Matthew Venaas Research Manager Skyfactor Understanding Our Troops: A National Study on Military-Connected Students Matthew Venaas Research Manager Skyfactor

Want a copy of the slides and related educational content? Text 2018NaspaTroops to 38470 Link active for one month! Slides also available on NASPA app

Our Plan Opening Discussion Context: Military Student Issues National Study Discussion and Questions

Goals Frame context of why studying military- connected students is important Highlight challenges with current research and data Provide national data to help fill gap on military student college experiences Discuss how this data can be applied and what we can look at next

Opening Question: What comes to mind when you think of military-connected students?

Did You Know… Since the passage of the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill, nearly 1.5 million veterans have enrolled in college and received over $50 billion in federal benefits. Source: Worley (2015)

Current Research Multiple Risk Factors Broad Focus Incomplete Data Common risk factors Delayed enrollment Part-time attendance Adult students Health issues Differences in outcomes Higher dropout rates Lower GPAs Much of the existing literature focuses on the population as a whole ACE/NASPA report from 2015 highlighted need to disaggregate data and avoid “one-size-fits-all” approach Many current studies are limited: Single campus Small samples Case studies Difficulty identifying population Issues with federal data

Institutional Challenges Identification Siloed Data Services Knowledge Campuses often rely on military students to self-identify, or use variables like use of benefits that may not capture all students. What data does exist on campus is often scattered and siloed across various units, divisions, and datasets. Institutions are beginning to increase resources and efforts to support military students, but these are often on-going. While institutions have increased services to military students, many faculty and staff lack awareness of what is available. Siloed Data – Admissions may have info from application; Financial aid may know about benefit usage; Assessment/IR may have survey data; Activities may know who participates in military student organizations; Veterans services office may know who uses services; And, again, almost all of those require students to self-identify. Services - As of 2012, 4 out of 10 higher education institutions surveyed by ACE either had opened a military office on campus or planned to in the next five years. Knowledge - Very little is known about student veterans’ post- deployment transitional experiences. Some existing work notes lack of programs to connect faculty and staff to campus resources re: military students.

Challenges for Students Transition Health Issues Benefits Military Duties Lack of Support Shift from structured, hierarchical environment to self-directness, along with finding purpose after deployment, can create challenges in transition. Many military students are trying to cope with physical and mental health issues. Existing work shows military students more hesitate to seek assistance. Federal and state resources available related to education and health benefits, but not all are utilizing and getting these benefits can be a challenge. Many students enroll full-time in school while serving in the military part-time. Some are activated during the academic year. Many military students struggle to find support from various areas, including their institutions, faculty/staff, students, and families. Benefits- Depending on current status or type of service, eligibility fro VA/DOD benefits may differ greatly (ex: some only available to reservists or active duty or veterans, or a combination). See table in http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Military-Connected-Undergraduates.pdf for more information. Lack of support- Some literature shows that many military students are not seeking out resources available to them. 2011 work by Ghaffari found that veterans who were concerned about privacy of counseling records and how that might affect their future employment. That article also found relationship between participation in mental health counseling and favorable attitudes towards seeking help. Work in late 2000s found military students and their families felt institutions were not prepared to help them or understand their unique experiences. military as well as civilian students indicate that issues related to acceptance and assimilation can be just as important as financial or institutional barriers.

We know we need to support our military-connected students We know we need to support our military-connected students. But, the best ways to do so are still coming into focus.

Using Data to Inform Our Efforts

Today’s Data Mapworks Fall 2016 Transition Survey 44,089 undergraduate students 894 military students (2%) 42 U.S. institutions Predominately four-year institutions Diversity in size, mission, and location Survey typically administered between 3 to 6 weeks from the start of the academic year. Average response rate: 48%

Key Questions Who are our military students? How do military students compare to non-military student peers? Are there differences across the military student population when we dig deeper?

Who Are Our Military Students?

Who Are Our Military Students? Nationally, about 57% of college students are female.

Who Are Our Military Students? Similar to national trends (ACE report from 2015 showed approximately 30% of military population from racial/ethnic minority)

Who Are Our Military Students?

Who Are Our Military Students? Some of this are similar to 2015 NASPA/ACE report data (In particular, dependents, adult students, part-time enrollment)

Who Are Our Military Students?

Who Are Our Military Students? Compared to nationally, population of this study skews guard/reserve (45% vs ~10% in ACE 2015 report)

Who Are Our Military Students?

Who Are Our Military Students?

Who Are Our Military Students?

The College Student Experience: Compared to Non-Military Peers

Self-Assessment of Skills Topics for Comparison Academic Behaviors Self-Efficacy Self-Assessment of Skills Academics Peer Connections Social Integration Living Environment Social Commitment Satisfaction Finances Institutional Term GPA Retention Outcomes

Basic Academic Behaviors Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Advanced Academic Behaviors Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Academic Resiliency Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Self-Assessment: Self-Discipline Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Peer Connections Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Social Integration Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

On-Campus Living: Environment Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Off-Campus Living: Environment Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Financial Means Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Institutional Commitment Competing a degree difference is not statistically-significant Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Institutional Satisfaction Chart displays percentage of students responding either “6” or “7” on a seven-point scale (with “7” labeled “Extremely”) ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Institutional Outcomes Chart displays the average GPA or retention rate for each group. ** after question text indicates differences is statistically-significant.

Military Students: The High-Level Comparison Many differences statistically-significant Practical affect of differences is up for debate Military students were: More likely to report concerns on social issues, in particular peer connections Less likely to report concerns about paying for their education Less likely to earn a high GPA or return for the next academic year

Digging Deeper Some existing work has noted the importance of looking beyond the surface and not just considering the military student population as one, homogenous group.

Four Ways to Dig Deeper Current Status Combat Zone Deployment Type Entry Status Group 1: Active duty, reserve, or guard Group 2: Veterans Group 1: Served in combat Group 2: Never served in combat Group 1: Had at least one deployment that was designated hazardous Group 2: No deployment ever designated hazardous Group 1: Matric at entry Group 2: Transfer at entry

Basic Academic Behaviors All military students 80% Current Status Combat Zone?** Deployment Type? Entry Status** Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Academic Resiliency All military students 62% Current Status** Combat Zone?** Deployment Type? Entry Status** Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Self-Discipline All military students 67% Current Status Combat Zone?** Deployment Type? Entry Status** Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Peer Connections All military students 22% Current Status** Combat Zone?** Deployment Type?** Entry Status** Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Social Integration All military students 42% Current Status** Combat Zone?** Deployment Type? Entry Status Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

On-Campus Living Environment All military students 59% Current Status Combat Zone?** Deployment Type?** Entry Status** Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Off-Campus Living Environment All military students 67% Current Status** Combat Zone?** Deployment Type? Entry Status Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Financial Means All military students 56% Current Status** Combat Zone?** Deployment Type?** Entry Status** Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Institutional Commitment All military students 76% Current Status** Combat Zone? Deployment Type? Entry Status** Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Institutional Satisfaction All military students 50% Current Status Combat Zone?** Deployment Type? Entry Status Chart displays percentage of students in each group with a factor score (average score on across all questions in the factor) of 6 or higher ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Chart displays the average fall-term GPA for each group All military students 2.94 Current Status** Combat Zone? Deployment Type? Entry Status** Chart displays the average fall-term GPA for each group ** in label box indicates difference between groups is statistically-significant

Wrapping Up Diverse population Biggest differences with non-military students seen in social topics The importance of digging deeper Differences based on previous experiences Much still to learn

Food for Thought What do you know about your military-connected students? Are you seeing a different story on your campus? How should services vary to fit different needs of various groups? What should we look at next?

Thank you for joining us today! Continue the Conversations Text for Slides! Continue the Conversations Evaluation Text 2018NaspaTroops to 38470 for easy access to slides and related educational content Slides also available on NASPA app Email: matthew.venaas@macmillan.com Twitter: @mattvenaas LinkedIn: Matthew Venaas Please remember to complete your online evaluation following the conference. Your feedback is crucial.

Additional Resources Ackerman, R., DiRamio, D., Mitchell, R. L. G. (2009). Transitions: Combat veterans as college students. New Directions for Student Services,126, 5-14 Baumann, M. (2009). The mobilization and return of undergraduate students serving in the national guard and reserves. New Directions for Student Services, 126, 15-22 Cate, Chris Andrew. 2014. Million Records Project: Research from Student Veterans of America. Washington, DC: Student Veterans of America. http://studentveterans.org/images/Reingold_Materials/mrp/download-materials/mrp_Full_report.pdf DiRamio, D, Jarvis, K, Iverson, S., Seher, C., & Anderson, R. Out from the shadows: Female student veterans and help-seeking. College Student Journal, 49(1), 49-68. Durdella, N., & Kim, Y. K. (2012). Understanding patterns of college outcomes among student veterans. Journal of Studies in Education 2(2), 109-129 Elliot, M., Gonzalez, C., & Larsen, B. (2011). U.S. military veterans transition to college: Combat, PTSD, and alienation on campus. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48 (3), 279-296 Kirchner, M. (2015). Supporting student veteran transition to college and academic success. Adult Learning, 26(3), 116-123 McBain, L., Young, K. M, Cook, B. J., & Snead, K.M. (2012). From Soldier to Student II: Assessing Campus Programs for Service Members and Veterans. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/From-Soldier-to-Student-II-Assessing-Campus-Programs.pdf

Additional Resources Molina, D., & Morse, A. (2015). Military-connected undergraduates: Exploring differences between National Guard, reserve, active duty and veterans in higher education. American Council on Education/NASPA. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Military-Connected-Undergraduates.pdf Molina, D., & Morse, A. (2015). Military-connected undergraduates: The current state of research and future work. American Council on Education/NASPA. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Military-Connected-Undergraduates-Research-Convening-Summary.pdf Olson, T., Badger, K., & McCuddy, M.D. (2014). Understanding the student veterans’ college experience: An exploratory study. U.S. Army Medical Department Journal. 101-8 Rumann, C. B., & Bondi, S. (2015). Engaging student veterans inside and outside the classroom. In Quaye, S., & Harper, S., eds., Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge Rumann, C.B., & Hamrick, F.A. (2010). Student veterans in transition: Re-enrolling after war zone deployments. The Journal of Higher Education, 81, 432- 458 Worley, R. (2015). Education Service update. [Presentation to the National Association of Veterans Program Administrators (NAVPA) annual conference held October 5-9, 2015]. Retrieved from http://navpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2015-Education-Service-Update.pdf