Introduction

As the United States concludes almost a decade of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, universities and colleges are witnessing a steady rise in the enrollment of student veterans (Ackerman & DiRamio, 2011). As such, many learning institutions have established key programs and approaches designed to improve the success of veterans in higher learning. Nevertheless, according to the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), only a small proportion of veterans utilize all their federal education benefits (Anderson, 2002). In addition, the federal government infrequently tracks the rates of veteran completion and retention. Some higher learning institutions have developed wide-ranging evaluation plans in order to determine the measurable outcomes of their programs (Angrist, 1993). However, presently, most success measures for programs and services specific to veterans are unreliable and qualitative.  Despite additional research being necessary prior to considering certain practices as best, the recently passed post-9/11 GI bill is an extremely attractive advantage for veterans and their family members, and service members (Annen & Royl, 2010). With respect to this, the focus of this literature review will be to create an understanding of the advantages and challenges of using military educational programs.

The history of educational military programs dates back to the creation of the professional corps in Prussia, France and United Kingdom in the 19th century (Astor, Jacobson, & Benbenishty, 2012). The educational system of Prussia focused on practical military qualifications and facilitated social discrimination (Center of Military History (U S Army), 2008). On the other hand, the French military educational system emphasized competition and had its officials recruited from wide geographical area. The Prussian System differed from the French System in that military education ended when one was commissioned (Cohen, Warner, & Segal, 1995). The Britain military education system retained its 18the century system and lacked the motivation for change due to the Revolution in Prussian and France military disasters. The production of military production was based on the concept that the military leadership developed naturally from one’s social status (Cope, 1995). It was in the second half of the 19th century when the purchase system was abolished. However, discrimination in favor of classes endured because only the upper classes were able to keep their children in school when the entrance age to military schools was raised. Quickening in the rate of social and technological changes in the 20th century sophisticated the key problems that the military of the 19th century failed to solve completely (Davenport, 2008). The US academies have taken initiatives to enhance the quality and get rid of discrimination. The US academies have maintained the concept of common pre-commissioning education and have established specialization in Sciences, and humanistic and social studies (Field, 2008).

Despite the improvement by the US academies, veteran students face problems in attempting to utilize their educational benefits (Greenberg, 2008). These students have aired their unique needs and problems compared to contemporary undergraduates through focus groups, roundtables, interviews and conferences (Harell, 2004). Since veteran students are a hugely diverse population with extremely wide-ranging experiences, it is not possible to take one entire approach to improve their educational experience. Therefore, learning institutions should measure the respective needs and problems before channeling resources (Herrmann, Raybeck, & Wilson, 2008). The first problem voiced by student veterans when trying to utilize their educational benefit id the unfamiliar and daunting bureaucracy of higher education. Despite the military being vastly complex, the information concerning navigation is ingrained in troops through training from the commencement of a military career (Howell, 2011). According to James, Forest, & Altbach (2006), many students have voiced the sense of alienation they frequently feel when beginning higher learning because they are not certain of where to get assistance. According to Kay (2009), the solution of this problem is to establishing key points of contact within the learning institutions such as the financial aids, registrar, admissions, career center, student health, housing and admissions. An example of higher learning institution that has designated veteran liaison is the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) (Kennedy & Neilson, 2002).

Many student veterans face frustrations of transitioning out of the military in to time to join traditional orientation sessions that frequently occur several weeks before the beginning of terms ( Military Family Network, 2007). As a result, the veterans might miss the basic introduction to resources and campus, which other incoming students receive. This can frequently result in disorientation feelings from the outset. Student veterans require key information concerning their benefits and other resources that are not included in the orientation of other incoming students (Murphy, 2007). As such some institutions have developed short break-out sessions for student veterans, on top of the freshman orientation program and regular transfer. One such learning institution is the George Washington University that found out that having a separate program was beneficial for student veterans. This program equipped veterans with the necessary information about their benefits. O’Herrin (2011) also adds that the program also assisted the student to meet one another and the campus administration. Rose, Kasworm, & Ross-Gordon (2010) concur by saying that the program provided the veteran students with an insight into campus resources in a face-to-face and an intimate setting.

Student veterans with disabilities also face navigation and language barriers when attempting to utilize their educational benefits (Rush, 2006). In a recent study by Center of Military History (U S Army) (2008), focused on veterans in higher learning, discussed the disconnect existing for many students wrestling with service-associated disabilities or injuries. In addition, incoming student veterans might not also be conversant with the term disability in higher learning. For instance, the term disability can present confusions to veterans who have a disability, but has not undergone Veteran Affairs disability rating process (Watson, 2007).

The benefit derived by the higher learning institutions from partnering with the Veterans Affairs is convenience. The Yellow Ribbon education program is one of the key sources of convenience to the educational institution (Walters, 2006). This program is a source of finance for military service members who are seeking for ways of financing their education through the Veterans Affairs. As such, the program enables higher learning institutions such as colleges, Universities and other degree-offering schools to finance their tuition under the post-9/11 Bill. This implies that if a veteran student desired to join prestigious institutions such as Stanford, the GI Bill would not cover for the whole tuition fee (Smole & Loane, 2008). However, if the institution has provisions for the Yellow Ribbon program, the Veterans Affair would contribute a specified amount. The financing by the VA program facilitates the learning of the student and creates convenience to the side of the institution. This is because the school would not have to wait for students experiencing fee insufficiencies.

However, the VA program has a limitation linked to it in that it can provide veteran students and families with benefits for up to 36 months, three years (Rush, 2006). As a result, military members need to overcome this limitation by seeking other alternatives. The first alternative is the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), which is a form prepared yearly by not only veteran students, but also prospective students to assess their eligibility for student financial aid. Nevertheless, the application is not for one federal program but the gateway of consideration for the nine federal student-aid programs, and 605 state-aid programs. Almost all students in the US are eligible for some financial aid (O’Herrin, 2011).

Similar to other military branches, the US Army provides various alternatives to its members in to get post-secondary education through the Army Continuing Education System (ACES). These alternatives are usually known as Voluntary Education. The ACES provides the following Voluntary Education programs to assist military members to attain their educational objectives: GoArmyEd, Tution Assistance (TA), Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOCAD) and eArmyU among other Army education resources (Anderson, 2002). The GoArmyEd program is a virtual breakthrough for military soldiers on active duty requesting for Tuition Assistance online, distance learning, and eArmyU online courses. This program offers an automated process, which replaces some of the procedures historically performed by the Army Education counselor (Angrist, 1993).

The Army Tuition Assistance is mainly for the Army Reserves who might benefit by receiving up to 100 per cent their college tuition (Center of Military History (U S Army), 2008). The ACES launched the Tuition Assistance automation program on April, 2006. This program enables military soldiers to request enrollment in online college courses. The fact that the program can finance fully college tuition makes it a good alternative to overcome the 36 month limitation of the Veteran Affairs program. In addition, it also assists in accelerating the process of enrolment and minimizes wait times at higher learning schools.

The SOCAD program provides an opportunity for soldiers to pursue degree programs for the US Army. This program comprises of colleges offering associate and bachelor’s degree programs on Army installations internationally (Anderson, 2002). The SOCAD colleges create a network in which the colleges accept credits from others. This program assures members and their families can that they will complete their degree programs. The eArmyU program also provides 100 per cent tuition assistance, books and study materials, and fees for online courses. This alternative is fully online and offers soldiers with a streamlined portal framework to various post-secondary degrees ( Military Family Network, 2007).

In conclusion, veteran students face problems in attempting to utilize their educational benefits. Many student veterans face frustrations of transitioning out of the military in to time to join traditional orientation sessions that frequently occur several weeks before the beginning of terms. Student veterans with disabilities also face navigation and language barriers when attempting to utilize their educational benefits. The benefit derived by the higher learning institutions from partnering with the Veterans Affairs is convenience. The Yellow Ribbon education program is one of the key sources of convenience to an educational institution. The US Army provides various alternatives to its members in to get post-secondary education through the Army Continuing Education System (ACES).

References

Military Family Network. (2007). Your Military Family Network: Your Connection to Military Friendly Resources, Benefits, Information, Businesses and Advic. New York: Capital Books.

Ackerman, R., & DiRamio, D. (2011). Creating a Veteran-Friendly Campus: Strategies for Transition and Success: New Directions for Student Services. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Anderson, L. (2002). Servicemember’s Guide to a College Degree: 2nd Edition. London: Stackpole Books.

Angrist, J. (1993). The effect of veterans benefits on education and earnings. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 46(4), 637-652.

Annen, H., & Royl, W. ( 2010). Educational Challenges Regarding Military Action. New York: Peter Lang.

Astor, R., Jacobson, L., & Benbenishty, R. ( 2012). The School Administrator’s Guide for Supporting Students from Military Families. London: Teachers College Press.

Center of Military History (U S Army). (2008). History of Operations Research in the United States Army, V. 2: 1961-1973 (Paperback), Volume 2; Volumes 1961-1973. Government Printing Office.

Cohen, J., Warner, R., & Segal, D. (1995). Military service and educational attainment in the all-volunteer force. Social Science Quarterly, 76(1), 88-104.

Cope, J. (1995). International Military Education & Training: An Assessment. London: DIANE Publishing.

Davenport, C. (2008). Expanded GI Bill too late for some: Delayed rollout by VA feared. The Washington Post, 7(2), 45-60.

Field, K. (2008). As Congress prepares to expand GI bill, colleges reach out to veterans. The Chronicle of Higher Education., 3(1), 12-20.

Greenberg, M. (2008). The new GI Bill is no match for the original. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(46), 45-53.

Harell, M. ( 2004). Working Around The Military: Challenges To Military Spouse Employment And Education. London: Rand Corporation.

Herrmann, D., Raybeck, D., & Wilson, R. (2008). College is for veterans, too. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(13), 12-19.

Howell, T. ( 2011). The Military Advantage (2011 Edition): The Military.com Guide to Military and Veterans Benefits. New York: Naval Institute Press.

James, J., Forest, P., & Altbach, G. (2006). International Handbook of Higher Education: Part One: Global Themes and Contemporary Challenges, Part Two: Regions and Countries. Dordrecht: Springer.

Kay, S. (2009). From Sputnik to Minerva: Education and American National Security. Washington: DIANE Publishing.

Kennedy, G., & Neilson, K. (2002). Military Education: Past, Present, and Future. London: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Murphy, D. (2007). Educating the Corps: Real and Perceived Barriers to Higher Education for United States Marine Non-commissioned Officers. New York: ProQuest.

O’Herrin, E. (2011). Enhancing Veteran Success in Higher Education. Association of American Colleges and Universities, 13(1), 45-60.

Rose, A., Kasworm, C., & Ross-Gordon, J. (2010). Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education. London: SAGE.

Rush, R. (2006). Nco Guide 8th Edition. Washington: Stackpole Books.

Smole, D., & Loane, S. (2008). A Brief History of Veterans’ Education Benefits and Their Value. New York: CRS.

Walters, A. (2006). States expand tuition benefits for veterans. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(48), 23-34.

Watson, C. ( 2007). Military Education: A Reference Handbook. Washington: Greenwood Publishing Group.