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

2. 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

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

4. 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

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

6. 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)

7. 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

8. 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.

9. 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 for more information.
Lack of support- Some literature shows that many military students are not seeking out resources available to them 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.

10. 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.

11. Using Data to Inform Our Efforts

12. 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%

13. 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?

14. Who Are Our Military Students?

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

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

17. Who Are Our Military Students?

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

19. Who Are Our Military Students?

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

21. Who Are Our Military Students?

22. Who Are Our Military Students?

23. Who Are Our Military Students?

24. The College Student Experience: Compared to Non-Military Peers

25. 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

26. 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.

27. 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.

28. 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.

29. 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.

30. 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.

31. 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.

32. 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.

33. 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.

34. 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.

35. 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.

36. 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.

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

38. 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

39. 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.

40. 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

41. 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

42. 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

43. 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

44. 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

45. 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

46. 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

47. 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

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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

51. 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

52. 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

53. 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?

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

55. 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 Million Records Project: Research from Student Veterans of America. Washington, DC: Student Veterans of America.
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),
Durdella, N., & Kim, Y. K. (2012). Understanding patterns of college outcomes among student veterans. Journal of Studies in Education 2(2),
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),
Kirchner, M. (2015). Supporting student veteran transition to college and academic success. Adult Learning, 26(3),
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

56. 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
Molina, D., & Morse, A. (2015). Military-connected undergraduates: The current state of research and future work. American Council on Education/NASPA. Retrieved from
Olson, T., Badger, K., & McCuddy, M.D. (2014). Understanding the student veterans’ college experience: An exploratory study. U.S. Army Medical Department Journal
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,
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