Friday
January 9, 2009
Advertisement
News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Feb. 22, 2008
What Makes a College ‘Military Friendly’?
More and more colleges are seeking to enroll members of the military (and, increasingly, their spouses), viewing service members as an attractive pool of students who are eager to learn and able to pay, with significant financial support from the federal government.
Related stories
- A Tale of Two GI Bills, Oct. 3
- Major Expansion of Veterans’ Tuition Aid Clears Big Hurdle, May 23
- Best You Can Be Without a Degree, Feb. 14, 2008
- A Key Senator’s Suggestions, Dec. 12, 2005
- Tough Love for Colleges, Dec. 9, 2005
But as hundreds of college administrators and military education officers gathered in San Francisco this week at the annual meeting of the Council for College and Military Educators, officials on both sides of the equation emphasized in sometimes blunt terms that institutions cannot view military personnel as just another group of students.
“Military friendly” has to be “more than a slogan,” given the unusual needs of members of the military, Robert Bothel, voluntary education chief for the U.S. Coast Guard, told a roomful of college administrators Wednesday. “Look at your Web pages, your policies, all your stuff. If you compared that to what Joe Blow off the street sees, and there’s no difference, how dare you call yourself ‘military friendly.’”
Bothel hastily added, and most other military officials at the meeting agreed, that the vast majority of institutions are working hard to be (and not just claiming to be) “military friendly.” But they also acknowledged that colleges had lots of reasons to woo servicemen and women — $445 million of them, in fact.
That’s how much the various branches of the military spent on what they call “voluntary education” — that pursued by soldiers, sailors and others on their own time — in the 2006 fiscal year. Bothel said. That represented 840,000 enrollments, with 43,500 service members earning credentials from high school completions to Ph.D.’s.
“”There’s money out there to be made, and some schools are making a pretty good living off the military,” Bothel said.
The world of military education is one of those unusual and underexamined corners of higher education, and like many other pockets of the increasingly diverse postsecondary landscape, this one has its own jargon — ESO’s (education service officers), ACE credits (American Council on Education-recognized credit for certain types of training), — and its own complicated structure.
Some of the education is provided on military bases by colleges with contracts or “memorandums of understanding” between branches of the military or individual bases. But increasingly, the education is being offered online, with as much as 75 percent of the instruction offered that way in 2007 to soldiers and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan and Navy personnel aboard ships around the world. Service members who want “training assistance” funds, as the military education aid is called, most often work through the education officers in their units in choosing the providers, but they can also enroll directly in (and be marketed to by) individual colleges.
More than 900 people attended this week’s CCME conference, up sharply from last year, and more than 75 institutions chose to exhibit there, dominated by institutions like the University of Maryland University College, Central Michigan University, Thomas Edison State College and Excelsior College that have served the military for many years. Most of the colleges at the San Francisco meeting are members of Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges, a group that requires its 1,800 member colleges to fulfill certain criteria and standards, a Good Housekeeping seal of approval of sorts.
The growth of distance education to serve the military is logical, given the farflung nature of today’s armed forces and the ever-improving technology, but military leaders expressed some concerns about the trend, even as they acknowledged its inevitability.
Ileen F. Rogers, director of education for the Army, cited a mix of practical and philosophical reservations. She noted the disruption that occurred this month when several severed undersea cables limited Internet access in the Middle East and Asia. “This caused a great deal of anxiety and worry over connectivity, about soldiers being unable to do their coursework online because somebody cut a cable,” said Rogers.
But more fundamentally, she described herself as an “old fogey” because “I still think it’s romantic to be in a classroom.... I like that kind of stuff, and I kind of hate to see that disappear.”
Rogers’s counterpart for the Navy, Ann Hunter, voluntary education service chief and enlisted education program manager for the Chief of Naval Operations, Training and Education, presented statistics in her presentation to the group Thursday showing that the Navy spent more money for fewer courses for fewer sailors in fiscal 2007 compared to 2006. “I’m not being critical, I’m just simply saying, from the Navy perspective, and from a business perspective, we’re not getting as much benefit from our money as in the past.” (According to Carolyn Baker, the Pentagon’s deputy under secretary for military community and family policy, the Navy and Air Force saw drops in the number of servicemembers taking college courses, while the Army and Coast Guard saw sizable increases.)
Distance education courses cost the service $80 more per credit hour on average than in-class courses, Hunter said, and to her dismay, sailors were twice as likely to fail or withdraw from online courses. The Navy plans further study about why, she said, because “if we’re going to spend more money for distance learning, we want to make sure we’re getting the biggest bang for our buck.”
Given the pounding that college officials are taking from politicians and families about their prices, it probably was not surprising that it was a common theme from military officers as well. Hunter pointed out that Navy policy calls for books and fees unrelated to a specific course not to be covered by the service’s training assistance funds. But she said the service is increasingly finding that books and certain fees are included — “and I don’t want to use the word ‘masked’ — in some colleges’ tuitions. “There have been some creative ways of getting around our policies,” she said.
Such policies are certainly not “military friendly,” Bothel said in his Wednesday presentation about how colleges should treat servicemen and women. “We still have members paying a parking fee, and they’re sitting on a cutter taking a class. And we don’t need your health fee — the military has the best health care around.”
Bothel warned at the start of his talk that he wouldn’t offer a “list of bullets” for colleges interested in enticing military personnel to their campuses, but in fact he wound up providing a slew of do’s and don’ts drawn from working with the 991 colleges to which he said the Coast Guard delivered some of its tuition assistance in 2006.
Among them:
- Be direct. “Military people are very direct, and they want direct answers. Have someone answer the phone when they call. And when I search on your Web site, I should be able to find out how much you cost. If I can’t, if it’s a big secret, I don’t want you to enroll any of my students.”
- Don’t mislead. He recounted an advertisement he saw from a college that promised “free education” to military students. It turned out that the college charged under the $250 per credit that the Coast Guard covers, and therefore it was going to cost the student nothing out of pocket. “That doesn’t make it free,” he scolded.
- Don’t make students commit to long-term arrangements. “They can’t predict where they are going to be six months from now,” and if a college requires a student to commit to finish a program at the institution, “the student isn’t in a reliable position to be able to make that commitment.”
- Extend military discounts to spouses. “Military spouses are some of the poorest people in the world,” Bothel said. “Some of you have taken the initiative to charge less to military spouses than to the military themselves. Now that’s military friendly.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Comments
Response to Jim
Thanks, Jim, for you comments. I agree that the current system is far too cumbersome and bureaucratic, and sometimes (when I’m feeling paranoid) I wonder if that is not indeed intentional, in hopes of discouraging some vets from cashing in on their benefits. There is definitely room for improvement in this area.
But, I primarily wanted to comment on your last statement that “it would be nice if a person joins our military, they would all get the same benefit.” Welcome to the realities of the All Volunteer Force. If a young person could join a service and work in an air conditioned and heated office (doing critically important work, I grant you) and still get the same college benefits as a mud-humping, 100-pound toting, frozen-in-the-wintertime and burning-up-in-the-summertime stinking dirty infantryman, then you can imagine that the Army and Marines would have a very hard time filling their critical combat-heavy jobs. That’s not a matter of being political; that’s just being practical.
PA Man, at 9:15 am EST on February 22, 2008
equal treatment
I want to comment on the question regarding equal benefits.... As an engineer on the boat I had to be there the night before shipping off, and was on the boat shutting the plant down while my shipmates with whitestripes were off getting drunk (or studying) in Waikiki. I was offered $35K to re-up (didn’t take it went back to school) while the white stripers got nothing. My work was harder and more time involved. I should have recieved more benefits. We received the same pay but after two years in nuke power school I should have received more well I was an E-4 and 5 vs most others were E-3 but the pay differential is nil at that level.Benefits should match the job done.
A-ooooga! Dive Dive!
-WB
ex navy, ex-nuke submariner, MM2(SS) at USS Hawkbill SSN-666, at 11:30 am EST on February 22, 2008
Keep Military culture off our Campuses!
Let’s keep the Pentagon off our campuses! This evil institution and its “overseer", the Department of War, is responsible for so much destruction and death around the world since 1945 (sadly,in the name of Americans), that its influence should be laughed off every campus. We need to promote a situation of MILITARY FREE ZONE on each camous. When they come calling with their guns and money to support Washington aggression abroad and advance the call of death, all administrators should send them packing!
Thank you,
Sheldon Green
Sheldon Green, at 12:10 pm EST on February 22, 2008
Agreeing with Green, more or less
Although I wouldn’t put it in quite the same terms, I agree with poster Green.
Universities: Education, academic freedom, and the search for truth.
The contemporary American military: Training, following orders without question, and the willing conduct of a fifty-year series of illegal (ie, undeclared) wars.
Politically-correct thought has done enough damage to academic freedom; why add the military’s participation?
Donald M. Scott, at 12:35 pm EST on February 22, 2008
Military Education
So, we shouldn’t educate those serving in the military about the complexities of what they are participating in—or perhaps what it means to “serve and defend the Consitution of the United States.” Much better to leave that in the hands of military trainers?
Excuse the sarcasm, but the idea is not to serve military training, but to offer soldiers and sailors the benefits of a college education. Think about the GI Bill and what it meant to the democratization of education from elites to a general and assumed opportunity for all. I would hate to deny those serving in the military their access to the American Dream.
Fred Stielow, at 1:30 pm EST on February 22, 2008
Response to the Submariner
As far as believing that due to your presumed “more technical and important” Navy specialty, you should have received more pay or benefits, is absolutely ludicrous and is logic indicative of a supercilious persona that has no place in our military. I can tell you for a fact, when that supply clerk is attempting to obtain a critical part for the reactor you are working on, he becomes a very important person in your life and the lives of your shipmates. The same can be said for the food service personnel when your belly is aching for some decent grub. The truth be told, every job in the military is important and contributes to the overall mission. When one feels they are more important than their peers, it usually means they need to grow up, or get out.
Scot Ashton, SMSgt, USAF (Ret)
Scot, at 2:40 pm EST on February 22, 2008
Who dies to allow the right to our freedom?
I see nothing wrong with ROTC on campus-after all these are the men and women that will be willing to die so that we can have our free way of life. Every homecoming parade at Penn State I nearly weep with pride at the men and women in uniform that are so young and yet so willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country. I know I’m in the VFW myself from my own Naval war service and my brother was a Navy pilot that was killed in action so that I have the freedom among other things to be a doctoral candidate in education at this fine school and write this response with out worries that my house will be seized. I’m one of those left wing liberals too but I deal with a 52 card deck and full reality. I hate this war so much for what it has done to 4000 families like mine and Iraqi civilians and have opposed the war in Iraq since the vote to give Bush authority but I do admire the men and women that are willing to take a stand like my brother for my AND YOUR freedom. ROTC does belong on campuses, where we teach among other things management classes and how to teach to make better sailors, airmen, soldiers, and marines. My final words, enjoy your life in the United States and remember the men and women that give up part of their college experience so that they can train to be better in service to our country. Regards,
PR
Paul Rutter, doctoral candidate at Penn State, at 2:40 pm EST on February 22, 2008
What a Load of Liberal Garbage
Sheldon Green doesn’t want the military on campus, apparently afraid that having soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen on campus will somehow infect the perfect educational environment.
If he really wants to do this, why doesn’t he talk to his administration and propose it. Oh yeah, I forgot. Money. It seems as if the federal government pours money into institutions of higher education, not just from veteran’s benefits, but in the form of research grants, etc.
We should oppose all of this. I mean really, what has the evil “Department of War” ever done for society since 1946? I mean besides developing the Internet (based on work by Vernon Cerf of Stanford among others, funded by DARPA and ARPANET). We should also oppose the use of LifeFlight and similar modern medical lifesaving techniques since they were pioneered and perfected by the military. Integration of the races started immediately after WWII, well before that of the general society — we should probably object to that as well.
All of that is evil! We should not allow it! Help, the sky is falling!
As for Donald Scott’s position, I’m confused. Is the academic freedom and search for the truth limited to those that agree with his position? Is that why those Americans that chose to serve in the military can’t contribute to the debates and discussion on campus?
I would also encourage the esteemed Mr (or Dr) Scott to educate himself on the contemporary American military. All commissioned officers must have at least a Bachelor’s degree. To become a senior officer without a least a Master’s degree is rare. Doctorates are not uncommon.
Education is encouraged for enlisted service members also. Senior non-commissioned officers (sergeants) will almost always have an Associate’s degree and usually a Bachelor’s. I’ve known quite a few with Master’s.
The military is well past the day of taking orders without question or wanting soldiers who don’t think. On the contrary, the services all want their service members to be able to think critically, to come up with creative solutions to problems, and to above all be flexible.
Isn’t this what we are supposed to encourage at colleges and universities? Or is it just for those that hold liberal, anti-military views?
“Politically-correct thought has done enough damage to academic freedom; why add the military’s participation?”
This statement shuts out an entire group of people — why is that acceptable?
By all means, let’s ban the military and it’s people from campus.
Greg P, at 2:40 pm EST on February 22, 2008
Small minded bigotry
Mr. Green and Mr. Scott, it is so refreshing to see such bigotry and ignorance in the name of higher education!
So, let’s keep the military and military students off campus. What other groups should we exclude? Blacks? Hispanics? Republicans?
I guess you guys are all for “academic freedom” and the “search for the truth” provided it doesn’t challenge your narrow minded view of what’s right. Open and free debate doesn’t occure when you exclude those who have a different frame of reference.
The young men and women who serve in our military have a maturity and sense of responsibility that is rarely found on some college campuses. I think that you’ll find that most of them aren’t as self-center as you two appear to be.
How about if you two try to promote a bigotry free zone on your campuses?
Vince Michaels, at 2:45 pm EST on February 22, 2008
Dance of the Anti-Military Deranged
Somehow I suspected that the disloyal anti-military crazies would pop up and off on this important issue of military education for our service personnel. After seeing the Green/Scott song and dance, could we get on with the serious discussion?
J A DeLater, at 2:45 pm EST on February 22, 2008
Military on Campus
While some academics may want the ‘military off campus’, there are probably more that see the benefit of their presence. Even at a liberal institution such as CU, professors as well as students talk about the practical and real experiences that veterans (increasingly with combat experience) bring to discussions.
As one colleague put it, teaching a class on economic develeopment, it was rather different having a student that had spent 12 months as part of a civil affairs team in Iraq. His insights were far better than the limited (and idealized) views of the rest of the undergraduates.
Additionally there is an increased interest in military and security issues. Not only have there been an increase in my security oriented courses, but I am regularly asked to guest lecture on the topic in other courses.
So, to paraphrase, ‘while you may not be interested in war; war is interested in you.’
BTW, ask engineering and hard sciences how many are willing to give up their DoD funded research.
Dr.Michael KannerDept. of Political Science
Michaed D. Kanner, Prof. at University of Colorado, Boulder, at 3:10 pm EST on February 22, 2008
military training & pay & benefits
Scot- You have to be kidding me? The supply guys on boat couldn’t order their way out of a paper bag much less do anything efficiently. I had to create a spare parts inventory and cross reference all the equipment that certain o-rings or gaskets would work on because the supply guys and their records were never up to date, and for the mess cooks, well on submarines its a good thing we were allowed to go in a cook our own meals when they weren’t using the kitchen. Maybe if the cooks and supply clerks were on the boat when I was warming up the reactor a day before we set sail and were on the boat when I was cooling the reactor down we would have proper supplies, and better food. Harder workers deserve better pay. You sound like a socialist communitarian. Are you sure you’re a military man? It’s why in the real world more in demand, higher trained people earn more. It’s the reason for higher education aside from the Jeffersonian principles of a better educated citizenry will be more aware of a government that is proper. More education equals better pay in the general sense. Oy Vey. I’m glad you were Army and not Navy. Still mad you couldn’t get in the Navy I guess. Regards,S
Submariner, at 6:10 am EST on February 23, 2008
Military Education
Thank for the great article highlighting military education. The first GI bill literally changed the landscape of higher education by providing a large influx of students. Today’s military education system for active duty with almost half a billion dollars a year spent offers active duty member the chance to regain some of the earning power they lost while in the service and every member deserves the opportunity. Even with the advent of the active programs not every service member gets the chance to use these great programs so colleges with policies that dovetail with active duty policies benefit both the soldier and society.
Kevin K Dean, assessment specalist, at 6:15 am EST on February 23, 2008
My college was near a naval base and we had quite a few military students in my history and political science classes. Without fail, they were among the most informed and passionate in the class and would often challenge the professors’ opinions and add to the diversity of viewpoints.
Of course, Sean’s suggestion would be a self-fulfilling prophecy. If he could keep all the military out of the schools, then he would be right when he suggests they are uneducated! Not a very good plan at all.
college graduate, at 9:45 am EST on February 23, 2008
Green and Scott should work at Antioch
The population of the US is comprised of approximately 13% that are military vets (dwindling since 1970 peak of ~19%). Many of these vets, like myself (late 70’s), had little opportunity to advance my education while on active duty. However, I was able to attend college with TA from the GI Bill, and had I the opportunity that is currently available to active military, I could envision a much greater and positive impact that education would have made while on active duty. As for not being military friendly, Mr. Green and Mr. Scott could not be further from reality. The thought that the millions of active duty, reservist, guard, and by extension, veterans are not welcome to receive the benefits of a higher education is something that would originate in the the empty halls of Antioch College. I am elated to have served the nation as a member of the military, and am just as proud of my accomplishments in higher education... thanks to the GI Bill.Kev
Kevin P, at 1:25 pm EST on February 23, 2008
What a laughfest
” .. The contemporary American military: Training, following orders without question, and the willing conduct of a fifty-year series of illegal (ie, undeclared) wars ..”
Previously noted in IHE: the military academies among the top 20 lib-burr-al arts colleges in the U.S.
Having worked across U.S. academia, I saw more ideological “diversity” in the military academies than the typical 100% Democrat-registered soft-side academic department.
Anyone with an open mind knows military officers have considerable discretion in the field. They are educated to think intensely and quickly. Versus taking orders from their political masters.
L.L., at 9:10 pm EST on February 24, 2008
Educating the Military
It seems to me that we need to be careful to separate the people from the institution—almost like supporting the soldiers while opposing the war.
While my son, who was a Marine, will not be attending college because he was killed in Fallujah, some of his friends are now in college. The ones I see are excellent students, motivated and interested. One of his friends, who had been an indifferent high school student, is now majoring in Religious Studies, minoring in Theater, and has just picked up a second major in Political Science. He has been here for 4 semesters and had a 3.4 gpa.
His presence on the campus adds a lot.
My son understood my anti-war feeling and was confident that I loved and supported him.
Tracy Miller, at 11:20 am EST on February 25, 2008
Final Comment to Submariner
Submariner,
No, I’m not kidding you. If you have supply guys that can’t do their jobs, then your ship or command’s leadership is incompetent and should be replaced and or demoted. We have a system in the Air Force where people are evaluated on their job performance and are replaced, demoted, or separated for poor performance. I can only hope this type of apathetic and deplorable means of managing people is only indicative of your experience and not the entire Navy. If it is, we are in a world of trouble. Additionally, if you simply complain about a system and fail to provide a solution, you become part of the problem. I find it hard to believe the Navy leadership would stand for people derelict in their duties. It was also your responsibility to bring these problems to the attention of your superiors. If they were complacent, then you should have brought it up the chain. Sorry to beat a dead horse, but if you take off your blinders you will also see how the military does pay more for performance. Those that work harder, get better annual performance ratings. Those who have better ratings have higher overall scores and thus more points towards promotion. Even more importantly, the people who get off their butts and study score higher on promotion tests than those who are lazy. I guarantee you, you won’t find too many chiefs, senior chiefs, or master chiefs who didn’t work their tails off to get where they are. If you seriously think we should start paying soldiers, sailors, airman and marines by what you consider performance, then you know nothing of the military or civilian Human Resource Management. Do you propose we set up an individual, group, team, or organizational variable pay system? In the team, group, or organizational system only those components that do well receive adequate pay. In this case, you probably should not have been paid at all in your last command. How about individual variable performance? This system would pay based on a member’s performance ratings. Highest ratings would get the most pay right? Wow, since nearly 70% of the Air Force E-1 thru E-4s get the highest ratings, I guess we just tell the Pentagon to ask congress for a much larger yearly budget. Now, let’s consider a commission. We could give marine snipers additional money for each person they eliminate. Before long, they would do anything for a higher body count. What a great idea. How about paying a firefighter more money for each fire they put out. No fire this year? Too bad. Comparing the military and civilian community is like apples and oranges. To do so is not only ludicrous, it’s implausible. Oh, by the way, the Jeffersonian ideal is not exactly compatible with the military as well. If it was, we would reach a consensus before taking a hill. I really don’t think that will work. Ultimately, revamping the pay system to accommodate “winers” would result in the services retaining more winers. Thank God they have more sense than that. As far as paying people for additional education they acquire, the military does this. In the Air Force, you may not assume the rank of E-8, (senior master sergeant) without an associate degree. The Navy is following suit for senior chief in 2011. Once an Air Force member earns a bachelor degree he, or she, may apply for officer training school and a rank of second lieutenant. Additionally, the officer promotion board will almost never consider a captain (O-4) for Major unless he or she has completed a graduate degree. The education is strongly tied to the promotion. Furthermore, to insinuate that I am a socialist and or communitrian is truly facetious. You must have quite an imagination, are heavily sedated, or grossly ignorant to the definition of a communist. As far as your comment of having trouble believing I am a “military man” I give you this: After a distinguished 24 year career in the Air Force earning five meritorious service medals, four college degrees including a graduate degree, becoming a first sergeant where I supervised over 500 people, and going to war when my country called on me, the opinion of a runny nose malcontent, who couldn’t handle the military, means about as much to me as the gum on my shoe. Those of us who served and continue to serve owe you a debt of gratitude for leaving our military.
Regards, ScotScot A. Ashton, SMSgt, USAF
Scot, at 5:45 pm EST on February 25, 2008
Advertisement
Jobs Related to What Makes a College 'Military Friendly'?
or search for jobs directly.
Technician
Columbus State Community College
Columbus State Community College invests in employee development by providing numerous resources, partnerships, training and ... see job
Director
Western Carolina University
The Director for Summer Sessions is responsible for the planning, development and management of credit offerings as part of ... see job
Home
| Sign up | Log in
| About us
| Work for Us
| Press Releases
| Rights and permissions
| Contact us
| Advertise
| Partners
| RSS 
| Podcasts
| Links
| Privacy
| My Account
© Copyright 2009 Inside Higher Ed
If congress really wants to do something that would impact our military personnel and their attempts to get a higher education, I suggest that congress repeal all of the military educational programs, act, etc and replace them with one simplified act that is easy to administer in the eyes of the military personnel and in the eyes of the higher educational institutions.
The system that is place today has so much governmental red tape involved that many of the deserving men and women from our military give up and do not even try to access their benefits.
It is real a shame, when prospective students arrive on college campuses and are clueless to their benefits and even their units can’t help them. The governments website for GI benefits is okay, but it is far from user friendly. Also, the way payments are processed, some by bank transfers, others by checks and some by credit card, is impractical. What all this does is set up a confrontational situation between the school and the student, often the student blames the school for all the short comings. Their favorite pharse is “this is not what I was told.” What they are referring to are the promises that were made to them at the time of their enlistment, but like anything thing else, if it sounds to good to be true it usually is.
It would be nice that if a person joins our military, they all would receive the same benefit. What ever that benefit would be.And they would be able to receive that benefit without a hassel.
I know, this will not happen, it is way to political to be practical.
Jim, at 8:00 am EST on February 22, 2008