall 2014 at the Veterans Resource Center. Each group was to include two males and one female; however, on the date of the group, one male member of each group failed to attend. All four were Caucasian and veterans. Groups were jointly conducted by the PI and RA.

Individual Interviews

One of the two nonattendees later contacted the PI and two others requested to participate after the groups ended. They met with the PI in person, signed informed consent, and completed the demographic questionnaire. They were then e-mailed the questions and instructed to write or type their responses and return them to the PI. All three returned completed questionnaires.

Interviewee Descriptions

The age range of the seven interviewees was 24 to 47 (M = 39). Six were Caucasian and one was African American. All were attending college full time at the time of their interviews; all but one planned to pursue a master’s degree. All but one worked outside the home. One currently serves in the National Guard; the others were veterans. None were the first in their family to attend college and all commuted to college. All were heterosexual and most were married or living with a partner; several had dependent children. Pseudonyms are used throughout.

The first focus group consisted of combat veterans Heidi and Carl. Heidi was a single, 24 year old, Caucasian female with no dependents. An Air Force veteran, she was deployed twice to Iraq. She was medically discharged due to a hand injury but presently has full use of it. Heidi was a sophomore in the education department and intended to pursue a master’s degree.

Carl was a 41 year old, Caucasian student retired from the Marine Corps. He was deployed three times, including to Kuwait and Somalia. He was in a committed relationship with a woman with children. He was a junior in the social work program and intended to pursue a master’s in social work (MSW). He registered with the campus Office of Disability to obtain accommodations due to diagnosed PTSD and attended the armed services student group once.

The second focus group consisted of Dick and Jane, neither of whom had served in a combat zone. Dick was a 46 year old, Caucasian, Army veteran and was a sophomore in mechanical engineering. He was married with no dependent children. He was not working due to medical conditions unrelated to his service.

Jane was a 38 year old, married, Caucasian student who had retired from the Marine Corps. Prior to and after her military service, she worked in private business. She was a psychology junior and planned to complete a master’s degree. She was one of two interviewees who took a veterans-only section of a general education course. She worked full time while attending school full time. Her household consisted of herself, her husband, her sister, and six children.

The three other VAMS were Ralph, Sam, and Greg. Ralph was a 47 year old, African American social work junior who planned to pursue an MSW. He retired from the Army in 2008. He was deployed five times, including to Iraq. He was separated and worked part time. Ralph was active in the military social work student group.

Greg was a 31 year old, married, Caucasian student who separated from the Marine Corps. He was deployed twice to Iraq. He had children under age 18 and was dealing with a serious medical disease unrelated to his service; he did not work because of this. He was a social work senior who planned on becoming licensed. He also attended one campus-armed forces group.

Sam was a 46 year old Caucasian who retired from the Air Force. He serves in the National Guard and is self-employed when not serving. He was married with two children. He was a junior in the nutrition program and was the other interviewee who took a veterans-only course. He reported being involved in research on campus with some of his professors.

Narrative Inquiry

The RA transcribed audiotapes and typed up responses to the questionnaires. The PI and RA separately read all transcripts once without annotating. When transcripts were reread, they noted commonalities, coding chunks of dialogue in a recursive manner, and wrote memos before and during the study. Memos are standard components of many phenomenological studies (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006). Memos were not shared with one another until the end of the transcript review process.

Initial Codes and Emerging Themes

After separately reading and coding the transcripts, the PI and RA read them jointly to label the initial codes derived from the interviewees’ verbatim statements (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006). Verbatim codes included career goals, support, not involved, big and small scale problems, lack of discipline, socialization, transition, purpose, difference, pressure, disclosure, they don’t understand/they don’t know, burden, issues, graduation, major, relationships, identities and roles, means to an end, different perspective, common, share, be myself, no excuses, and diversity.

The PI and RA narrowed these initial codes down to assess emerging themes. The themes included the transition from military to student life, including military transfer credit, military culture, and financial aid; stopping out due mobilization or deployment; managing multiple identities; medical or psychiatric symptoms; coping strategies; sense of belonging or involvement on campus; and attitudes about civilian peers and faculty. Interviewees’ verbatim statements are indicated within quotation marks later.

Emerging Themes

Transitioning From Military to Student Role

Military credits

Greg was not sure he received all the transfer credits from his military transcript: “I’m not aware of the ins and outs of the credits that were recovered from my active duty time. I do feel that I did not get the credits that I may have thought I would have gotten ….” On the other hand, Sam reported that the “transfer of credits went fairly easy.”

Skills transfer

Aspects of military culture, such as a need for structure, punctuality, perseverance, and meeting deadlines, were applied to their academic endeavors (Hall, 2011; Livingston, Havice, Cawhon, & Fleming, 2011). Dick, Jane, and Heidi talked about being punctual, not missing classes, and completing homework on time. Heidi said she does not “really deviate from anything because I know with a set schedule it will keep me on track.”

Greg’s transferred skills included “punctuality, determination, respect, knowledge, and self-awareness,” but he saw the downside of the effects of military culture as well: “It was very hard to adjust upon being discharged. I lost the sense of structure that I had become so accustomed to. Over time, it became easier.”

Carl stated that for him “structure in the service doesn’t apply to schoolwork.” He described waiting “until the last minute. I can’t concentrate that long on something … when my mind is elsewhere … I’d rather do it in a rush, under pressure, and get it done.” He said this procrastination gave him a sense of “excitement” which he seemed to require in order to complete his homework.

Concerns about financial aid

The Montgomery GI Bill and post 9/11 GI Bill have time constraints: “I have 36 months start to finish before it runs out,” Greg said. “So I have to go to school year-round ….” Dick acknowledged that he could not finish school “without my financial aid.” Jane noted she will end up having to self-pay in order to complete a master’s degree. These gaps may force some VAMS to stop out to gain money to finance the rest of their studies or to work several part-time jobs, an additional stressor that may negatively impact persistence.

Stopping Out

Abrupt calls to redeploy can disrupt college careers as well as VAMS’ families, jobs, and lives (Bauman, 2009; “Crisis of Identity,” 2011; Hoyt & Winn, 2004). They may miss orientation, deadlines to add or drop or withdraw, fail to complete assignments and thus fail courses, or have bureaucratic challenges that affect reenrollment upon their return to campus (Livingston et al., 2011). Sam reported he had been “mobilized during the Fall 2011 semester for 30 days, but not deployed.” He was unable to return to school that term; when he returned the next semester, “re-enrollment was seamless and painless.”

Managing Multiple Identities

Many VAMS struggle with competing demands of their intersecting identities and roles (“Crisis of Identity,” 2011; Vest, 2014). For example, Greg described himself as a “parent first, military veteran second, and student third. I am the parent of two little boys, full-time college student, and currently interning on top of my medical issues. It is a lot to handle right now.”

Sam described himself first as a

… student researcher. I currently work a part-time job, and [am] a full-time student, and I’m enrolled in an internship … I serve on the Board of Directors for two all-volunteer organizations. I’m also a husband, a father of two children, and have … animals … Time and prioritization [are] usually the only conflict.

Medical or Psychiatric Concerns

Several interviewees disclosed medical or psychiatric conditions such as multiple sclerosis, heart disease, PTSD, and anxiety (Ellison et al., 2012; Kim et al., 2010; Ostovary & Dapprich, 2011). Greg said he has “disabilities … so juggling many things can pose a potential problem” in terms to getting to class or completing homework on time.

Carl disclosed he was being treated for PTSD and that he had registered with the Office of Disability for classroom accommodations. He struggled in class to manage his symptoms of anxiety, hypervigilance, paranoia, and difficulty concentrating. At times he would leave the classroom to pace in the hall, which he saw as “self-defense.” Carl described how he has to plot in his mind during class: “How to get out of the classroom if something happens? How to escape? Who the person over there is, what’s their angle? How do I take this person down and get out of here?” He rationalized that “I remove myself before I take it out on anybody else.” He explained, “I spend a lot of my time in class doing that, and I suffer from that, because it takes me away from the work.”

Heidi said being in a crowded classroom made her anxious. She told the story of how she was supposed to be in a smaller, veterans-only course but instead was placed in a very large class. She, too, described mentally plotting how to get out of the room. She had to “know what I’m going to do if something happens. I don’t know … how I’m gonna get out of here ….” Heidi’s anxiety was palpable as she said how being in a crowded room is “really my only problem. I don’t do well in big crowds in small places ….” Carl provided Heidi with support as he shared he had similar issues.

Coping strategies

Aside from removing oneself when anxiety mounts, other coping strategies interviewees cited were listening to or playing music, exercising, and spending time with family. Greg said he “unwinds by playing guitar when I get too stressed out.” Sam said he exercises routinely “five days per week for at least an hour. I take my wife to dinner every weekend, and I make sure that I spend time with my children helping them with their homework.” None of the interviewees admitted to using alcohol or other substances to cope.

Sense of Belonging and Involvement on Campus

Connections to civilian and veteran classmates

When asked if they attend any campus athletic or social events, few interviewees reported attending anything unrelated to a class assignment, such as receiving extra credit to attend a guest lecture. VAMS may prefer to connect more with other veterans, leading to the usefulness of having a student veteran organization on campus (Ford et al., 2009; Summerlot et al., 2009). However, they tend to be socially isolated from their civilian classmates.

Ralph acknowledged that getting involved in campus veterans groups might support his academic success. Greg felt “a certain bond with fellow vets. They know what it was like to serve and what it takes to be a hard worker.” Sam agreed: “Bonds that I made with people while serving in the military are important … ”

Self-disclosure of veteran or military status

Some VAMS may reveal their military status at some times and to certain people, but at other times they do not disclose (“Crisis of Identity,” 2011; Vest, 2014). Ralph felt it was “important for [students] to know my status because I came back and many others did not.” Sam stated, “I am unashamed of my service to my country. However, there are times when I know that it’s best that I keep my experience close to my vest.”

Greg said he tries to “blend in” with students and does “not reference” his veteran status “very much.” For Jane, “it depends … I don’t go into class saying ‘hey I’m a veteran’ … but it will come up.” Carl pointed out that during “introductions … I’ll express that I served … but I don’t really wear it as a badge … to tell everybody. Not that I’m not proud of it … It’s mine. I don’t need to share it with everyone.”

Attitudes About Civilian Classmates, Faculty, or Staff

Interactions with civilian faculty, staff, and peers are usually positive, according to those interviewed. However at times, there may be some hostility toward or ignorance about military culture and combat experience.

Attitudes about civilian faculty and staff

Sam talked about positive interactions with faculty: “All have been extremely supportive of me, my academic and professional aspirations.” Greg felt that

… some professors really value the opinions that I have had when the discussion of veterans is ever brought up … No professor has ever talked down on the military; for the most part, they respect the fact that I served …

However, he wanted faculty to be more flexible about deadlines for homework assignments: “I’m not talking about a free ride, but maybe a little more” leeway.

Carl reported that, because he handed a notice of his disability to his instructors, most have been respectful. However, he said a few had a negative or sarcastic attitude about affording him any accommodations. Sam described one negative experience he had when he overheard “a professor … say some negative things about the military and military people in general. I approached the professor … [and] gently corrected [him].” But Sam also had positive examples as well. “During my first two semesters at school, I sat next to an Iraqi war veteran who attended every class with his dog, which was trained to identify if the veteran was about to experience a seizure, or PTSD.”

Attitudes about civilian classmates

Most interviewees had negative things to say about their civilian peers. Some of this was attributed to “a big generational gap,” according to Ralph, which relates to VAMS’ nontraditional status. Some saw civilian students’ lack of structure, discipline, and respect as opposite to what they learned from military culture. Greg said, “Some [civilian] students can be a bit on the unmotivated and careless side. My opinion of them is that they are ignorant [about military life and culture] ….” Jane said she was “disgusted” by “disrespectful” students who she saw “packing up their things before class is dismissed, talking during the lecture, cheating … worrying about what will be on the test ….” Dick also viewed them as “disrespectful” due to texting and other rude behaviors.

Implications for Campus Policy and Procedures

The 6-year graduation rate of VAMS at this public, urban research university in the Midwest was higher compared to the recent rate for all undergraduates at this campus; it was only slightly lower than the national benchmark (Cate, 2014). However, nearly half appeared to have withdrawn from college during the period studied (Institutional Research, 2014). This is a staggering finding. It is unlikely that these students left for financial reasons, as most maintained educational benefits. However, the true reasons for their withdrawal remain unknown. Outreach to at-risk student veterans and to those who stopped enrolling might have encouraged some of these dropouts to reengage and return to complete their degrees.

Recommendations for University Administrators

Interviewees were asked for specific recommendations on how the university could assist VAMS to persist to graduation. Other suggestions were derived from an analysis of the archival data. Most of these recommendations do not require additional personnel or expenses and therefore would be quite cost effective to adopt.

Interdepartmental Communication

Academic advising, disability, student success, career counseling, and mental health counseling staff could be more proactive in letting VAMS know what services they offer and to streamline access to care on- and-off campus, including referrals and linkage to the VA. Enhanced communication between the OVA and these other departments is strongly recommended.

Outreach and Linkage

Students having academic, financial, or personal problems need to be outreached and offered interventions earlier—before they stop or drop out—to succeed academically. The OVA Director or his designee could contact VAMS annually to provide referrals and linkage to on- and off-campus resources. More important, once students have withdrawn or dropped out, individual outreach and follow-up are needed to reengage them.

Further, if faculty or staff become aware that a student veteran has or develops a psychiatric or physical disability, they can encourage the student to go to the Office of Disability to request accommodations, if warranted. Referrals to other campus resources such as tutoring or counseling could be made by OVA staff. Another suggestion was to house a social work student intern at the Vet Center to link students to community agencies and VA benefits. As of this writing, the university has begun to provide outreach to students who have withdrawn and have placed a social work intern at the Vet Center.

Financial Aid Advising

The university could assist VAMS financially, particularly when military or veteran educational benefits have been exhausted. In addition, if VAMS lose benefits from year to year, they may face significant financial concerns which may cause additional stress, such as needing to work a second job or even stopping or dropping out. Additional financial aid advisement, including assistance with military or veteran educational benefits processing, was recommended. Additional financial aid staff may need to be trained in this specialty. Greg also suggested scholarships that might offset the actual costs of college.

Academic and Career Advising

Students often struggle with academic and career decisions. The archival data revealed that several VAMS who returned from a stopout changed their major, several more than once. The admissions office can ensure that military transcripts are reviewed for maximum transfer credits. VAMS could be provided with enhanced academic advising as well as career counseling.

Faculty, Staff, and Student Orientation

The interviewees’ first suggestion was to develop a student or faculty orientation on military culture to integrate VAMS more fully into campus life. Military culture is little understood outside of that culture (Hall, 2011). Greg said veterans’ “military attitudes are different from traditional students. There is a different level of interpretation when it comes to coursework.” Sam added that

… some training would be helpful, if only for gaining a better understanding of where it is we come from … Training with regard to … the many needs that some of us have, especially after having returned from war … [The university] could design and implement an educational program for civilian students and administer it similarly to how equal opportunity is administered around the campus.

Hall (2011) recommended that civilians be taught about military culture and that instructors in particular should be made aware of what VAMS may perceive as offensive or demeaning language or behavior. Course content, particularly in helping professions such as social work and counseling, could include military culture as a separate population group with its own norms, values, code of conduct, and traditions; particular attention might be paid to female veterans as well (Hamrick & Rumann, 2012; “Women Warriors: Supporting Female Student,” 2011). Some interviewees felt that there would be fewer misunderstandings in the classroom if their faculty knew how to handle VAMS presenting with psychiatric, medical, or other issues more sensitively.

Collaboration would be needed between the OVA and several departments across the university, such as student affairs or student success, faculty development, student counseling, disability services, and so on (Burnett & Segoria, 2009; Ford et al., 2009; Hall, 2011; Kim et al., 2010; McCaslin et al., 2013; Pietrzak et al., 2009). These programs could develop a series of trainings on military culture designed for various campus populations. This training could be offered at new faculty orientation, during freshman week, and as part of faculty in-service trainings.

Peer Support and Professional Counseling

Students having personal or interpersonal difficulties need a safe place to talk, preferably with other veterans (“What Matters to Veterans,” 2011). A peer support group was suggested, to be held at the Vet Center. Housing an MSW student intern (who would be a veteran) there as well, who could provide some short-term counseling and referrals, was also recommended. At a later date, a therapist or counselor with specialized training could be hired to work at the Vet Center.

Enhanced Recreational Activities

The interviewees requested that the Vet Center add activities, particularly at night and on the weekends. Some said it should offer activities and groups for VAMS and their families. Carl wanted to see it as a place where a “more tight-knit veteran’s circle” could meet. VAMS wanted to socialize with peers, use the computer room and lounge, participate in activities, obtain advisement, and have a safe place to receive peer support.

Limitations

The use of aggregated data relies on the inclusiveness of content and accuracy of data entry; some VAMS may not have identified themselves as such. The PI could not follow up with any past students due to Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. The university had no information on the reason for students leaving, so the PI could only surmise possible reasons. “Dropouts” may have transferred to another institution, had a deployment lasting longer than the study period, left due to medical or psychiatric or other personal reasons, or may have returned after the study period.

This study occurred at one urban research university in the Midwest. Findings cannot be extrapolated to other institutions. Another limitation was the response rate was only 2.5% of undergraduate VAMS. Interviewees were self-selected, and only one was not Caucasian. While there was representation from combat and noncombat students and from females, and one interviewee serves in the National Guard, none of the students interviewed were active duty service members. Therefore, the findings have limited generalizability to students who are on active duty. Areas for future research include having a larger sample to interview; using online questionnaires; including more diversity; and directly assessing the attitudes of civilian students, faculty, and staff concerning the presence of VAMS on campus.

Conclusion

Military experience impacts veterans’ higher education in terms of both strengths and challenges. Some VAMS’ strengths were related to military culture: structure, punctuality, perseverance, and meeting deadlines. Half of the student veterans who had been enrolled during the period of the archival study successfully graduated, on a par with the national average and well above the average for the preponderance of undergraduates at this Midwestern University.

Some challenges reported by those interviewed included running out of financial aid before completing a degree, civilian faculty and students’ responses to VAMS in the classroom, and civilians who appeared ignorant about military culture and service. There was a lack of university outreach to the VAMS who appeared to have stopped or dropped out of college. Future plans include providing student staff or volunteers to contact VAMS who have not reenrolled for classes.

More can be done to ensure VAMS’ persistence to graduation. Findings from this study indicated that campuses need to develop and implement a multiple-pronged, proactive, strength-based approach, encompassing several departments, in order to enhance VAMS’ college experience and chances to persist to graduation. To this end, some universities have offered veterans-only classes, created and staffed veteran affairs departments, and endorsed military-related student organizations. It was clear from the purported attrition rate of nearly one half of VAMS enrolled during the study period that more needs to be done to outreach and advise those students who appear to be having difficulties. It is hoped that a more proactive approach to providing student veterans and military-connected service members with focused advisement, counseling, and outreach will result in higher rates of retention and graduation.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank the student veterans who participated, as well as my Research Assistant, Jessica Yarab, MSW; Becky Geltz at Institutional Research; and Major Rick Williams of the Office of Veterans Affairs, for their support of this project.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Mari Alschuler, PhD, LISW-S, is an MSW program coordinator and an assistant professor of social work at Youngstown State University. Dr. Alschuler currently researches mindfulness approaches to teaching and counseling.

Jessica Yarab, MSW, was the research assistant on this study. She is currently a Florida Registered Clinical Social Work intern.

References

Bauman

(2009) The mobilization and return of undergraduate students serving in the National Guard and Reserves. New Directions for Student Services 126: 15–23.

Burnett

Segoria

(2009) Collaboration for military transition students from combat to college: It takes a community. Journal of Postsecondary Education & Disability 22(1): 53–59.

Cate

C. A.

(2014) Million records project: Research from student veterans of America, Washington, DC: Student Veterans of America.

Crisis of identity? Veteran, civilian, student. (2011). Veterans in Higher Education, ASHE Higher Education Report, 37(3), 53–65. doi: 10.1002/aehe.

Ellison

M. L.

Mueller

Smelson

Corrigan

P. W.

Torres Stone

R. A.

Bokhour

B. G.

Drebing

(2012) Supporting the educational goals of post-9/11 veterans with self-reported PTSD symptoms: A needs assessment. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 35(3): 209–217.

Ford

Northrup

Wiley

(2009) Connections, partnerships, opportunities, and programs to enhance success for military students. New Directions for Student Services 126: 61–70.

Gay

L. R.

Mills

G. E.

Airasian

(2011) Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications, 10th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Hall

L. K.

(2011) The importance of understanding military culture. Social Work in Health Care 50: 4–11.

Hamrick

F. A.

Rumann

C. B.

(2012) Addressing the needs of women service members and veterans in higher education. On Campus with Women 40(3): n.p.

10.

Hesse-Biber

S. N.

Leavy

(2006) The practice of qualitative research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

11.

Hoyt

J. E.

Winn

B. A.

(2004) Understanding retention and college student bodies: Differences between drop-outs, stop-outs, opt-outs and transfer-outs. NASPA Journal 41: 395–417.

12.

Institutional Research. (2014). Youngstown State University.

13.

Institutional Research. (2016). Youngstown State University.

14.

Kim

P. Y.

Thomas

J. L.

Wilk

J. E.

Castro

C. A.

Hoge

C. W.

(2010) Stigma, barriers to care, and use of mental health services among active duty and National Guard soldiers after combat. Psychiatric Services 61(6): 582–585.

15.

Livingston

W. G.

Havice

P. A.

Cawthon

T. W.

Fleming

D. S.

(2011) Coming home: Student veterans’ articulation of college re-enrollment. Journal of Student Affairs Research & Practice 48: 315–331.

16.

McCaslin

S. E.

Leach

Herbst

Armstrong

(2013) Overcoming barriers to care for returning veterans: Expanding services to college campuses. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development 50(8): vii–xiv.

17.

Morrow

J. A.

Ackermann

M. E.

(2012) Intention to persist and retention of first year students: The importance of motivation and sense of belonging. College Student Journal 3: 483–491.

18.

Ostovary

Dapprich

(2011) Challenges and opportunities of operation enduring freedom/operational Iraqi freedom veterans with disabilities transitioning into learning and workplace environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education 132: 63–73.

19.

Pietrzak

Johnson

D. C.

Goldstein

M. B.

Malley

J. C.

Southwick

S. M.

(2009) Perceived stigma and barriers to mental health care utilization among OEF-OIF veterans. Psychiatric Services 60(8): 1118–1122.

20.

RAND Corporation. (2008). Invisible wounds: Mental health and cognitive care needs of America’s returning veterans. Rand Center for Military Health Policy Research. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9336.

21.

Rumann

C. B.

Hamrick

F. A.

(2010) Student veterans in transition: Re-enrolling after war zone deployments. Journal of Higher Education 81(4): 431–458.

22.

Shea

K. P.

Fishback

S. J.

(2012) Impact of cumulative combat stress on learning in an academic environment. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education 136: 53–63.

23.

Summerlot

Green

S.-M.

Parker

(2009) Student veteran organizations. New Directions for Student Services 126: 71–80.

24.

Transition 2.0: Using Tinto’s model to understand student veterans’ persistence. (2011). Veterans in Higher Education, ASHE Higher Education Report, 37(3), 35–50. doi: 10.1002/aehe.

25.

U.S. Department of Defense. (2013, June). VA/DoD clinical practice guidelines for assessment and management of patients at risk for suicide. Retrieved from http://www.healthquality.va.gov/srb/VADODCP_SuicideRisk_Full.pdf.

26.

Vest

B. M.

(2014) Citizen, soldier, or citizen-soldier? Negotiating identity in the U.S. National Guard. Armed Forces & Society 39(4): 602–627.

27.

What matters to veterans? Peer influences and the campus environment. (2011). Veterans in Higher Education, ASHE Higher Education Report, 37(3), 21–33. doi: 10.1002/aehe.

28.

Women warriors: Supporting female student veterans. (2011). Veterans in Higher Education, ASHE Higher Education Report, 37(3), 69–80. doi: 10.1002/aehe.