Abstract
Student veterans experience unique challenges when returning to higher education. While the Post-9/11 GI bill creates an easier pathway for veterans, student veterans often face multiple impediments to degree completion. Using the Veterans Supplement of the Current Population Survey, we conducted a logistic regression of 4,887 veterans that predicts college retention measured by bachelor’s degree completion using six study variables of physical, sensory, and mental challenges (concentration, hearing, eyesight, walking, dressing, and going out). We conclude only difficulty hearing and walking significantly decreased the odds of bachelor’s degree completion. Recommendations for campus-student-support services are explored.
The majority of veterans leaving the military today can be categorized as having some college but no degree completion (National Center for Veteran’s Analysis and Statistics [NCVAS], 2018; Steele et al., 2018). In 2011, 1.1 million veteran students were either enrolled in undergraduate programs or applied for Post-9/11 GI benefits, with future estimates of veterans attending college predicted to climb to 2 million by 2020 (Chan, 2018; Radford et al., 2016; Steele et al., 2018).The Post-911 GI bill made higher education more attainable, and in many cases covers the full cost of education at in-state and public colleges, and universities (DeCoster, 2018; U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs [USDVA], 2018).
Yet, despite these benefits, challenges unique to this subset of nontraditional students appears to interfere with degree completion, particularly graduation from four-year institutions. Lower completion rates for student veterans from four-year institutions have been reported such as Johnson et al. (2014) institutional findings of a low 3% veteran completion rate as compared with the national average of 57% for students at similar institutions. Alschuler and Yarab (2018) echo similar concerns reporting that approximately half of 707 veterans enrolled during 2009–2014, withdrew from a Midwestern public university. And while findings from one of the largest studies on veteran degree completion, the Million Records Project, noted slightly lower bachelor degree completion rates of student veterans when compared to the general population of students, the findings also noted it took student veterans longer to complete their bachelor’s degrees or 6.3 years on average (Cate, 2014). Given these challenges, this study aims to identify factors that interfere with student-veteran bachelor degree completion.
Literature Review
So who are student veterans? Of the approximately 22 million veterans living in the US today, white, non-Hispanic males continue to be the largest demographic group (Elliott, 2017). Yet the numbers of non-white-non-Hispanic veterans grew from 13.3% among Pre-9/11 veterans to 20.5% among Post- 9/11 veterans. This trend is similar among Hispanic veterans. The numbers of Hispanic veterans grew from 5.7% among Pre-9/11 veterans to 12% among Post 9/11 veterans (NCVAS, 2018). Gender diversity is also increasing and by 2020, 10% of the veteran population is expected to be female (Evans et al., 2015; Radford et al., 2016). Additionally, age has shifted: Post-9/11 veterans are the youngest cohort of veterans with a median age of 35 as opposed to 68 for all other groups of veterans (NCVAS, 2018).
Yet on college campuses, student veterans are older than their traditional counterparts, with an average student veteran age of 34 (Borsari et al., 2017). They are more likely to have family responsibilities, and more likely to be a first generation college student (Borsari et al., 2017; Evans et al., 2015; Radford et al., 2016). These factors characterize student veterans as nontraditional students, but based upon their age, prior military experiences and socialization, they are a unique subset of nontraditional students.
Nontraditional Status
Deutsch and Schmertz (2011) suggest that nontraditional adult students are those students who are 24 years of age or older and are “entering higher education with a different set of adult life experiences than students 18–22” (p. 478). Nontraditional or returning students have discontinued their education at an earlier time and have returned to college often bringing with them multiple life complexities that include a continuation of employment, parenting, and other family responsibilities (Chen, 2015; Francois, 2014; Safford & Stitton, 2016). Veterans, for example, are more likely to be married or divorced, and more likely to have children, than non-veterans (Radford et al., 2016; DeCoster, 2018). They are also more likely to have interrupted or discontinued their education due to deployments that interfered with earlier degree completions (Cate, 2014).
While the nontraditional student population has increased dramatically, it also has a significantly higher dropout rate: 38.9% as compared to 18.2% of their traditional counterparts (Borsari et al., 2017; Chen, 2015; Francois, 2014). Competing demands such as juggling work, family responsibilities, and education can negatively impact degree completion (Morgenthaler, 2009). These competing demands constrain the time needed for studies yet nontraditional students are more likely to need extra time due to the additional effort required because of rusty or weak writing, math, and technological skills or abilities (Chen, 2015; Morgenthaler, 2009). As Chen (2015) argues, much more effort is required for the returning student to complete their program of study. These additional efforts and demands point to the importance of a strong support system to assist nontraditional students in completing their bachelor degrees.
Combat Related Injuries
Unique to student veterans may be combat related issues or other issues experienced in the military that exacerbate an existing disability or lead to the development of a new one. Living and learning with a disability can be an added pressure for student veterans, who are often coping with problems experienced by nontraditional students. The National Center for Educational Statistics reported differences of disability rates between veteran and non-veteran students: 18% disability rates for student veterans, 13% for non-veteran independent students, and 9% for non-veteran dependent students (Radford et al., 2016). Additionally, the NCVAS (2019) documents higher percentages of Post-9/11 veterans who sustained service-connected disabilities, as compared to Pre-9/11 veterans. This is due to recent advances in technology that have saved lives during military combat, but also created more instances of veterans living with sustained physical and psychological injuries such as PTSD, depression, traumatic brain injury, hearing loss or other sensory impairments, and orthopedic injuries (Alschuler & Yarab, 2018; Church, 2009; Decoster, 2018; Johnson et al., 2014). Referred to as blast injuries, these are the signature injury of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars (Church, 2009).
Psychological Injury
Approximately 20–46% of returning veterans likely meet criteria for PTSD or depressive disorders (Currier et al., 2015; Decoster, 2018). When comparing todays veterans with previous generations, 44% of Post-9/11 veterans say their adjustment to civilian life was difficult as opposed to 25% of veterans who served in earlier times (PEW Research Center, 2011). Bhattarai et al. (2020) provides contrasting information and emphasizes that Vietnam veterans, Gulf War, and Post-9/11 veterans actually have similar PTSD scores with greater differences indicated when comparing these groups to earlier cohorts, i.e., Korean and World War II veterans. Thus, PTSD is a risk factor for multiple age demographics and wartime cohorts.
PTSD or post-traumatic stress disorder can develop after exposure to trauma such as combat. Symptoms include hypervigilance, hyper-arousal, intrusive memories increased anxiety, suicidal ideation, insomnia, and issues concentrating (Parks & Walker, 2014; Smee et al., 2013). Parks and Walker (2014) describe how combat experiences and memories of witnessing death, living in a state of hyperawareness, and facing daily threats of loss of life, create problems of adaptation to everyday life once the veteran returns home. PTSD and depression are risk factors for suicide among veterans, and student veterans are more likely to commit acts of self-harm than non-student veterans (Borsari et al., 2017; DeCoster, 2018; Parks & Walker, 2014). These symptoms can be problematic, not only for adaption to everyday life but also for the demands of college.
Physical Injuries
In 2015, the Congressional Research Service reported that 10% of veterans were physically disabled, and 52,000 were injured in Iraq or Afghanistan (Decoster, 2018). Thus, Post-911 veterans may live with higher rates of chronic pain that can interfere with day-to-day functioning. Yet Vietnam Era veterans report greater levels of limb pain, and shortness of breath; issues that could be due to exposure to Agent Orange and herbicides (Autor et al., 2011). Exposures to toxins are also an issue for Gulf War veterans. Gulf War veterans may have been exposed to chemical and biological weapons, or pesticides. Indeed, Gulf War deployment is associated with higher rates of unexplained symptoms or overall poor health (Elliott, 2017; Porter et al., 2018).
Other examples of physical injuries include concussive traumatic brain injury (TBI) or injury caused to the brain by external force. Approximately 19% of veterans live with a TBI (Smee et al., 2013; Elliott, 2017). While soldiers of any war are at risk for TBIs, the increasing numbers of veterans living with TBIs are likely due to the widespread use of improvised explosive devises (IEDs) in Iraq and Afghanistan (DeCoster, 2018; Parks & Walker, 2014; Smee et al., 2013). Mild TBIs, the most common TBI injury, impacts concentration, memory, retention and encoding of information, mental efficiency, and performance. Other TBI symptoms include chronic headaches, nausea, vertigo, fatigue, and photosensitivity (Decoster, 2018; Parks & Walker, 2014; Smee et al., 2013). Smee et al., (2013) adds an additional issue related to TBIs: combat-based, concussion fatigue that can interfere with the student veteran’s ability to sustain concentration in pressured college environments. Additionally, TBI and spinal cord injuries can create problems for student veterans in sitting, prolonged computer or lab work, and walking to and from classes (Borsari et al., 2017; Church, 2009). Specific to spinal injuries, veterans may experience problems with physical dexterity, such as completing written assignments, and mobility issues (Borsari et al., 2017; Church, 2009). Mobility issues could also be due to amputations. A 2011 report by Pew Charitable Trust indicated higher rates of amputations experienced by veterans serving in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq or about 1–29.
Thus, physical injuries can range from chronic pain, shortness of breath, TBIs, loss of limbs, and spinal injuries. While all have the potential to negatively influence student-veteran degree completion, TBI injuries and mobility issues are particularly problematic. TBI injuries could interfere with the student veteran’s ability to process and retain information, while mobility issues could limit a student veteran’s consistent attendance overtime.
Sensory Issues
Historically, war has always included the risk of exposure to loud noise, making sensory issues such as hearing impairments all too common (Elliott, 2017; Evans et al., 2015). Indeed, auditory injuries, such as tinnitus or ringing in the ear, and hearing loss, have been identified as the most common VA service-related disability, and are the fourth leading cause for a medical referrals (Elliott, 2017; Joseph et al., 2016; Karch et al., 2016; Theodoroff et al., 2015). The ear is typically the most vulnerable and often the first organ to sustain injury during a blast such as an IED, and veterans may never fully recover from these injuries (Joseph et al., 2016; Theodoroff et al., 2015). Veterans also report TBI related vision issues such as issues with visual acuity, and sensitivity to brightness. Veterans with PTSD reported problems with blurry vision (Trachtman, 2010). These sensory impairments can create difficulties for student veterans in hearing and understanding lectures, reading course materials, and completing assignments.
Combination of Injuries
Combinations of these issues can create problems for student veterans in the areas of “focus, cognitive processing, retention and memory in terms of ability to learn” (Alschuler & Yarab, 2018, p. 50). Comorbidity or the co-occurrences of PTSD and TBI are common and can exacerbate obstacles to college success (Smee et al., 2013). Other studies highlight the common co-occurrence of tinnitus, depression, anxiety, concentration, and sleep issues (Henry et al., 2019). When mobility problems or sensory issues are linked with PTSD and/or a TBI, these problems can exacerbate the already difficult transition from the military to college, making the goal of a college degree more difficult to attain.
Time Served: Pre or Post-911 GI Bill
Reasons for rising veteran student rates on college and university campuses include the Post-9/11 GI bill. Unlike its predecessor the Montgomery GI bill, the new GI bill makes higher education more attainable for veterans and in many cases covers the full cost of education at in-state public colleges, and universities (DeCoster, 2018; USDVA, 2018). Although the Post-9/11 GI bill has a positive effect on veterans enrolling in colleges and universities, it is contingent on when the veteran served. Veterans, who served from September 2001, onwards are eligible for the Post-911 GI benefits implemented in August of 2009 (Zhang, 2018).
Examples of positive effects include veterans who are 40–50 years of age and have a 13% college enrollment rate compared with a low 4% of nonveteran students of the same age range (Zhang, 2018). Using American Community Survey data, Zhang (2018) concluded that the Post- 9/11 GI bill had stable, positive effects on veteran students from ages 20–60. As Zhang (2018) points out, veterans do routinely follow a different path than nonveteran college students who have lower college enrollment rates after the age of 30. Despite these positive enrollment numbers, Chan (2018) found that older student veterans were less likely to graduate. As Zhang (2018) emphasized, the Post 9/11 bill could influence college enrollment more than degree attainment.
Conceptual Framework
Veterans are a subset of nontraditional students with distinctive risk factors for attrition. Bean and Metzner’s (1985) Model of Nontraditional Student Attrition offers a flexible lens to understand attrition factors that are unique to this subset of nontraditional students. Nontraditional students are defined as students who are 24 years or older, a commuter or not living on campus, likely a part-time as opposed to a full-time student (Bean & Metzner, 1985). Additionally, nontraditional students are mainly concerned with an institution’s academic programs as opposed to the social environment of the institution (Bean & Metzner, 1985; Southwell et al., 2018).
Bean and Metzner (1985) proposed that social integration within higher education institutions is less important to nontraditional students than external environmental factors. Nontraditional students often experience environmental press, not necessarily experienced by traditional, full-time, and residential students. Bean and Metzner (1985) describe nontraditional student environmental press as less overall interactions in the college environment, similar course interactions, and increased interactions with the external environment when compared to traditional students. “For nontraditional students, environmental support compensates for weak academic support, but academic support will not compensate for weak environmental support” (Bean & Metzner, 1985, p. 492). Thus, due to an increase of external pressures, the decision to drop out of higher education could be based on external environmental barriers or lack of support, as opposed to academic issues (Bean & Metzner, 1985). This lack of support could include barriers on and off campuses, such as accessing support for a disability. When disability support barriers are combined with other environmental factors experienced by nontraditional students, such as employment and family responsibilities, the goal of completing a program of study could become unmanageable.
Methodology
We guided this study through one primary research question: How do physical, sensory, and mental challenges, in a sample of veterans, relate to student-veteran college degree completion? Using secondary data from the Current Population study, we performed a logistic regression gauging the effect of veteran student (N = 4887) challenges on the outcome variable four-year college degree completion. The model includes salient controls of warzone experience, era of service, gender, and race. All else equal, we find challenges in hearing and walking to significantly decrease the odds of student veterans completing a four-year degree.
Data Sample
Data were drawn from the August 2011 Current Population Survey (CPS) (ICPSR, 2011a). The CPS sampling and data collection methods are detailed elsewhere (US Bureau of Labor Statistics and US Census Bureau Current Population Survey: Technical Paper, 66, 2006). Briefly, the CPS obtained interviews from approximately 56,000 households (Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [ICPSR], 2011b). The main purpose of the survey was to collect official government statistics on employment estimating the demographics and labor force of veterans (ICPSR, 2011b). The CPS included a veteran supplemental survey, our population of study. The sample of veteran respondents was limited to those that had at least 1 year of education beyond high school. After list-wise deletion of cases, the sample for our study consisted of 4887 veterans.
Analytic Procedure
For this study, we developed a conceptual model to examine physical, sensory, and mental challenges and student-veteran degree completion including demographics of gender, ethnicity, and race. Controls also included service in a warzone, and time period of service.
All three demographics were constructed as dummy variables stipulating whether the veteran was male, non-Hispanic, and white. Ethnicity and race were treated as two separate variables within the data. The service in warzone control variable indicated yes, the veteran had experience in a warzone. Time period of service reflected the answer to “When did you serve?” and coded as such (1 = September 2001 or later, 2 = August 1990-August 2001, 3 = May 1975-July 1990, 4 = August 1964-April 1975 (Vietnam era), 5= February 1955-July 1964, 6 = July 1950-January 1955 (Korean War), 7 = January 1947-June 1950, 8 = December 1941-December 1946 (World War II), 9 = November 1941 or earlier).
The variables of interest, health and mental challenges, included six variables: concentrating and remembering, hearing, seeing, walking, dressing, and doing errands. All challenge variables were dichotomous, self-reported answers to the following questions:
“Because of physical, mental, or emotional condition, does have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions?”
“Is deaf or does have serious difficulty hearing?”
“Is blind or does have difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses?”
“Does have serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs?”
“Does have difficulty dressing or bathing?”
“Because of physical, mental, or emotional condition, does have difficulty doing errands such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping?”
Given the binary nature of the outcome variable, logistic regression was used to examine the effects of veteran health challenges on college four-year degree completion. Descriptive analysis provides insight to the sample. As shown on Table 1, the veteran sample included 45% with a college degree, 91% male, 95.8% non-Hispanic, 87.4% white, 28.9% served in a warzone. Interestingly, the majority of the sample, 35.4% served during the Vietnam era. The sample accurately reflects the veteran population demographics in 2011, namely overwhelmingly male, non-Hispanic, and white (Lee & Beckhusen, 2012). We assert an applicable sample as these demographics continue to represent the veteran population relatively accurately (NCVAS, 2019).
Descriptive Summary of the Sample (N = 4887).
Table 2 shows the logistic regression results. The overall model is significant with a chi-square value of 109.181, df = 11, p < 0.001. For the study variables, results indicate that two challenges significantly reduced the odds of veteran student four-year degree completion: difficulty hearing and difficulty walking. The odds of those veterans completing a four-year degree with a serious hearing impairment were 74% (OR = 0.744, p <.05) of the odds of those veterans without a hearing challenge. The odds of those veterans completing a four-year degree with serious difficulty of walking were 68% (OR = 0.676, p <.05) of the odds of those veterans without a walking challenge. The other four challenges (concentration and decision-making, eyesight, dressing, and going out) did not show significance in degree completion.
Logistic Regression of the Sample.
Model Fit Indices:
Note. Positive effects indicated by OR greater than 1, negative effects indicated by OR between 0 and 1. ***p < .001; **p < .05.
Veterans who were white had 40% higher odds of four-year degree completion (OR = 1.405, p < .001), and non-Hispanic veterans had 59% higher odds (OR = 1.590, p < .05). In addition, odds of male veteran degree completion were significantly lower than females (OR = 0.739, p < .05). Interestingly, service in a war zone did not show significant effects. As period of service becomes less recent, odds of four-year degree completion significantly increased by a factor of 14 (OR = 1.143, p < .001).
Discussion
The growing number of student veterans on U.S. college and university campuses, calls for an increased understanding of factors that influence student veteran retention. Bean and Metzner’s (1985) model of nontraditional student attrition provides a wide framework to consider impactful factors, such as a lack of, or inconsistent support for coping with a disability. Evaluating a sample of 4887 veterans in 2011 that attempted at least one year of college, we find only 45% of the sample completed a bachelor’s degree. The challenges of concentration, hearing, eyesight, walking, dressing, and going out were assessed for impact on bachelor’s degree completion. Only hearing and walking showed significant influence in lack of degree completion, measured by bachelor’s degree completion. Study control variables included service in a combat zone, and time-period of service. Combat zone experience did not show significance, while time-period of service indicated veterans serving farther back significantly graduating at higher rates, with Vietnam veterans having the highest graduation rate. Cate (2014) provides some support for this and points out that student veterans, who used the Montgomery GI bill or the GI bill available for Pre-9 11 veterans, had only minor differences in completion rates from those who used the Post-9/11 GI bill, and actually had a higher numbers of student veterans graduating with master’s and doctoral degrees. Demographic variables seem to match the general student population with white, non-Hispanic, and females graduating at higher rates than minorities, Hispanics, and males.
Morris et al. (2019) also finds some similar results from their survey at a Midwestern university of 348 student veterans, in which problems with noise were mentioned as one of several issues that negatively influenced transitioning to college. Physical disabilities were also cited, and student veterans with physical disabilities, identified problems of mobility barriers such as parking accessibility, having to climb stairs, terrain of campus environment, and lack of elevators (Morris et al., 2019). As Church (2009) points out, physical issues such as moving from building to building, sitting or standing for extended periods, dexterity and motor skills, and accelerated fatigue can be challenging for student veterans experiencing mobility issues.
This calls into question campus-support services. Berry and Domene (2015) argue that research is limited on what students with sensory and mobility issues need in the way of college support services. For example, is the sensory issue of hearing impairment given less attention while issues such as counseling for PTSD, depression and concomitant problems of concentration and knowledge retention, emphasized more among student veterans? Veterans suffering from dizziness, imbalance or ringing in their ears often are referred for traumatic brain injury as opposed to auditory impairments (Helfer et al., 2011; Karch et al., 2016). Due to the comorbid nature of blast injuries, i.e., TBIs, auditory injuries, and PTSD, it can be difficult to understand how these impairments influence each other (Joseph et al., 2016; Karch et al., 2016; Theodoroff et al., 2015). Certainly, Boutin (2008) emphasizes the high attrition rates of hearing impaired and deaf students, as high as 75%. Links between tinnitus and concentration have also been noted that can negatively impact success in college (Henry et al., 2019). Yet what about existing disability services?
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, requires colleges and universities to provide reasonable accommodations to ensure full access to students with disabilities (Office for Civil Rights, 2011). Potential and reasonable accommodations could include qualified interpreters, note takers, assistive equipment, tutoring services, one-on-one assistance to instructors, removing environmental obstacles, and extended time to complete assignments (Berry & Domene, 2015; Branker, 2009; Mamiseishvili & Koch, 2012). However, despite the availability of accommodations, some evidence points to higher dropout rates among students with disabilities (Mamiseishvili & Koch, 2012). Accessing the accommodations could be part of the issue as, to receive many of these services, students have to provide verification of their disabilities and register with disability services on respective campuses. Lack of service coordination between offices, such as a campus veteran services office and office of disability services, or problems of busy, nontraditional students who may not have the time to go from office to office can impede connections with disability services or other college services (Bodrog et al., 2018). Additionally, the required documentation to receive disability services may be different for veterans coming from a military system. In other words, a student veteran may produce documentation that looks different than documentation normally received at an office for disability services or there may delays in acquiring necessary Veteran’s Administration (VA) documentation that support the need for reasonable accommodations (Madaus et al., 2009; Shackelford, 2009).
Further considerations could be shifting away from medicalizing disabilities, such as specific documentation requirements for service-related injuries, and utilizing a more flexible, accessible system (Branker, 2009; Madaus et al., 2009; Morris et al., 2019; Shackelford, 2009). Shifting away from medicalizing the disability could also encourage destigmatizing disabilities and presenting disability services as “building cognitive strengths” as opposed to a physical or mental deficit (Smee et al., 2013, p. 30). This may be particularly important for student veterans who may be hesitant to disclose a disability due to previous military culture and socialization that emphasized showing strength as opposed to asking for help (Shackelford, 2009). Indeed, student veterans with disabilities are part of two intersecting groups: veterans who are socialized to demonstrate strength and independence, and persons with disabilities who may need environmental modifications, and a willingness to self-advocate to acquire these modifications.
Although services do exist to assist students who have sensory or mobility problems, nontraditional, student veterans may experience difficulties in assessing them. These difficulties can range from lack of coordination between campus veteran affairs offices and offices for students with disabilities, lack of time to track down necessary paperwork and/or the perceived stigma of reporting a disability.
Recommendations
Offices of Disability Services and Campus Based Veteran Services
Provision of services begins with assessment, and ensuring sensory and mobility issues are assessed adequately within the context of veteran-friendly support services. For veterans with combat-related injuries, the use of screening tools could flag co-occurring conditions so that disabilities such as hearing impairments are not overlooked, and student veterans receive comprehensive accessibility to services (Hillesheim, 2013).
A coordinated portal for veterans, overlapping veteran and disability services, would provide increased and seamless accessibility. As Madaus et al. (2009) suggests, many veterans do not have experience or an understanding of how to seek and utilize disability services, and require a more individualized, flexible approach. Thus, a veteran’s support service center that included advising, counseling, and disability services could fill this gap (Borsari et al., 2017). This more flexible arrangement could accommodate busy nontraditional student veterans with time constraints and make it easier for veterans to disclose disabilities to knowledgeable support staff trained in veteran’s issues (Burnett & Segoria, 2009; Shackelford, 2009; Southwell et al., 2018). Thus through the integration of services, student veterans would be more likely to receive disability services from the beginning of their time on campuses.
Faculty Training
A second recommendation is training faculty in identifying student veterans with disabilities as well as ensuring coursework is accessible (Borsari et al., 2017; Branker, 2009; Burnett & Segoria, 2009; Gonzales & Elliott, 2009). Student veterans may not readily self- disclose their disability, and a faculty member may be the first person to identify the disability, and need for accommodations (Shackelford, 2009). Further, student veterans may refuse to follow through with disability services due to time constraints or perceived stigma. Therefore, provide training for faculty on ways to increase course accessibility, such as assuring and monitoring that universal design concepts are integrated into college courses. Universal design requires flexibility and equitability in curriculum and course design for persons with diverse abilities and learning needs (Branker, 2009; Decoster, 2018; Gonzales & Elliott, 2009). Examples specific to students with sensory or mobility impairments could include strategies to monitor the classroom noise level, slowing the pace of instruction, use of close captioning for video lectures, and ensuring the parking and class location are accessible (Boutin, 2008; Branker, 2009; Burnett & Segoria, 2009; Evans et al.,2015; Gonzales & Elliott, 2009; Kirchner, 2015; Morris et al., 2019).
Outreach, Mentoring, Student Support Services, and Advising
Proactive outreach strategies assist student veterans in learning about available services and how to obtain them. Outreach efforts could include a comprehensive approach that incorporates faculty, advisors and peers. Advisors, for example, need to have a broad understanding of how a student veteran’s limitations can impact their academic efforts, and utilize a more targeted advising process with student veterans (Branker, 2009). Creating a group of veteran faculty, and staff mentors to work specifically with student veterans would be an additional consideration (Burnett & Segoria, 2009). Similarly, implementing peer mentoring or utilizing Veterans of America framework for establishing a student veteran’s group to encourage academic persistence (Boutin, 2008; Branker, 2009; Church, 2009; Gonzales & Elliott, 2009; Johnson et al., 2014; Southwell et al., 2018). Finally, implementing a veterans’ only, new student orientation, that targets this subset of students could provide a further avenue for outreach.
Limitations
This study used a large and nationally representative sample, the 2011 Current Population Survey Veteran’s Supplement that provided a robust data set. However, secondary data contains methodological limitations such as when the data was drawn. While this data was drawn in 2011, the timeliness of the data remains applicable with regard to the Post-911 GI bill. Secondly, secondary data does not operationalize survey questions towards a particular research question. Questions in the current population survey were designed in the context of employment and labor. We accept this limitation as college degree completion is a precursor to future employment opportunities. Additional limitations include potential issues of self-reporting and the accuracy of participant responses (Drake & Ried-Johnson, 2008). This study also did not consider an associate’s degree as degree completion. While we recognize that an associate’s degree could be considered a measure of degree completion, we defined bachelor’s degree as a terminal degree, and thus used a bachelor’s degree as the standard for completion. Lastly, we limited the sample to those veterans that completed at least one year of college to appropriately measure completion.
Future Research
The current study introduces a pertinent and practical discussion of campus support to aid student veterans in bachelor degree completion. Future research is needed to expand upon understandings of student veteran challenges and possible interventions. For example, a deep analysis of each study variable by the veteran’s time-period of service could tease out trends confirming differences between groups. A sampling of student veterans on individual campuses with campus support services included within the analysis could determine correlation of need and support. A small data set with a qualitative approach would add depth to the student veteran’s own perception of challenges in completion. Insight to these possibilities could greatly assist universities in support services direction.
Conclusion
As a unique subset of nontraditional students, student veterans often face multiple environmental challenges both within and outside the college environment. Hearing and physical disabilities are examples of such challenges and can present major obstacles for student veterans in degree attainment. When combined with other challenges such as external responsibilities, or the co-occurrences of other physical and mental issues, accessing college and university support services becomes paramount. Yet, accessing these services can be problematic, and may require the involvement of multiple offices, documentation, or time the student veteran simply does not have. Therefore, to ensure student veterans are able to access the services they need requires a comprehensive approach. This approach begins with easily accessible and streamlined campus, veteran-support services, an inclusive assessment, and trained faculty and staff, to ensure the implementation of needed services. Central to this approach is the identification of all, not just some, disabilities experienced by student veteran to ensure equitable accessibility.
This study identified physical and sensory disabilities as major impediments of student- veteran degree attainment, and supports previous studies that call for additional research in the areas of student veterans, their postsecondary needs, and access to services that meet those needs.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
