Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Schlossberg's transition theory: a framework for evaluating student-veterans’ transition to higher education institutions
(USC Thesis Other)
Schlossberg's transition theory: a framework for evaluating student-veterans’ transition to higher education institutions
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 1
SCHLOSSBERG'S TRANSITION THEORY: A FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS
By
Alberto Morales, Jr.
A Dissertation Proposal Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2016
Copyright 2015 Alberto Morales, Jr.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 2
Dedication
I dedicate this work to my family and especially my wife who shared this burden for over three
years. She may have always stayed in the shadows, but everybody knows that it was her love
that made me get through this journey.
To my children and grandson. I hope that I have become living proof that anything in life is
possible with faith and determination; it is never too late and never let anyone tell you
differently.
To my father. He was a humble man who arduously worked to keep food on the table and A roof
over our heads. Although he only had an eighth-grade education, his wisdom was insightful, his
work ethic commendable and his words of praise the backbone of our values. I wish you were
here to see me graduate, Papi, but I know you will be there because you live in my heart; te
anoro, mi Viejo…
To my mother. I remember you teaching us lessons on a blackboard in the living room. You did
not believe in kindergarten so you took it upon yourself to get us ready for first grade. As our
first teacher, you provided the very foundation that has made us successful in our lives. I know
that you will not be there with me at graduation, but I will send you many pictures and a DVD! I
love you so much and words cannot even express what you mean to me; Bendición Mami!
To my brothers. Jose, you have always been a mentor and role model for me. As my big brother,
you taught me the values of education and were an example of determination when you achieved
your doctorate. You are my rock, and you are always there when I need a smile. Carlos, you
chose to follow your heart and join the military at the early age of 17. It was during Vietnam and
I was so proud and sad to see you go. You have served your country for over 22 years and you
are the reason I decided to join the military myself. I am so proud of your accomplishments and
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 3
the fact that I know you will always be there for me. I am the luckiest little brother in the world.
It looks as if I chose to be a little of each of you: a retired soldier who has a doctorate.
To my father-in-law. An American by birth, my father-in-law spent his youth an internment
camp during WWII because he was a Japanese-American. A retired military officer, he did not
let the torments of his plights determine his future. He was a proud, educated man whose efforts
bestowed on him the honor of having an Army headquarters building named after him in Hawaii.
To my mother-in-law. A quiet woman who came to the United States from Japan after the
Second World War only to experience racism and alienation at the hands of her new country.
She struggled and overcame and serves as an inspiration to me. Her perseverance and love
continuously guided me throughout this journey.
I have been tempered by the struggles of my parents and in-laws. It is because of your life long
lessons and steadfast resolve that I have the opportunities I enjoy today. Gracias and Domo
Arigato…
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 4
Acknowledgements
My thanks and appreciation to Dr. Robert “Bob” Keim for persevering with me as my chair
throughout the time it took for me to complete this research and write the dissertation. Many are
the times I sent multiple emails, texts and voicemails in times of doubt and despair, and he was
always there to lend a hand. His steadfast devotion to his spiritual life was indeed inspirational,
and I am glad to have met him and now call him friend - God Bless.
To my fellow animal lover. I first met Dr. Monique Datta at the acceptance dinner sponsored by
the USC Hawaii Cohort 2013. In a matter of minutes, we were talking as though we had been
friends for years, and that has not stopped. She was my beacon when times were difficult and
she offered her time and expertise to better my work. I am forever grateful and, as a student-
veteran, indebted to her work and determination in helping me accomplish my goals.
To Dr. Todd Outlaw. You nurtured me through two master’s degrees and a doctorate. Your
gentle demeanor has always been a blessing and your friendship and encouragement a vital part
to the successful completion of this degree. I can only hope to be the professor that you are.
I am grateful as well to the USC staff in Los Angeles for coordinating and overseeing the
administrative concerns that made it possible for me to complete my degree from a geographical
distance of over 2,000 miles.
To my cohort Ohana. This journey has been filled with laughter, stress, uncertainties, and
cognitive overload, but we managed to overcome the odds and become Doctors of Education. I
will always cherish our friendship, love and continued gatherings in the future.
I must acknowledge as well the many friends, colleagues, and teachers who assisted, advised,
and supported my research and writing efforts over the years. Especially, I need to express my
gratitude and deep appreciation to Dr. Pamela Milligan whose mentorship, friendship,
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 5
hospitality, knowledge, and wisdom supported, enlightened, and entertained me over the many
years of our friendship.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 6
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 4
List of Tables 8
List of Figures 9
Abstract 10
Chapter One: Introduction 11
Background 12
Statement of the Problem 16
Conceptual/Theoretical Framework 17
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions 19
Significance of the Research 20
Methodological Approach 20
Summary 21
Limitations 21
Delimitations 22
Definition of Terms 22
Chapter Two: Literature Review 23
Military Educational Benefits 25
The New GI Bill 29
Effects on Higher Education 30
The Student-Veteran 31
Non-Traditional/Traditional Students 34
Students With Disabilities 37
Transition 39
Transition Process 44
Transitioning to Academia 45
Model: Schlossberg’s Transition theory 46
The 4S System 46
Summary 51
Chapter Three: Methodology 52
Purpose and Research Questions 52
Research Design 53
Participants 54
Measurement Instrument 54
Data Collection 55
Data Analysis 55
Chapter Four: Findings and Results 57
Demographics 59
Military Branch 59
Military Rank 60
Gender 61
Military Status 62
Quantitative Results 63
Qualitative Findings 70
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Situation 72
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 7
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Strategies 80
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Self 82
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Support 82
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Catch All 84
Summary 85
Chapter Five: Discussion 87
Situation 87
Support 89
Self 91
Strategies 92
Implications 93
Recommendations for Policy and Practice 95
Recommendations for Future Research 96
Conclusion 97
References 98
Appendix: Student Veteran Transition Survey 114
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 8
List of Tables
Table 1. Military Branch 59
Table 2. Military Rank 61
Table 3. Gender 62
Table 4. Military Status 63
Table 5. Cronbach Alpha – Reliability Statistics - Support 65
Table 6. Cronbach Alpha – Reliability Statistics - Self 65
Table 7. Total Variance Explained 66
Table 8. Rotated Component Matrix 70
Table 9. Coding Defined by Framework 71
Table 10. Emerging Themes 72
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 9
List of Figures
Figure 1: Military Branch 60
Figure 2: Military Rank 61
Figure 3: Gender 62
Figure 4: Military Status 63
Figure 5: Scree Plot 67
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 10
Abstract
The United States consistently drew down forces and reduced military spending
following large-scale commitments in time of major conflicts (Warner & Pleeter, 2001).
Previous draw down periods shared the common thread of veterans’ physical and emotional
trauma, homelessness, unemployment and educational needs as they reintegrate to civilian
society. Pursuant to the American Council on Education (2014), over five million post-9/11 GI
Bill service members are expected to transition out of the military by 2020. Since the enactment
of the Post-9/11 GI Bill in 2008, the Department of Veterans Affairs denotes Americans invested
over $42 billion on educating many of these transitioning service members (Center for Education
Attainment & Innovation, 2014). Increased enrollment and revenue possibilities mean senior
leadership at higher education institutions see the recruitment of the student-veteran population
as critical (Vacchi, 2012). The purpose of this study was to explore the transitional experiences
of service members and veterans (student-veterans) enrolled at a four-year institution in the
Pacific region using Schlossberg’s (1981) transition theory as a framework. This mixed-method
study grounded in the transitional perspective of adult development allows for a broader
examination of the challenges today’s student-veterans face. Results indicate student-veterans
would benefit from peer-mentoring program, courses aimed at easing the transition, a cohort
education mode. Institutions can better train staff, faculty, and administration on issues,
particularly mental health issues, affecting the student-veteran.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 11
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
The influx of military personnel transitioning into higher education needs to be studied
and understood in order to meet the needs of these new students. The United States has
consistently drawn down forces and has reduced military spending following large-scale
commitments in time of major conflicts (Warner & Pleeter, 2001). Previous draw down periods
in the U.S. have shared the common thread of physical and emotional trauma, homelessness,
unemployment and educational needs to assist in the reintegration veterans to civilian society.
Bichrest’s (2013) research indicates that this new student-veteran population has unique
opportunities that could lead to improved life outcomes. Pursuant to the American Council on
Education, over 5 million Post-9/11GI Bill service members are expected to transition out of the
military by 2020 (American Council on Education, 2014). Since the enactment of the Post-9/11
GI Bill in 2008, the Department of Veterans Affairs denotes Americans have invested over $42
billion on educating many of these transitioning service members (Center for Education
Attainment & Innovation, 2014). Although all indicators point to an increased level of military
personnel pursuing higher education, Grimes, Meehan, Miller and Ward (2013) assert that only
few studies exist on the enrollment characteristics of student-veterans at a time when academia
and policymakers require a better understanding of the needs of this growing, non-traditional
population.
Increased enrollment and revenue possibilities mean senior leadership at higher education
institutions see the recruitment of the student-veteran population as critical (Vacchi, 2012).
Green and Hayden (2013) impart that “successful management of these students requires
institutional responses that many consider transformational” (p. 93). Grimes et al. (2011) assert
that creating an inclusive and supportive community for all student-veterans is an important part
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 12
of fostering an environment in which they can succeed. Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh and Whit (2006)
also elaborate that, by creating a transformational and impactful opportunity to support student-
veterans, schools can facilitate a connection among them, their campus, and their peers. The
inability to comprehend the unique needs of the student-veteran population will, according to
Brown and Gross (2011), engender an ineffective experience for both the student and the
institution.
This study closely parallels a doctoral study (Diamond, 2012) conducted at a small
community college in the Northeastern United States. The purpose of the present study was to
apply a development theory based on a pilot study’s 2012 data analysis report. The pilot study
used Schlossberg’s (1981) transitional theory as a framework for student-veterans studying at a
four-year institution in the Pacific region. Schlossberg explained that a transition is “any event,
or non-event, that results in changed relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles” (p. 27).
Schlossberg (1995) also elaborated that there are four coping mechanisms: situation, self,
support, and strategies, (4S’s). The ways in which an individual approaches each will determine
the outcome. Strengths and weaknesses in each area either assist or impede successful transition.
Background
Student-veterans have permeated the campuses of America’s higher education
institutions for over seven decades. While transitioning into civilian life after a career or tour in
the military, reintegration is incumbent on the veteran’s ability to gain confidence and security
through career enhancement and attending to emotional and physical traumas (Tibbits &
Donahue, 1946.) The discernment is that veterans can be flexible, handle change, and adapt and
overcome. These, according to Gilardi and Guglielmetti (2011), should be adequate for a
seamless transition to higher education. However, the authors emphasized the challenging nature
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 13
of the transition to college is for many student-veterans with unique personal and academic
issues. The handling of these issues determines success.
A key contributor to student-veterans’ difficult transition is the change of roles from the
highly structured rigor of military service to civilian life (Church, 2009). Ackerman, DiRamio
and Garza Mitchell (2009) also iterate that areas to be aware of are “social and personal
interactions, adjusting to various settings, and dealing with psychological and physical
challenges” (p. 8). Herrmann, Raybeck, and Wilson (2008) discussed the vicissitudes that
student-veterans encounter on campus, in particular with academics and support services
dynamics. The study emphasized the need for student-veterans to familiarize themselves with
lecturing methods, the various types of college research assignments, and study/time
management skills (Herrmann et al., 2008). Student-veterans who participate in hybrid courses
may, according to Perksy and Oliver (2011), encounter greater difficulty due to isolation from
on-campus resources.
Mental and physical traumas experienced by disabled student-veterans require additional
accommodations above those proved under the Americans with Disabilities Act (Wilson, Smith,
Lee, & Stevenson, 2014). Consequently, key academic practices and a validated collegiate
system consisting of transitional support systems are an asset for the improvement of learning
skills and enduring educational success (Hale, Hannum & Espelage, 2005). Academic success is
in part the responsibility of the student-veteran as well. The selection of an academic institution
that caters to the student-veteran’s career objectives and physical capabilities enhances the
probability of a positive outcome (Teachman, 2007). Student Veterans of America (2012) also
emphasized that student-veterans must have the resources to conduct research and find
institutions that best fit their personal goals and agendas. Black, Westwood and Sorsdahl (2007)
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 14
further assert that, by not dovetailing an academic institution’s transitional services and support
programs to student-veteran preferences, obstacles can preclude and hinder their attempts to
acclimate and succeed. Transitional services and support systems, as expressed by O’Herrin
(2011), have proven to be key players for higher education institutions and their abilities to boost
student-veteran outcomes and foster familiarity. Comparable support systems assist traditional
students adjust to the classroom and campus and can be advantageous to student-veterans as well
(Zarecky, 2014).
Academic success is paramount for collegiate institutions catering to the increase of
student-veteran enrollment (O’Herrin, 2011). Kim and Cook (2009) also state the importance
that collegiate leadership has in its role to assess established programs that may influence
student-veteran success in their quest for a degree. Higher education would need to review
current programs geared to assist incoming student-veterans transition thus ensuring retention
and increase transparency of services. Pursuant to Lokken, Pfeffer, McAuley and Strong (2009),
institutions with the ability and flexibility to continuously assess, can maintain, improve or delete
support programs to assist student-veterans. Green (2004) also comments that the ability of the
institution to help these students relies involves listening to their concerns and knowing the
research on them. Although higher education incorporated agendas and policies to support
transitional services for student-veterans, O’Herrin (2011) claimed that success is conditional on
the university’s ability to develop or improve its current level of services. It is vital for
institutions to gain full insight on prospective services in order to increase student-veteran
outcomes with supplemental resources (Kim & Cook, 2009).
The Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (2013) is a
conglomerate of professional organizations and associations that uphold standards in student
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 15
affairs, student services, and developmental programs. Several of the organizations and
associations are military veteran affiliated and collaborate with universities to develop veteran-
friendly programs and services. Those standards have been used as a guideline to help
institutions establish programs and services for student-veterans. Following the standards is the
first step to providing educational services to veterans, as the transparency of those services
become a requirement due to Public Law No. 112-249, approved on January 10, 2013.
Institutions would benefit from enhancing and improving available services (U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs, 2013).
Surveyed data collected from student-veterans’ perceptions of the university can help
institutions determine the level of trained professionals necessary to serve student-veterans
(Pekow, 2008). A requirement to augment university medical personnel is necessary for the
evaluation of emotional, mental, and physical problems. Ruth, Spicer and Vaughan (2009)
propose that these trained professionals would serve as liaisons between student-veterans and the
university (Ruh, Spicer, & Vaughan, 2009). Wilson et al. (2014) indicate that student-veterans
would benefit from the assistance of additional trained personnel when acclimating to college
campuses, institutional services, and when dealing with disabilities.
Some institutions have been proactive in their efforts to succeed in this new frontier. By
creating veterans’ offices, incorporating Veteran Affairs satellites on campus, increasing staff in
financial aid and admissions branches, and training faculty and staff in anticipation of the new
student-veteran populace (Redden, 2008). In a survey of 690 higher education institutions,
McBain, Kim, Cook, and Snead (2012) found that 614 indicated they augmented their student-
veteran programs and services since the attack on September 11, 2001. As indicated by the
survey, transitional programs and support services dramatically gained momentum after the
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 16
signing of the Post 9/11 GI Bill in 2008. Interestingly, the survey indicated that only 255 of the
sampled institutions fostered a program to directly assist student-veterans in the transition
process from military bases to college campuses. It is important to note that before congress
authorized the Post 9/11 GI Bill in 2008, only 151 of the sampled schools provided any type of
transitional assistance or service support to student-veterans (Schiavone, Vincent & Gentry,
2014).
This distinct population includes an untraditionally high proportion of women
(Baechtold & De Sawal, 2009) and disabled individuals (DiRamio & Spires, 2008). During the
Second World War, 9% of the population served in the military compared to less than 1% in
today’s society (Kortegast & Hamrick, 2009). According to Tavernise (2011), there is a divide
between student-veteran and other students on American campuses. This fundamental difference
among traditional students, faculty, and staff with regard to the familiarities and requirements of
this group is reflected in the relative lack of research on their transition from the military into
higher education (Kirchner, 2015). In spite of the situation, university stakeholders concluded
that one of the positive consequences of the Post 9/11 GI Bill is that military personnel,
regardless of status (veterans, reserve component, active duty) are reporting to duty on university
campuses in masses (Radford, 2009).
Statement of the Problem
From an academic perspective, institutions that develop programs directed to student-
veterans strive to develop services that encourage students to complete their education. Briggs
(2012), however, discussed the high enrollment of veterans, the 88% dropout rate, and the 3%
graduation rate, indicating that colleges need to attend to veterans’ services. Carlstrom, Harris,
Hughey, and Ryan (2011) stipulate that, although many universities offer basic support services
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 17
for students, few institutions endeavored to make available specific programs and services for the
student-veteran, thus creating a “veteran-friendly campus” (p. 57). Understanding student
perceptions provides the necessary data to develop adequate transitional services and support
systems. The concern for providing adequate veteran transition to college life is such a priority
that Congress passed Public Law No.112-249, stipulating that higher education institutions must
make their services transparent to the public. As a result, all colleges must now examine their
support services and provide information regarding the status of these services to ensure
academic success (Lolatte, 2010).
Conceptual/Theoretical Framework
As stated previously, this study applied Schlossberg’s transition theory, first proposed in
1981. Schlossberg et al. (1995) explained that a transition is “any event, or non event, that
results in changed relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles” (as cited in Ryan, Carlstrom,
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 18
Hughey & Harris, 2011, p. 27). Schlossberg (1981) devised the 4S system to “identify the
potential resources someone possesses to cope with the transition” (p.16). Goodman,
Schlossberg and Andersen (2006) define the 4S’s as follows:
Situation: How the transition is perceived depends upon the transition identification,
timing of the change and if there are multiple transitions at once. Equally important to
resource identification is if the individual has experienced this or a similar transition in
the past.
Self: What personal traits does the individual possess to deal with the transition?
Supports: External resources and support to deal with change. Examples are individuals
that the individual can use as resources, family, friends, colleagues, and community
networks. There is an emphasis placed upon the fit between the supports needed and the
supports the individual has access to.
Strategies: Are concrete tactics used to facilitate the action needed to change. What and
how actions are prioritized is vital to the individual. What actions should be taken and
what should be prevented. Perspective is key to enacting coping strategies. (p. 18)
Schiavone and Gentry purport that the theory is “framed in the transitional perspective of
adult development, and as such, is an appropriate lens through which to examine the topic of the
present study” (p. 34). The theory indicates that there are three points of progression in the
transition process: moving in, moving through, and moving out (Goodman et al., 2006). As
transition flows, in the moving in phase, the individual starts off beset by change. As elaborated
on by Goodman et al. (2006), the individual assesses and fabricates a course of action. The
individual is focused on the reality of the present. The moving through phase is characterized by
the individual arriving at their new environment yet tussling and wrestling with their place in the
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 19
transition. Finally, in the moving out phase, the individual is insightful and self-examining and
can gaze forward without dwelling in the past. Goodman et al., (2006) also iterate that
transitions are time consuming and the reactions that people experience change them for better or
worse.
Anderson, Goodman, and Schlossberg (2012) and Schiavone and Gentry (2014), define
the term transition as “any event or nonevent resulting in change in relationships, routines,
assumptions, and roles” (p. 39). Van Solinge and Henkins (2007) assert that, although the
opportunities afforded by transitions are important, the individual’s perception of how to
transcend that road determines the outcome as either constructive or destructive. Demetre and
Corney (2010) further elaborate that the transition from the military to campus can lead to
“positive, neutral, negative or stressful experiences, depending on a person’s personality,
situation and resources” (p. 35). Schlossberg’s theory provides a framework in which
transitions, regardless of being positive, negative, dramatic or ordinary can be studied and
analyzed with to facilitate transition to higher education campuses (Schlossberg, 1981). For the
purposes of this study, Schlossberg’s transition theory provides awareness into the distinct realm
of student-veterans’ transitions by offering insight on what influences their progressions into,
through, and out of higher education settings (Vacchi, 2012).
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to explore the transitional experiences of service members
and veterans (student-veterans) enrolled at a four-year institution in the Pacific region. Using
Schlossberg’s (1981) theory of adult transition as a framework, this mixed-methods study was
conducted in two phases utilizing a convergent parallel design in order to support the emergence
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 20
of codes, categories, and themes. The study yielded the development of the following research
questions:
1. How do military students perceive their transition experience from the military to higher
education?
2. What is the transitional process that military students exhibit when acclimating to an
academic environment?
Significance of the Research
As Ackerman et al. (2009) argue, the volume of scholarly literature on student-veterans is
both slim and dated. Changes in the military’s gender composition and modern warfare
transformed the United States Armed Forces (Card, 1983, Horan, 1990). Previous research on
student-veterans delved on issues such as mental health and academic achievement rather than
on transition issues (Ackerman et al., 2009). Although there have been recent studies of student-
veterans’ experiences in higher education (Rumann & Hamrick, 2010; Ackermann, DiRamio, &
Mitchell, 2009; Schiavone & Gentry), there is a gap in the literature on making meaning of their
transition. The only relevant study (Diamond, 2012) was conducted at a small community
college in the Northeastern United States. The present study’s location was a four-year
institution in the Pacific region that has programs aimed at assisting student-veterans.
Conducting a mixed-method study grounded in the transitional perspective of adult development
allows for a broader examination of the challenges today’s student-veterans face.
Methodological Approach
The present study employed a mixed-method approach with a convergent parallel design
as the guiding methodological framework. The data collection tool was a 38-question survey.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 21
All participants were students at the same four-year institution in the Pacific. Open-ended
survey questions were also included in the survey.
Summary
The primary purpose of the present study was to discover the challenges that student-
veterans experience during their transition from the military into higher education. Using a
mixed-methods format, this study may influence these institutions by providing them with data
to inform their approach to serving the nation’s rapidly growing student-veteran population. The
findings may lead to further research that yields rich contextual information, assists university
staff members who work with these students, and, ultimately, humanize and give voice to a
student population that is often misunderstood.
Limitations
The primary limitation of this study was that the mixed-method format survey instrument
was Internet-based. Survey research can be hindered by a low response rate of less than 15%.
By using a mixed-methods format, the qualitative portion of the study was not intended to be
generalized. Rather, it was intended to provide a general idea of how the institution studied aims
to support student-veterans as they transition into higher education using the students’ own
perspectives. Additionally, student-veterans participating in the study were volunteers.
Individuals, according to Griffin and Gilbert (2015) who chose to participate, may have
particularly strong positive or negative experiences to share, and this must be taken into
consideration in interpreting the findings. Another limitation was that this particular university
was selected because of its location and the convenience of accessibility for the researcher.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 22
Delimitations
The group of student-veterans studied were identified through the university’s programs
which assist this population with enrollment and advisement. There may have been more
veterans on campus who received the email message. The survey was only distributed to
students currently enrolled at one four-year university in the Pacific region.
Definition of Terms
Active Duty - Full-time duty in the active military service of the United States, including
active duty or full-time training duty in the Reserve Component.
Armed Forces of the United States - A term used to denote collectively all components of
the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard
Combat - Combat is fighting between two groups of armed forces.
Military Education Benefits - Benefits that provides assistance to obtain a degree and
pursue other eligible education and training (GI Bill, Post 9-11 GI Bill, Montgomery GI Bill,
Tuition Assistance)
Reserve Component - The Armed Forces of the United States Reserve Component
consists of the Army National Guard of the United States, the Army Reserve, the Navy Reserve,
the Marine Corps Reserve, the Air National Guard of the United States, the Air Force Reserve,
and the Coast Guard Reserve.
Student-Veteran - A veteran using their education benefits to obtain a degree
Veteran - A veteran is a person who served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces and
was released under an honorable condition.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 23
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
When President Obama signed the Post–9/11 GI Bill into law, he said Americans
benefiting from the legislation will “lead the way to a lasting economic recovery” and become
“the backbone of a growing American middle class” – ideals that are premised on degree
completion (as cited in Redden, 2009, p 1). The new legislation commits significant resources to
the education of millions of active duty service members and veterans (Kleykamp, 2009). The
placement of educational centers on military bases and the benefits available to military
personnel/veterans via tuition assistance and the Post 9/11 GI Bill indicate the commitment
senior military leadership and elected officials have to assisting military personnel enter higher
education programs and eventually become college graduates (Wilson et al., 2013). By 2010,
35% of active duty soldiers (198,173) took advantage of educational benefits and enrolled in
college courses (U.S. Army, 2011). However, of the 470,000 enlisted active duty soldiers, only
5% have a bachelor’s degree (U.S. Army, 2010).
As veterans’ enrollment continues to rise, transparency and examination of both their
transition and the services they receive becomes a priority. The increase may be attributed to the
drawdown of service members after the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. With this influx of
military personnel entering the workforce and the changes in the economy, veterans will pursue
new avenues and careers that require additional education (Kim & Cook, 2009). Briggs (2012)
posits that 800,000 military veterans now attend U.S. colleges, but an estimated 88% will drop
out of school during their first year and the overall graduation rate will reach only 3%. During
the last three years, the rate of student-veterans earning an associate’s degree increased only 9%
while bachelor’s degree completion rates dropped by 20% (Briggs, 2012). Schools that fall short
of providing adequate transition coping methods will see an increase in student-veteran attrition
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 24
and non-completion rates (Green & Hayden, 2013). Data from the American Council on
Education (2008) reiterates that student-veterans transitioning from the base to the campus
cannot succeed without proven programs to support them in navigating the college campus and
their academics.
From a transitional perspective, Ackerman et al. (2009) found that military veterans not
only experienced issues adjusting to the civilian sector but also adapting to college life.
Psychological problems such as PTSD or physical challenges that occurred during military
service were not addressed during services’ Transition Assistance Program mandatory sessions.
These incomplete transitional services did not address important areas, such as social and
personal interactions. They also did not address problems adjusting to educational settings
(Saunders, 2012). The U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs (2012) further expounds that the
increase of Post 9/11 GI Bill users would require universities to provide opportunities for
developing coping mechanisms.
Not since the enactment of the Serviceman’s Readjustment Act of 1944 have college
campuses seen expansion of a veteran education benefits program like the Post 9/11 GI Bill.
Ensuing adaptations of educational bills continued to endorse President Roosevelt’s affirmation
“that educational benefits are an integral way to support service members’ transition into civilian
life and compensate them for the sacrifices made during military service” (as cited in Gonzalez,
Miller, Buryk & Wenger, 2015, p. 5). In the present all-volunteer force, educational benefits
have traditionally aided recruiters and retention personnel to recruit and retain individuals (U. S.
Department of Veterans Affairs, 2013). In a 1999 active duty survey conducted by the
Department of Defense, 62% of service members affirmed that educational benefits were their
primary reason for enlisting (Simon, Negrusa & Warner, 2010). In 2014, the RAND Corporation
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 25
surveyed active-duty military personnel and veterans, noting that 74% of respondents indicated
that the educational benefits were either an important or very important reason for joining the
military (RAND Corporation, 2015). The Post 9/11 GI Bill is the most popular and generous of
all educational benefits since 1944.
With more than one million users by 2014, the Post-9/11 GI Bill considerably boosted the
higher education benefits available to service members. Griffin and Gilbert (2015) posit that,
with more than two million total post-9/11-era veterans and draw down mechanisms in place, the
program will likely continue to grow both in participation and cost. Research indicates it is
prudent that military personnel and veterans recognize the value of the post 9/11educational
program in helping veterans reach their educational goals and earning potential (Asbury &
Martin, 2012).
While Department of Veterans Affairs data indicate an increase in Post 9/11 GI Bill
college enrollment, reports and statements from elected officials contend that a multitude of
challenges put student-veterans in jeopardy of leaving college before completing their degrees
(Grimes et al., 2011). This study provides supplementary insight into these transitions,
highlighting the institutional factors that can both impede and enable the process.
Military Educational Benefits
Lawmakers contemplated the impact of returning veterans on American society as early
as 1942, the second year of World War II. Legislators were concerned about the postwar
economic conditions in the United States and wanted to put legislation in place to minimize the
possibility of another era of economic depression. As described by Bannier (2006),
“Pragmatism, not altruism, was the driving force behind those proposals” (p. 36). White (2004)
suggested that memories of the post-World War I economic conditions brought fears that these
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 26
conditions would be repeated when the World War II veterans returned to civilian society. Mass
quantities of returning veterans, without assistance, coupled with government peacetime
spending levels created the possibility of overwhelming society and causing another economic
depression (Bannier, 2006).
President Roosevelt requested a committee propose ideas to Congress for postwar
planning (Edmondson, 2002). Roosevelt asked both government and private groups to
recommend ways in which to handle the returning veterans (Edmondson, 2002). The outcome of
the committee’s work recognition that a strategy was needed to assimilate returning veterans into
society. According to Buckley (2004), as early as 1942, strategies were created to manage the
expected postwar problems. In 1943, the White House tasked the National Resources Planning
Board to study postwar manpower requirements and propose a series of programs for education
and training. At the time, nearly 640 bills concerning veterans failed to be acted upon by
Congress (Kleykamp, 2006). Many of these bills were considered too generous and too
reminiscent of socialism to receive support. Efforts to develop a postwar plan to accommodate
the returning veterans continued.
One idea for a veterans’ assistance package came from Wisconsin, which developed a
program in 1919 that was considered a possible model for post-World War II veterans’
assistance (Ford & Miller, 1995). The Wisconsin Educational Bonus Law of 1919 provided
educational support for World War II veterans in the form or $30 per month for up to four years
to attend any Wisconsin-based non-profit school (Bannier, 2006).
The American Legion, which was established in 1919, was a strong proponent of
providing benefits to World War II veterans, and its members were interested in helping veterans
reintegrate themselves into society at war’s end. In 1943, the American Legion proposed the
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 27
“core ideas of the GI Bill” (Mettler, 2005, p. 20), which became the foundation for the
Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944. The American Legion took strong exception to
Roosevelt’s opposition to veterans’ benefits and took an active role in representing the interests
of post-World War II veterans. According to Kiester (1994), Legionnaire Harry Colmery wrote
by hand what was to become the GI Bill in a Washington, DC hotel room.
Colmery scripted “A Bill of Rights for GI Joe and GI Jane” that was detailed and
inclusive (Edmondson, 2002). In addition to educational benefits, the GI Bill referenced
unemployment allowances, hospital services, career counseling, and mortgage loans to assist
with the transition to civilian life (Edmondson, 2002). Afterwards, the Servicemen’s
Readjustment Act of 1944 became Public Law 346 (Pedigo, 1994). “Roosevelt declared that the
GI Bill ‘gives emphatic notice to men and women in our armed forces that the American people
do not intend to let them down’” (Bannier, 2006, p. 40).
The social climate in which the GI Bill was developed was not universally supportive of
veterans’ benefits. Roosevelt was not alone in his opposition. In fact, the bill passed the House
of Representatives with a margin of only one vote (Bannier, 2006). Some legislators were
concerned about whether states or the federal government should administer the bill. The
Disabled Veterans of America’s concern, which was asserted by various congressmen, was that
disabled veterans might lose needed resources if economic assistance was accessible to all World
War II veterans. Additionally, the leaders of that organization were concerned that the proposed
assistance these veterans might diminish the attention and funds available for World War I
veterans (Kiester, as cited in Bannier, 2006, p. 37).
The training benefit the bill made available was very generous. It provided opportunities
to attain a degree, a certificate or an apprenticeship. The bill provided for tuition and fees,
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 28
books, and a housing allowance covering living expenses for up to 48 months, depending upon
length of service (Greenberg, 2004). In addition, the legislation provided an unemployment
allowance of $20 per week for up to 52 weeks and a guaranteed loan program for the purchase of
a home, farm, or business (Brown, 2009).
The unemployment benefit was unpopular with some legislators from the Southern
region of the United States where many states adhered to the practice of paying different wages
to black people than they paid to whites. The GI Bill required that everyone, regardless of race,
receive the same amount of unemployment compensation (Bannier, 2006). In addition to
compensation, segregationists did not embrace the proposed legislation, which would equalize
treatment of all veterans. In addition, many legislators were concerned that the unemployment
assistance specifically was going to be very costly. In practice, only about eight million, or 50%
of the eligible veterans, used the unemployment benefit (Humes, 2006). Those who did use the
benefit generally used it for a short time instead of the yearlong period for which they were
eligible (Humes, 2006).
Korean War veterans, according to Stanley (2003), were the next group covered by
educational benefits. Stanley reported that about 40% of eligible Korean War veterans used the
education benefits within the first five years of their becoming available. Of the two million
service members who used these benefits, more than one million used them for college, while the
remaining individuals used them for training and vocational coursework. In June 1966, a second
education benefit came through the Post-Korean War GI Bill. This new bill retroactively made
all post-Korean War veterans eligible for new education benefits (Stanley, 2003).
The Montgomery GI Bill followed in 1984, but this bill was significantly different from
its predecessors. The benefits administration in the U.S. Department of Veterans’ Affairs (2004)
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 29
noted that it required the service member to elect to participate in the bill as well as to contribute
financially. Prior to the Montgomery GI Bill, benefits did not require a contribution from the
service member.
The New GI Bill
The new Post 9/11 GI Bill, which was passed in 2008, provides post-9/11-era veterans
with updated and improved educational benefits. This legislation, which is officially named The
Post-9/11Veterans Educational Assistance Act, was passed on June 19, 2008, as part of the
Fiscal Year 2008 Supplemental Appropriations Act (Ryan et al., 2011). This act is also known
as the Webb-Mitchell GI Bill and became effective May 1, 2009 (Mitchell, 2009). Today’s GI
Bill is heralded as the most generous veterans’ education benefit package since the GI Bill of
1944. The improved payment schedule for tuition, books, and tutoring, plus the transferability
features, are reminiscent of, although not equal to, the benefits provided under the original GI
Bill.
The federal government (through the Department of Veterans Affairs) makes direct
tuition and fee payments for each eligible service member enrolled in an accredited college or
university. Prior to this bill, payments were made directly to the veteran who was then
responsible for ensuring that the educational institution received payment. These payments
added an additional burden of cash flow management to both the veteran and the institutions
which, sometimes, had to act as collection agencies.
The new GI Bill serves veterans primarily from the Iraq and Afghanistan-era wars. In the
first two weeks after the bill’s effective date, more than 25,000 applications were submitted
(Bichrest, 2013). According to Dunne (2009), interest in pursuing postsecondary education,
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 30
coupled with institutions of higher education experiencing budget cuts, lays the groundwork for
an opportunity that is beneficial to the military, higher education and society.
Effects on Higher Education
Higher education faces challenging budget-related problems. Public funding is declining
and the economy is in a recession, which left many people unemployed or underemployed and
competing for an ill-funded financial aid pool (Garza & Fattah, 2005). In the midst of this
environment, the Post-9/11 GI Bill provides generous benefits and may increase enrollment at
America’s colleges and universities. Stone (2008) noted that the law applies to not only all
regular active duty personnel, but also includes reservists and members of the National Guard.
According to Miles (2009), Department of Veterans Affairs leadership believed this law would
replicate the effect the original GI Bill in terms of expanding the middle class and reducing
homelessness among veterans. Veterans who reenter the civilian community with education and
marketable skills are more likely to find reliable employment, which decreases their chances of
homelessness and increases their job and economic mobility (Bichrest, 2013).
Not everyone agrees that the new legislation is as significant as the original 1944
legislation. As noted by Greenberg (2008), the new GI Bill does not have the same importance
for society that the original GI Bill did (p. 56). However, Greenberg did acknowledge that the
bill might have an impact since more veterans will have the financial assistance necessary to
pursue postsecondary education. He concluded that veterans with higher education will result in
more productivity and employability, enhances veterans’ reintegration of into society
(Greenberg, 2008).
Research indicates that student-veteran enrollment is greater at two-year public colleges
than at other types of higher education institutions (Conway, 2009). Nonetheless, guidance from
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 31
university leadership requires academic advisors to enable and endorse their success regardless
of educational setting (McBain, 2008). During the 2007-2008 academic year, Radford and
Weko’s (2011), revealed that “two-year public colleges enrolled 43% of all student-veterans
going to postsecondary institutions, public four-year schools matriculated 21 percent, private
not-for-profit four-year institutions educated 14 percent, and private-for-profit colleges offered
services to 13 percent” (p. 13).
Studies (Radford & Weko, 2011; McBain, 2008; Cook & Kim, 2009) showed that
veterans actively pursue higher education after being discharged from the armed forces but do
not earn a degree. McBain (2008) cited figures from the Department of Veterans Affairs that
denote that only 6% of the 71% who use at least a portion of their educational benefits deplete
their funds. Conway (2009) asserts that the low percentage of student-veterans who use their full
funds reflect academic institutions’ inability to move them towards academic success. In 2009,
Cook and Kim conducted a survey of 700 academic institutions. They found that only 154 of the
institutions offered transitional orientation specifically geared for student-veterans, only 28
offered orientations specific to this group, 346 did not employ at least one trained staff member
to aid with transitional issues, 399 did not offer training for staff and/or faculty about transitional
assistance, and only 252 had trained staff to assist student-veterans with disabilities. The
findings exemplify DiRamio’s (2008) supposition that student-veterans require trained personnel
and programs that understand the specific needs of this population.
The Student-Veteran
This section of the literature review explores some of the transition experiences of
student-veterans. Studies that address this transition indicate that it can be especially challenging
for the adult learner who enters college after a break from academic studies (Coreyman, 2001;
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 32
Diyanni, 1997). This transition applies to student-veterans who frequently experience significant
breaks in academic attendance because of military service demands, which require the student to
readjust to the college environment. Additionally, curriculum requirements may have changed
during the student-veterans’ service, requiring updates to academic habits.
Current student-veterans represent a different population than previous beneficiaries of
military education assistance or GI Bill recipients (Morreale, 2011). Lack of continuity in
education, physical and psychological issues, and social isolation are some of the challenges
today’s student-veterans face while pursuing higher education (Hopkins, Herrmann, Wilson,
Allen, & Malley, 2010). In addition, financial concerns continue to be problematic, and the now
more generous benefits do not eliminate these issues. The resulting need for employment while
enrolled in school provides an additional challenge. Although becoming a college student may
represent a positive transition, the experience may be difficult if not overwhelming.
A recent study on service members in school used direct input from student-veteran
surveys (Steele, Salcedo, & Coley, 2010). The study, which had a sample size of 500, found that
respondents identified multiple challenges when transitioning to the role of college student:
relocation, loss of social support systems, reintegration into a civilian lifestyle, different or
nonexistent health care services, and, possibly, a new job or career path. While adjusting to the
civilian community, the student-veteran may also be adjusting to life as a college student.
Although returning veterans may provide a level of maturity and a broader understanding
of global issues to the learning experience because of their military service (Byman, 2007), it is
important for educators to understand their perceptions as they transition to college students. As
stated above, early awareness of this population’s needs provides opportunities to develop
appropriate techniques to minimize attrition and increase the chances of success (Byman, 2007).
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 33
Student-veterans experience a major change when they enter postsecondary education.
Campus culture is quite different than military culture and proves to be one of the largest
adjustments (Rumann, Rivera, & Hernandez, 2011). The college environment is typically
designed to encourage creativity and individualism (Rumann et al., 2011) while the military
structure requires conformity and adherence to predetermined behavioral rules. Transition from
a highly structured environment to a less structured one may be problematic, and institutions
need to be prepared to assist student-veterans with this difficulty (Bichrest, 2013). According to
the Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support Agency (2004), some institutions
developed military services offices separate from the veterans’ benefits processing offices to
focus on the transition experience from an academic and social standpoint.
Consequently, selection of an institution is an important choice, as according to
Herrmann (2007, 2009), the student-veteran’s success relies not only on him/herself, but also on
the institution. Murphy (2011) explains that the higher education process may be described as a
“black box” (p. 45) because outward appearances of structure and program descriptions may not
represent what happens at the institution. Some institutions provide the requisite Veterans
Services Office and define themselves as military-friendly organizations, but there is little to no
support behind the self-assigned designation. Although the Department of Veterans Affairs
website lists colleges which proclaim to be veteran friendly, Harmeyer (2007) stated it is a
general term used to describe schools with an awareness and sensitivity to military culture. It is
not a standardized term and is not monitored by the Department of Veterans Affairs for its
quality, nor is it a reflection of uniform institutional policies and practices for student-veterans.
The VA website does list schools which have not been approved to certify whether a student is a
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 34
veteran or not. This approval does not reflect the treatment veterans may receive at the
institution or the institution’s awareness of student-veteran issues (Herrmann et al., 2009).
Student-veterans should assess institutions for indications of a military-friendly
environment. For example, the presence of a Reserve Officer Training Corp, on campus, or, at a
minimum, lack of prohibiting the program, creates a more military-friendly environment
(Herrmann, 2009). The veteran-friendly school, according to Griffin and Gilbert (2015), is more
likely to have administrative and faculty members with prior military service, which means they
will be familiar with the various challenges of military life. The process of selecting an
institution is compounded by the fact that military personnel need to select an institution far in
advance of the actual date of matriculation (Vance & Miller, 2009). The geographical location
of the prospective school may be across the world from the service member’s current location.
Information about the institution may not be readily available or the service member’s ability to
access such information may be limited as a result of mission requirements (Strickley, 2009).
This means that finding an appropriate school may be a difficult task for the student-veteran.
Non-Traditional/Traditional Students
Research on non-traditional student populations originated in the 1970s and was
primarily dedicated to elements that affect student adjustment (Adams & Corbett, 2010; Tinto,
1975, 2002). Ogren (2003) elicited that non-traditional students can become involved and adapt
to higher education campuses by properly managing their new, different life role. Adam and
Corbett (2010) also posited that the student can assume these roles concurrently without internal
struggle. The authors also reiterated that in situations of perceived discordancy, non-traditional
students will characteristically choose personal life over educational goals. Unlike their
traditional student counterparts, non-traditional students often have occupational and familial
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 35
responsibilities that must be negotiated, prioritized and balanced on a daily basis (Adams &
Corbett, 2010; Ogren, 2003).
To achieve projected goals, non-traditional students frequently seek emotional support
from family and friends (Solomon & Gordon, 1981). Nonetheless, their method to adapt and
engage on campus is problematic and not often looked upon by higher education institutions.
For example, Baptista (2011) noted university dining facilities are usually closed during evening
classes, libraries and study halls close before the end of the evening classes, and student service
and academic offices are often misaligned with that of the non-traditional student.
Bean and Metzner (1987) investigated numerous tenets imperative to the adjustment of
non-traditional students to academic rigor. Based on their results, Chartrand (1992) examined
the direct and indirect effects of personal variables (age, educational goals, and GPA), academic
variables (certainty of major, student satisfaction with the courses and faculty), context variables
(support, finances, employment, family responsibilities); and social integration on psychological
outcomes (institutional commitment, academic adjustment and psychological distress) on the
student’s commitment to pursue academic goals. Chartrand determined that the “background
variables were not significant contributors to the model, while the academic variables played an
important role in the model” (p. 23). Additionally, Chartrand acknowledged the requirement to
use the model with other ethnic groups, consider the role of gender and incorporate academic
achievement.
Results from a RAND study conducted in 2015, concluded that, over time, enlisted
personnel are just as likely to enroll in college and attain a degree as their counterparts in the
civilian world. Participation in military education programs increased postsecondary enrollment
of the student-veteran population and Post 9/11 GI Bill beneficiaries perform as well as their
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 36
civilian colleagues in terms of degree completion rates (Gonzalez et al., 2015). Student-veterans
now have the resources and financial support to enter higher education in pursuit of a degree.
Summerlot, Green and Parker (2009) state that traditional college students are “typically
defined as 18 to 24 years old, enrolled in college for the first time, and attend school full time”
(p. 77). The American Council on Education (2014) showed that the average age of student-
veterans initiating their postsecondary education is 25. The primary difference between
traditional and non-traditional students is that the latter have a greater propensity to encounter
roadblocks that can slow down their progression towards a degree. Historically, student-veterans
mirror today’s non-traditional students by needing more time to complete their degree programs
while balancing work and family obligations. McMurray (2007) further elaborated by expressing
that non-traditional students usually enroll as part-time students, are married and have children,
are employed as the primary household provider, and are challenged by balancing a budget to
finance their education and household necessities. Sewell’s (2000) research affirms that the surge
of World War II student-veterans who enrolled in higher education via the Serviceman’s
Readjustment Act of 1944 were considered the first non-traditional students. Notwithstanding,
the similar traits endemic to the Post 9/11 GI Bill beneficiaries mirror their World War II
colleagues and are also classified as non-traditional students (Baptista, 2011). Gilardi and
Guglielmetti (2011) postulate that, because of their experiences in the military, student-veterans
also possess a greater understanding of worldly events than do traditional students.
The RAND institute (2105) contends that research is deficient on the degree to which
Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits aid in navigating the obstacles to graduation. Baptista (2011) strongly
suggests that, when studying the student-veteran population, researchers should be cognizant of
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 37
their affinity to non-traditional student characteristics before choosing benchmarks to quantify
“average progress toward degree attainment and assessing the impact of the benefit” (p. 753).
Horn and Carroll (1996) used seven different criteria to classify post-secondary students
as non-traditional students: delayed enrollment; part-time enrollment; financial independence; d)
full-time employment while enrolled; having dependents; single parent; and did not receive a
standard high school diploma. Subsequently, Horn and Carroll crafted a measure of non-
traditional status grounded on the quantity of non-traditional criteria (Kenner & Weinerman,
2011). Non-traditional students possessing one characteristic were labeled as minimally non-
traditional. Those with two or three were labeled as moderately non-traditional. Finally, those
possessing four or more non-traditional characteristics were deemed highly non-traditional
(Horn & Carroll, 1996; Kenner & Weinerman, 2011; Lane, 2004; Baptista, 2011). By utilizing
these categorizations and coupling them Department of Education (1996) data, the study
concluded that non-traditional students were less prone to graduate after five years and had the
propensity to defer or withdraw from their academic goals altogether. Conversely, Horn and
Carroll (1996) also discovered that the fewer non-traditional criteria met by a student, the greater
the chance for degree (Bachelor) completion within the five-year margin (National Center for
Education Statistics, 1996; Lane, 2004). If student-veterans are non-traditional students and non-
traditional students have low completion rates as Horn’s research indicates, then it is plausible to
conclude that student-veterans will likely have low completion rates.
Students With Disabilities
Hoge, Castro and Messer’s (2004) conclude that postsecondary students displaying
disabilities (physical, cognitive, mental health) frequently have a hard time continuing and
achieving undergraduate and vocational programs. Utilizing data from the National Center for
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 38
Education Statistics, Hurst and Smerdon’s (2000) found a difference in persistence the
persistence rates of students with disabilities as compared to that of their non-disabled
counterparts. The rate for students with disabilities was 53% while that of their non-disabled
peers was 64%. Costen and McNamara’s 1997 study deduced that other research uncovered
disabled students might experience lower self-efficacy and academic abilities as compared to
their non-disabled classmates. Studies on students diagnosed with mental health illnesses
insinuate a correlation between academic outcomes and psychological symptoms that
consequently leads students to leave higher education (Megivern, Pellerito, & Mowbray, 2003).
As of February 28, 2014, the Department of Defense reports that approximately 51,000
service members have been wounded and many suffer from mental health resulting from
Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn, and Operation Enduring Freedom. In addition,
Hoge, Auchterlonie, and Milliken (2006), indicated that the “prevalence rate for any mental
health disorder among OIF veterans was 19.1 percent, and 11.3 percent among OEF veterans” (p.
1025). Statistically, the probability of student-veterans enrolled in higher education that are
combating mental, emotional and physical wounds, is prevalent (Hoge, Castro & Messer, 2004).
The Americans with Disabilities Act designated student-veterans as a vulnerable
population (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2012). Beausoleil-Holt (2008) writes that, although
student-veterans experience many of the same problems as other college students, this population
may not comprehend and acquiesce to the unique challenges of their educational experience.
Based on research that shows college students with similar disabilities struggle
academically and have low post-secondary persistence and completion rates, it is possible that
some student-veterans with similar disabilities may have similarly low degree-attainment rates.
According to Glasser, Powers and Zywiak (2009), there is a significant difference between
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 39
student-veterans and traditional students when it comes to cultural and perceptual perspectives.
Hanafin (2012) ascertains that staff, faculty, administrators and students with no military
backgrounds find themselves unprepared to deal with or identify the challenges and problems of
the student-veteran populace. Elliott, Gonzalez and Larsen (2011) posit that, in order to address
many of the challenges student-veterans face in higher education, the student-veterans may need
to monitor, self-assess, and self-adjust.
Transition
The study of student-veteran’s successful transition and assimilation to colleges and
universities is a continuing one. After the enactment of the Serviceman’s Readjustment Act of
1944, Frederiksen and Schrader (1950) established a relationship between student-veteran’s
status and their scholastic achievement after World War II. The study substantiated the need to
designate student-veterans as a distinctive cultural group and derive programs and initiatives to
better enable their assimilation (Kennedy & Ishler, 2008).
The relationship between a student and the academic institution is not one of rote
functionality; the institution’s ability to offer opportunities and the student’s ability to make use
of the variety of programs facilitate a successful transition (Pascarella & Terezini, 2005).
Acculturation is one of the byproducts of an efficacious union of student and institution
endeavors. As an essential facet of personal growth, acculturation, according to Bateson (1972),
occurs when individuals with diverse cultural norms of behavior converge. Padilla and Perez
(2003) defined acculturation as a “social process that occurs in a context in which newcomers
and members of the host culture are in dynamic contact with each other” (p. 45). In order to be
successful throughout the various stages of life, Covert (2002) asserted that individuals must
have the ability to acculturate from one group to another. Bichrest (2013) also recommends that
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 40
comprehending and knowing what to expect, will demystify the transition and possibly enrich
life outcomes. Murt (2006) found that student-veterans are accustomed to highly structured
organizations embedded with specific hierarchies and protocols. Formally acquainting student-
veterans with a predictable process for their adjustment will be enable their acculturation. As
proposed by Ackermann et al. (2008), to smoothly transition a service member to higher
education, s/he must clearly understand the transitional phases of moving in, moving through,
and moving out.
These differences and unique needs can cause irritation or frustration when relating to
their classmates (DiRamio et al., 2008). However, several student-veterans expressed an interest
in connecting with other veterans on campus, and many were interested in a veterans’ student
organization (DiRamio et al., 2008). Rumann and Hamrick (2009) reiterated, “student veterans
frequently seek contacts with other veterans and military personnel as ways to validate their
experiences and aid in successfully making the transition to college” (p. 30). Subsequently,
Rumann and Hamrick (2010) identified similar findings that student-veterans who were able to
attend college with members of their unit mentioned their feeling of ease and comfort in the
social aspect of the transition.
In this way, current research suggests that student-veterans seek out others who have
similar experiences in order to feel more comfortable and find the transition to higher education
easier when they connect with these peers. Also, Rumann and Hamrick (2010) noted that several
participants described feeling like an outsider at times because other students did not know how
to approach veterans. On a larger scale, results from the National Survey of Student Engagement
(Center for Postsecondary Research, 2010) show that veterans reported lower levels of support
from their institutions and were generally less engaged than their peers.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 41
Herrmann (2008) identified other key elements related to successful transition from
soldier to student as academic advising and the availability of student resources. DiRamio et al.
(2008) assert that, while mandating professional development for university faculty and staff
regarding student-veterans may be difficult, opportunities should be available and that
participation should be highly encouraged to help educate those critical in meeting the unique
needs of this population (DiRamio et al., 2008). To this effect, DiRamio et al. found, “Of the
sixteen themes identified in the study...a consistent message from the participants was that they
hoped faculty members would acknowledge their veteran status and attempt to understand them
as a student population” (p. 89). Rumann and Hamrick (2009) agreed with the significance of
knowledgeable and caring faculty and staff in reporting that student-veterans emphasized the
importance of having faculty who understand their experiences.
On many campuses, the issue of how accommodating this unique and growing population
is a concern for administrators (Lokken, Donald, McAuly, & Strong, 2009). However, the
amount of scholarly literature focused on student-veterans is lacking. Currently, there is a gap in
the literature on student-veterans with combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. Furthermore, the
majority of previous research focused on their emotional and mental health conditions, bypassing
the critical aspects of transition (DiRamio et al., 2008). While research showed the value of
inclusive and supportive campus environments, a gap exists in the research to connect those
findings to what an inclusive and supportive environment might look like (Herrmann, 2008).
Therefore, higher education institutions have the responsibility to provide a supportive
environment that allows student-veterans to develop a sense of belonging.
Transitioning from military service to first civilian division can be complex and
challenging (Haynie & Shepherd, 2011; Black & Papile, 2010; Clemens & Milsom, 2008).
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 42
Hamrick and Rumann (2010) classify the armed forces as a sub-culture with a set of values and
norms that differ substantially from the mainstream society. The transition in lifestyle from
military service to civilian status can be classified, according to DiRamio and Jarvis (2011), as
cross-cultural. Transitions, (Ackermann et al., 2008; Schlossberg, 1981, 1995; Bichrest, 2013;
DiRamio et al., 2008) according to the authors, must be studied in terms of “type, perspective,
context, and impact” (p. 8). An adult’s ability to adapt to any transition is incumbent on the
previous factors. Types of transitions according to Schlossberg (1981) are as follows:
anticipated events, unanticipated events, and nonevents. It is important to understand that
perception is key factor in determining whether an event is anticipated or unanticipated.
Perception can be influenced by a variety of contextual dynamics that include gender,
socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and geographical and historical settings (Hanafin, 2012). The
delta between pre-transition and a post-transition is directly correlated to an individual’s
routines, assumptions and roles and determines the impact of the transition (Anderson, 2012).
Anderson (2012) also asserts that, rather than having some end point, a transition is “a process
over time that includes phases of assimilation and continuous appraisal as people move in,
through, and out of it” (p. 59).
Schiavone and Gentry (2014) cite Schlossberg, Waters, and Goodman (1995) in asserting
that transitions consist of four categories of variables, known as the 4S System: situation
variables may include trigger, timing, source, role change, duration, previous experience, and
concurrent stress; self variables may include socioeconomic status, sex, age, health, and values;
support variables are family, friends, institutions, medical care providers; and strategy (which
can be actual, perceived, utilized, or created) variables may include coping resources, techniques,
and advisement centers. Balancing the advantages and disadvantages of the variables hat fall into
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 43
each bucket determines success of the transition. For student-veterans, as an example, assets that
fall into the category of support can include not only friends and family, but also fellow service
members. On the other hand, a support liability could be the lack of certain institutional policies
or services at the veteran-student’s college.
According to Anderson (2012), supporters of adults in transition (such as veterans
making the transition to student life, for example) should have three goals: helping the individual
explore the transition by providing them with nonbiased relationships; helping them understand
their coping resources by providing them with new perspectives; and helping them cope with the
transition process by influencing action or inaction. The authors conclude by describing ways to
help adults in transition in various institutional environments, asserting that helpers must “work
on both the individual’s perspective and the institution’s opportunity structure simultaneously”
(p. 165).
Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton and Renn (2010) support that transition structures propose
that life events or non-events are undergone as significant, lasting events that can encompass
various challenges. DiRamio et al. (2008) propose that, while student-veterans are trying to
reestablish the link to campus life and engage with traditional aged students, they also need to
renegotiate their individualities in light of their veteran status (Runmann & Hamrick, 2010).
Notwithstanding, while trying to handle the transition to academic rigor and concurrently
managing an identity crisis, many student-veterans will also need to deal with service-related
disabilities (DiRamio & Spires, 2009).
Ackerman et al. (2009) provided key insight that most student-veterans considered
pursuing an academic career as one of the most challenging transition in their journey back into
society. Additionally, Cook and Kim (2009) reported that only 22% of surveyed schools afforded
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 44
student-veterans any type of transitional support. Griffin and Gilbert (2015) used Schlossberg’s
transition theory to transform viable research on student-veterans into proposals for
implementation to key personnel assisting student-veterans throughout the university campus.
This study extends on the work of DiRamio and Jarvis (2011), Diamond (2012), Schiavone and
Gentry (2013) and Griffin and Gilbert’s (2015) exercising Schlossberg’s transition theory to
investigate how individual colleges and universities accommodate and project services and
support to facilitate student-veteran transition.
Transition Process
As U.S. colleges and universities embrace diversity and the presence of student-veterans
increases, it is incumbent on senior campus leadership to identify, endorse and enforce effective
program initiatives to cater to its eclectic student population (Butcher, Taylor, & Wallace, 2012).
Student-veteran success is only as good as the programs and efforts the higher education
community supports and understands (Lighthall, 2012). Their gradual up-scaling and presence
contribute to an already diverse student population, prompting faculty and staff members to deal
with an array of multicultural issues (Minnis, 2014). Contemporary faculty and staff members
throughout higher education do not possess or have limited experience dealing with military
personnel and combat veterans on campus (Diamond, 2012). Data from the 2011 Pew Research
Center further supports Diamond’s (2012) statement by indicating that only .5% of Americans
have served in the armed forces over the last ten years.
Over the last decade, civic and military leaders have deliberated on the social and cultural
disconnect ubiquitous to those who served and those who did not by coining the phrase military-
civilian gap (Department of Veteran Affairs, 2013). Exacerbated by the media, focus on post-
traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, and violent behavior created an erroneous
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 45
picture of the student-veteran, questioning their mental stability and whether they possess the
tools and motivation to fully assimilate into the campus community (Hadley, 2010). Perceptions
of anti-military dissent on higher education campuses also contribute to an uneasy transition as
many student-veterans find themselves shielding their military affiliation to deter potentially
disparaging encounters with the campus population (Livingston, Havice, Cawthon, & Fleming,
2011).
Transitioning to Academia
Briggs (2012) reiterates that the Post 9/11 GI Bill will change college campuses and
sprinkle remnants of the Department of Defense throughout collegiate establishments. In
response, college administrators developed programs and services to meet the unique needs of
veterans. In a survey of 723 colleges, Cook and Kim (2009) found that over half of them have
student-veteran services; public four-year and two-year institutions are more likely to have these
services than are other institutional types; these services are student services related, including
financial aid, counseling, academic advising, and employment assistance; and student-veterans
are interested in transferring credits for course work earned while on active duty, being awarded
college credit for military service, and finding course offerings flexible enough to meet their
families’ needs.
In addition to offering veterans services on college campuses, some colleges joined
consortia of colleges to offer services to soldiers on military bases. For example, Corsica,
Johnson, and Lancaster (2002) and Ford, Northrup, and Wiley (2009) described consortia
between military installations and colleges in New York and Florida that combine flexible
scheduling, peer-to-peer support, cooperative advising, combined faculty resources, financial aid,
and transfer agreements to help soldier-students achieve their educational goals.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 46
Model: Schlossberg’s Transition theory
As stated in Chapter One, this study utilized Schlossberg’s transition theory. Schlossberg
et al. (1995) explained that a transition is “any event, or non event, that results in changed
relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles” (Ryan et al., 2011 p. 27). Schlossberg (1981)
devised the 4S system (situation, self, support and strategies) to “identify the potential resources
someone possesses to cope with the transition” (p.16).
The 4S System
Situation refers to the individual’s sense of control over the transition period (Evans et
al., 2010). Within the factor of situation, Schlossberg et al. (1995) denotes that concerns that
determine the courses of action taken by the individual are whether the transition is perceived as
permanent or temporary, good or bad and whether external/internal stressors exist to determine
the trajectory of the transition. Suggesting that they are differences between military and
academic organizations, Elliott, Gonzalez, and Larsen (2011) concluded that student-veterans
view academic cultures through a military lens. Unaccustomed to campus hierarchy and
infrastructure, their frustrations are exacerbated by the perceived lack of accountability and
poorly managed services (Glasser, powers, & Zywiak, 2009).
Evans et al. (2010) imply that coping skills are derived from internal resources coupled
with personality traits. Lazarus (2000) elaborates that, depending on the situation at hand, innate
mechanisms determine the mode in which the individual deals with the disruptive event or
occurrence. In the contextual model, identified as the one most widely used and accepted in
psychology, coping is defined as “the cognitive and behavioral efforts exerted to manage specific
external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of the
person” (Moon & Schma, 2011, p. 57).
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 47
The ability to successfully manage a transitional event is shaped by a multitude of
personal behaviors and characteristics inherent to the individual (Hopkins et al., 2010). Traits
such as age, gender, nationality, religion or socioeconomic status provide the methods through
which individuals cognize their responses to confront a transition, deciding which approach is
best suited to navigate an event (Schlossberg et al., 1995). Schlossberg et al. (1995) also
accentuate the significance of optimism, self-efficacy, resilience, and values in this process.
Positive outcomes are results of the proper balance of a positive assessment and a perception that
the individual is in some type of control and not a victim to the situation (Goodman et al., 2006).
Research emphasized the importance of counselors, advisors and mentors in relation to
managing self (Baechtold & de Sawal, 2009; Grossman, 2009; Jackson & Sheehan, 2005; Ruh et
al., 2009; Shackelford, 2009). Social integration and post dramatic stress disorder, according to
Ford et al., (2009) are two serious conditions that plague student-veterans on campus.
Complementing the research, Sachs also (2008) expressed concerns that counseling initiatives
need to take into account these psychosocial phenomena and their potential to engender
academic disruptions. As aforementioned, very few of college campuses are resourced and
manned appropriately to effectively manage student-veterans’ physical and mental disabilities.
Cook and Kim (2009) also assert that mental health services should be operated by certified
personnel who have the subject matter expertise to identify and treat student-veterans and the
ability to provide additional resources by forming collaborative partnerships with state and
federal medical agencies.
The support factor is a social construct primarily associated with the individual’s
capability to have a network of friends, family, colleagues or professionals who can provide
constructive feedback or encouragement leading to positive and fruitful transitions (Anderson et
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 48
al., 2012; Evans et al., 2010). Research indicates that student-veterans frequently consider
themselves a forgotten population, unsupported by an administration, faculty and staff incapable
of adequately understanding their needs and challenges (Cook & Kim, 2009; Hermann, Hopkins,
Wilson, & Allen, 2009). DiRamio and Jarvis (2011) recommend that, in order to ameliorate
student-veteran transitions, college campuses should provide an on-campus veteran liaison office
to assist these students and provide a much needed conduit to key offices and services
throughout the campus.
Runmann and Hamrick (2009) purport that fellow students can be used by the university
as a tool to positively support student-veterans in their quest to fit in. Considered non-traditional
students, student-veterans enter their freshman semester at an average at age of 25 (American
Council of Education, 2014). This difference in age can create social distances and the inability
to connect with traditional freshmen classmates (Bauman, 2009). Ackerman et al. (2009)
propose a venue in which student-veterans are given the opportunity to engage with other
student-veteran upperclassmen sharing their experiences while concurrently providing the voice
of experience. By supporting these collaborative efforts, Cook and Kim (2009) further
particularize that senior student-veterans can assist in the transition process by providing
tempered lessons on managing the academic maze and share proven coping mechanisms to
assists their freshmen brethren. University leadership can foster these relationships endorsing
student-veteran clubs or organizations. These judgment-free zones, as coined by Diamond
(2012) have the potential to enhance support in the company of fellow warriors.
Merriam and Caffarella (1999) and Evans et al. (2010) provided a definition to explain
the strategies as means to manage the outcome of a transition through personal behaviors. They
further iterate there are three coping responses: modifying the situation, controlling the meaning
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 49
of the problem, and managing stress after the transition. There are also four distinct coping
modes that an individual has access to as they engage in the responses: information seeking,
direct action, inhibition of action, and intra-psychic behavior (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999;
Evans et al., 2010).
Kleykamp (2009) explains that, while strategies are beneficial in isolation, critical
ingredients are the individual’s ability to be flexible and his/her judgment to execute multiple
strategies concurrently in order to obtain a positive transitional outcome. By examining the three
coping responses, academia can aid the student-veteran by promoting successful integration tools
in order to empower the individual to modify the situation, control the meaning of the problem,
and reduce stress levels (DiRamio & Spires, 2008).
Successful combat missions and engagements are a result of relevant, timely information
relayed through various levels of the command structure to keep combatants informed of
ongoing changes on the battlefield (McBain, 2008). Without this flow of information, the day-
to-day deliverables of any military organization would not be as productive and decisive.
McBain et al. (2012) agree that student-veterans often experience information deficits that are
distinct from those of their traditional student counterparts. The requirement to be well informed
is critical to a student-veteran and expected in order to attain the ultimate goal of graduation.
When student-veterans are sent from office to office with no results, are burdened by the
bureaucratic red tape of an academic institution or receive no answers as to why tuition benefit
payments are late or why they owe the university money, frustration increases. Student-veterans
have a difficult time making critical decisions without the proper information to guide them
throughout the process (Lokken et al., 2009). They come from an organization permeated by
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 50
meetings, status reports and accountability to an organization that, in their eyes, extols
mediocrity (Griffin & Gilbert, 2015).
Ackerman et al. (2009) propose that universities initiate strategies that can facilitate the
propagation of information to student-veterans. Bauman (2009), as well as Vance and Miller
(2009), further expound on the importance of providing the right resources help student-veterans
navigate the academic labyrinth. For new personnel assigned to a military unit, a checking-in
checklist is provided wherein the new member is told to visit the main offices and facilitate their
transition to the new organization. The authors suggest a similar vehicle to guide new student-
veterans to key offices and return to a point of contact that will review and ensure of places were
visited and that the process was completed successfully. An additional benefit to completing the
checklist is that, while the new member is going from office to office, new friends are made,
points of contact are established and the campus is demystified (Pallant, 2013). The American
Council of Education (2014) also highly endorses the point of contact initiative as a tool to assist
throughout the various phases of academic adjustment.
Creating functional systems for incoming student-veterans involves a collaborative
partnership throughout the vast network of campus stakeholders (McBain et al., 2012). Burnett
and Segoria (2009) recommend a multilateral agreement among key university personnel to
champion cross-institutional collaboration through a variety of student clubs, professional
development for faculty and staff, and counseling programs to foster an esprit de corps
environment between student-veterans and the general student population. Griffin and Gilbert
(2015) add to this study by expanding the collaborative umbrella to include external stakeholders
who have a vested interest in student-veteran concerns. By including reputable military veteran
organizations (e.g., Disabled American Veterans and Wounded Warrior Project), the Department
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 51
of Veterans Affairs, and Veterans Affairs Medical Centers, higher education can team up with
experienced personnel who have firsthand knowledge of the issues veterans face in their
transition to civilian society. This alliance can provide additional support, provide campus
liaisons, or reach out programs that can augment university policies and programs.
Summary
Colleges and universities in the Unites States are unprepared to embrace the multitude of
student-veterans presently forming up at their gates. Unable to properly service the unique needs
of this new student population, administration is forced to invest in new services and training
programs to assist staff and faculty in their daily encounters with student-veterans. Results and
findings from studies utilizing Schlossberg’s (1981) transition theory can provide key concepts
to transcend preexisting processes by pinpointing areas for improvement, return on investment
strategies and identify the challenges thwarting student-veteran integration. Advocating for
student-veterans and taking ownership of institutional directives earmarked for change need to be
endorsed and enforced by senior administrative leadership in order to be effective. The
unveiling of policies and procedures to advising centers, dispensaries, faculty and support staff
ensures attainment of student-veterans personal and academic objectives.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 52
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Radford (2009) emphasizes that the moment at which a service member registers in
higher education initiated a comprehensive stage of adult transition. Student-veterans
transitioning into the academic circles are exposed to an array of personal and environmental
changes (Diamond, 2012). Schlossberg (1995) purports that it is not the event or non-event that
is significant, but the impact that event has on the individual’s daily life. For, adaptation from a
military environment requires little effort while others struggle to successfully overcome the
vicissitudes of that transition (Anderson et al., 2012). This transitional journey Transitioning
from the military to academia prompts wide-ranging effects and reactions.
Purpose and Research Questions
The objective of this study was to gather lessons learned and best practices to assist
academic professionals in supporting student-veterans in higher education. This study sought to
improve, sustain or delete current developmental tools and processes utilized to assist student-
veteran’s transitional needs. A greater understanding of the experiences of this student
population can lead to successful integration and increase degree completion rates (Brown &
Gross, 2011).
Constant comparison can be undertaken deductively in that codes are identified prior to
analysis and then looked for in the data, inductively in that codes emerge from the data, or
abductively in that codes emerge iteratively (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2007). The data collected
were analyzed inductively to explore the transitional experiences of student-veterans enrolled at
a four-year institution in the Pacific region. Using Schlossberg’s (1981) theory of adult
transition as a framework, this was a mixed-methods study conducted in two-phases utilizing a
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 53
convergent parallel design in order to support the emergence of codes, categories, and themes in
order to support the emergence of the following research questions:
1. How do military students perceive their transition experience from the military to higher
education?
2. What is the transitional process that military students exhibit when acclimating to an
academic environment?
Research Design
The student sample for this study consisted of student-veterans at one four-year
institution in the Pacific region. The institution was selected as a sample case and data were
collected from current student-veterans enrolled in different disciplines and/or programs
representing both the undergraduate and graduate levels: 111 student-veterans were surveyed,
comprising 15% of the student-veteran population.
The profile questionnaire was designed by incorporating Schlossberg’s (1981) adult
transition theory to inform which stage of transition a potential participant self-identified. The
researcher used a convergent parallel design for a more complete understanding of the research
problem results from collecting both quantitative and qualitative data (Creswell, 2011). Miles
and Huberman (1994) purport that when researchers combine quantitative and qualitative data,
“we have a powerful mix” (p. 42). It consists of merging, integrating, linking or embedding two
“strands” (Creswell & Clark, 2011).
Utilizing the data derived from the survey instrument, this study discovered the needs of
this population during a significant life transition. Findings from this study may be used to aid in
the successful integration of student-veterans enrolled at colleges and universities.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 54
Participants
The student-veteran sample for the current study consisted of undergraduate/graduate
students at a four-year institution in the Pacific region. The university was selected as sample
case and data were collected from current student-veterans enrolled in the different disciplines
and/or programs. The goal was to survey at least 15% of student-veterans. Student-veterans are
defined, for the purposes of this study, as personnel from the various branches of the U.S. Armed
Services, including Reserves and National Guard, who are enrolled part or full time at the four-
year institution. This study did not differentiate between branches of the armed services or
subsections within them. Active and non-active duty service members were included and
evaluated equally in the study. The site was chosen due to researcher’s accessibility and military
involvement.
To establish a solid participant base, the researcher contacted the campus earmarked to
assist student-veterans and used their database to launch the survey. This database was cross-
referenced with financial aid records to ensure against duplication.
Measurement Instrument
In 2012, Diamond used Schlossberg’s transition theory as her primary research
instrument establishing an outline for the formation and sequence of questions. The theory is
mapped into three main transition sections: moving in, moving through, and moving out. In
addition to the three transition sections, subsections of the theory called the 4S’s were written
into each section of the outline; the 4S’s stand for Situation, Self, Support, and Strategies.
Questions are researched and developed to determine the category of transition the respondents
will mostly identify with. This 38-item instrument covers a variety of question types: categorical/
forced choice, dichotomous, Likert-scale rating questions and open-ended questions (Appendix).
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 55
Quantitative Questions 12, 27, 28, and 29 through 33 were designed to explore the
Support tenet of the 4S’s while quantitative questions 8 through 11, 14, and 16 through 25 were
designed to explore the Self tenet. Internal reliability tests were conducted for quantitative
questions using a Cronbach’s Statistics Alpha. Qualitative questions categorized as follows: Q7
and Q13 were designed to explore the Situation tenet of the 4S’s; Q26 explore the Strategies
tenet of the 4Ss; Q34 explored the Self tenet and Q37 explored the Support tenet. Lastly, Q38
was designed as a catch all with comments assigned appropriately to the 4S’s.
Data Collection
The Qualtrics © questionnaire was e-mailed to all valid participants. The questionnaire
further explored the transition from veteran to student and determined stage identification. Full
disclosure was made to the students with regard to the reason for the study, confidentiality, and
the opportunity for the students to aid the college to enhance practices and policies concerning
student-veterans. The Institutional Research Board at the University of Southern California and
the four-year institution in the Pacific region approved the research study, survey and procedures
in August 2015.
Data Analysis
The statistical analysis software used was the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
version 22 for the quantitative portion of the survey. Findings from the qualitative portion of the
survey were ascertained using the triangulation method. Pursuant to Creswell (2011), this
approach allows qualitative inquirers to triangulate among different data sources to enhance the
accuracy of the study. In order to validate the qualitative data acquired via the survey, the
researcher solicited an expert analysis from Doctor of Education, a counselor at a two-year
institution in the Pacific region in the office that functions as the transfer center for the campus.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 56
The expert analyst has also taught at the doctoral level at a four-year institution in the Pacific
region. Answers to all open-ended questions were transcribed, and organized through a
systematic coding process consistent with the triangulation method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).
In the second stage of data analysis, narratives and emergent themes were mapped to the
four Schlossberg factors, determining whether and how the ways in which institutions aimed to
support student-veterans were consistent with the 4S’s. The results of the data analysis are
documented in the chapter 4 of this research study.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 57
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS AND RESULTS
With the growing population of student-veterans attending institutions of higher
education, senior leadership at many universities initiate programs earmarked at understanding
this exclusive growing population (Green & Hayden, 2013). Many student-veterans, regardless
of branch, status, rank or gender, exhibit different characteristics based on their military and
personal experiences (DiRamio & Jarvis, 2011). Based on these distinctive characteristics and
demands, higher education consistently develops and improves initiatives to successfully
integrate policies and procedures that can cater to the needs of student-veterans and facilitate
their transition into higher academia.
Van Solinge and Henkin’s (2007) study stated that transitions are a time of opportunity
that has the potential of being either resolved constructively or destructively. Demetre and
Corney (2010), also ascertain that, depending on an individual’s personality, situation and
resources, the transition from military to higher education campuses can lead to a positive,
neutral, negative or stressful experience. The framework of Schlossberg’s (1981) transition
theory states that transitions, regardless of their positive or negative nature, can be studied and
evaluated and assist in a program plan that can to provide a smoother transition of to higher
education (Schlossberg, 1981, 2011). Goodman’s research (2006) emphasized that
Schlossberg’s transition theory consists of a moving in, moving through, and moving out
progressional scale. The type, impact and context of the change determine how fast or slow the
transition to the next phase will take.
This chapter presents results from data collected via a mixed-method format from
surveyed student-veterans. The researcher used a convergent parallel design in order to obtain a
more complete understanding of the research problem from collecting both quantitative and
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 58
qualitative data (Creswell, 2011). Miles and Huberman (1994) purport that, when researchers
combine quantitative and qualitative data, “we have a powerful mix” (p. 42). It consists of
merging, integrating, linking or embedding two “strands” (Creswell & Clark, 2011). The
statistical analysis software used was the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 22
for the quantitative portion of the survey. Findings from the qualitative portion of the survey
were ascertained by using the triangulation method. Pursuant to Creswell (2011), this approach
allows qualitative inquirers to “triangulate among different data sources to enhance the accuracy
of the study” (p. 231). Expert analysis from Doctor of Education, a counselor at a two-year
institution in the Pacific region in the office that functions as the Transfer Center for the campus
was used for the triangulation analysis.
The purpose of this study was to explore the transitional experiences of student-veterans
enrolled at a four-year institution in the Pacific region. Using Schlossberg’s (1981) theory of
adult transition as a framework, this study incorporated a two-phase, mixed methods format
utilizing a convergent parallel design in order to support the emergence of codes, categories, and
themes. The study yielded the development of the following research questions:
1. How do military students perceive their transition experience from the military to higher
education?
2. What is the transitional process that military students exhibit when acclimating to an
academic environment?
The conceptual framework illustrates that there are three phases (moving in, moving
through, and moving out), and these phase are tempered by the 4S’s (situation, support, self and
strategies). By collecting the data provided by the survey, the quantitative and qualitative data
were analyzed and coded in order to find patterns or similarities among the participants
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 59
(Diamond, 2012). Responses from each participant were analyzed and coded by individual
survey question, and then grouped by the 4S’s (situation, support, self and strategies).
The student sample for the study consisted of student-veterans at four-year institution in
the Pacific region. The institution was selected as sample case and data was collected from
current student-veterans enrolled in the different disciplines and/or programs representing both
the undergraduate and graduate levels: 111 student-veterans were surveyed comprising 15% of
the student-veteran population.
Demographics
Participant demographics pertaining to this study are outlined in Tables 1-4 and Figures
1-4, respectively. Demographic categories outlined in this study were military branch (Table 1
and Figure 1), military rank (Table 2 and Figure 2), gender (Table 3 and Figure 3) and military
status (Table 4 and Figure 4).
Military Branch
Table 1 and Figure 1 show the breakdown of the military branches of the student-veteran
population that participated in the study. Army was the largest group represented (38), followed
by Navy (31), Air Force (22), Marines (18) and Coast Guard (2).
Table 1
Military Branch
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Army 38 34.2 34.2 34.2
Navy 31 27.9 27.9 62.2
Air Force 22 19.8 19.8 82.0
Marines 18 16.2 16.2 98.2
Coast Guard 2 1.8 1.8 100.0
Total 111 100.0 100.0
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 60
Figure 1. Military Branch
Military Rank
Table 1 and Figure 1 illustrate the military rank breakdown categorized by rank groups.
Military rank group of E5-E6 was the largest group (52) followed by E1-E4 (30), E7-E9 (12),
O1-O3 (11), O4-O6 (5) and WO1-WO5 (1). Enlisted personnel comprised 94 student-veteran
participants.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 61
Table 2
Military Rank
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid E1-E4 30 27.0 27.0 27.0
E5-E6 52 46.8 46.8 73.9
E7-E9 12 10.8 10.8 84.7
W01-W05 1 .9 .9 85.6
01-03 11 9.9 9.9 95.5
04-06 5 4.5 4.5 100.0
Total 111 100.0 100.0
Figure 2. Military Rank
Gender
Table 3 and Figure 3 depict an overview of participants’ gender; 61% of the student-
veterans were male and 39% were female.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 62
Table 3
Gender
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Male 68 61.3 61.3 61.3
Female 43 38.7 38.7 100.0
Total 111 100.0 100.0
Figure 3. Gender
Military Status
Table 4 and Figure 4 depict an overview of the participants’ military status. Veterans
comprised 55% of the student-veterans surveyed, followed active duty personnel (25%).
Reserve status personnel made for 15%, and National Guard members for 5% of the sample.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 63
Table 4
Military Status
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Active Duty 28 25.2 25.2 25.2
Reserve 17 15.3 15.3 40.5
National Guard 5 4.5 4.5 45.0
Veteran 61 55.0 55.0 100.0
Total 111 100.0 100.0
Figure 4. Military Status
Quantitative Results
The profile survey questionnaire used in this study was designed using Schlossberg’s
(1981) transition theory as an outline for the formation and sequence of questions. The theory
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 64
was mapped into three main transition sections: moving in, moving through, and moving out. In
addition to the three transition sections, subsections of the theory called the 4S’s were written
into each section of the outline: Situation, Self, Support, and Strategies. Questions were
researched and developed to determine with which category of transition the respondents most
identified. This survey instrument used a variety of question types that will be discussed in the
qualitative portion of this chapter: categorical/forced choice, dichotomous, Likert-scale rating
questions and six open-ended questions (Appendix A).
Internal reliability tests were conducted using a Cronbach’s Statistics Alpha. This
statistic provides an indication of the average correlation among all the items that make up the
scale. According to Pallant (2013), values range from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating
greater reliability. Descriptive statistics for each variable that went into each of the scales are
provided reporting mean and standard deviation for each of those created in the items statistics
matrices found in Tables 5 and 6, respectively. Moderate to moderate high reliability were found
for Schlossberg’s 4s categories: .754 (Support), and .839 (Self). Additionally, Morrow and
Jackson (1993) argued that, for research with a sample size of more than 50, an alpha of .537 is
reliable; internal consistency values are illustrated in Tables 5 and 6.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 65
Table 5
Cronbach Alpha – Reliability Statistics - Support
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
.754 7
Item Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
relationshipother 3.36
1.284 107
children 3.97
1.335 107
parents 2.40
1.359 107
siblings 2.23
1.364 107
friends 2.74
1.152 107
boss 3.42
1.560 107
colleagues 3.09
1.527 107
Table 6
Cronbach Alpha – Reliability Statistics - Self
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
.839 15
Item Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
studyskills 2.53 .898 102
academics 2.50 .952 102
timemanagement 2.26 .954 102
friendships 2.29 1.049 102
ability 3.73 .892 102
competitiveness 3.65 1.011 102
achievement 4.16 .767 102
emotional 3.38 1.203 102
leadership 4.33 .800 102
physicalhealth 3.63 1.107 102
risk 3.48 1.158 102
confidenceintellectual 3.79 .968 102
confidencesocial 3.51 1.032 102
spirituality 2.86 1.259 102
understanding 3.70 .910 102
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 66
Data from the 32 quantitative questions were subjected to a principal components
analysis (PCA) with a VARIMAX rotation (Kaiser Normalization) using SPSS version 22. Prior
to performing the PCA, the suitability of data for factor analysis was assessed. The principle
components analysis revealed the presence of seven components with eigenvalues exceeding 1,
explaining 24%, 12%, 10%, 7%, 6%, 5% and 4.7% of the variance, respectively (Table 7). An
inspection of the screeplot revealed a clear break after the fourth component (Figure 5). Using
Catrell’s (1966) scree test, the researcher retained four components for further investigation. The
four-component solution explained a total of 53% of the variance, with component one and two
contributing 36%. Normal distribution assumptions were tested below .05 using the Shapiro-
Wilks Test.
Table 7
Total Variance Explained
Component
Initial Eigenvalues Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Total
% of
Variance Cumulative % Total
% of
Variance Cumulative %
1 5.428 23.602 23.602 3.350 14.564 14.564
2 2.770 12.043 35.645 2.934 12.755 27.319
3 2.374 10.322 45.967 2.305 10.022 37.340
4 1.571 6.829 52.796 2.120 9.217 46.557
5 1.367 5.946 58.742 1.754 7.627 54.185
6 1.172 5.097 63.839 1.730 7.520 61.704
7 1.080 4.697 68.536 1.571 6.831 68.536
8 .928 4.036 72.572
9 .820 3.566 76.138
10 .782 3.399 79.537
11 .694 3.018 82.555
12 .575 2.498 85.053
13 .506 2.201 87.253
14 .491 2.136 89.390
15 .421 1.830 91.220
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 67
Table 7, continued
Component
Initial Eigenvalues Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Total
% of
Variance Cumulative % Total
% of
Variance Cumulative %
16 .377 1.637 92.857
17 .336 1.461 94.318
18 .289 1.256 95.574
19 .261 1.137 96.711
20 .226 .981 97.692
21 .207 .901 98.593
22 .169 .735 99.328
23 .154 .672 100.000
Figure 5. Scree Plot
Pursuant to Schlossberg (1995), the devised 4S system “identifies the potential resources
someone possesses to cope with the transition” (Goodman, p. 24). Table 8 (Rotated Components
Matrix) would indicate that component one and component two validate the potential resources
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 68
for Self while components three and four identify with Support. The variables used in
component one consisted of 12 questions specifically asked to elaborate on Self. Component one
produced five results .6 and above that emphasized five key traits that are endemic to military
training: ability (.839), competiveness (.793), achievement (.772), intellectual confidence (.684),
and leadership (.603). These traits are strong in the individual student-veterans surveyed and an
indication that these students have the tools required for success; the moving in phase was
accomplished. Learning the rules, procedures and even being prepared to enter a different
environment (academic) did not dilute the traits of accomplishing the mission. The variables in
component two (.6 and above) further endorses Self by augmenting skills already tempered and
brought from military training: academic (.834), time management (.808), study skills (808), and
academics (.604). These particular variables produced indicate that student-veterans possess
skills that can assist in a positive college outcome.
Support variables were determined in components three and four. In component three, 12
questions were asked to determine Support. Three variables produced .6 and above to indicate
strong correlation to the Support tenet of the 4S’s. Social confidence (.751), spirituality (.650),
and friendship (.644) illustrates that teamwork and collaboration exist among student-veterans.
Component four further expounds on the value of support to student-veterans. Two variables
produced a .856 and .841 respectively pertaining to colleague and boss support. Results indicate
that again, military style preparation and modus operandi are frequent in this particular section of
the study. Ryan et al. (2011) assert that military personnel acknowledge that teamwork is
essential to accomplish tasks and missions.
The results of components three and four indicate that this mentality is carried forward in
a student-veteran’s journey in higher education. The student-veteran ascertains that it is
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 69
teamwork and knowing that someone has your six, is critical and necessary for success. Clegg
(2005), states that collaborative efforts continue because combining the perspectives, resources
and skills of people and organizations, or inter-organizational synthesis, has been shown to
achieve outcomes more creative and far greater than could have been achieved by the partners
working in any way but collaboratively (Clegg, 2005, p. 183). Researchers have called this
magnification of achievement the collaborative advantage or synergy (Huxham, 2000). Support
is no stranger to the student-veteran.
The results of this portion of the quantitative study indicate that two of the four tenets of
Schlossberg’s (1981) transition theory, self and support, are strong indicators that the student-
veteran has the tools to facilitate their transition to higher education. The moving in seems to be
an easier transition since military personnel are training and adapt easily to changes and new
assignments (Schiavone & Gentry, 2014). Situation and Strategy outcomes will be discussed in
the qualitative portion of this chapter.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 70
Table 8
Rotated Component Matrix
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ability .839 .279
-.127
competitiveness .793 .243 .178
achivement .772 .101
.191
Confidenceintellectual .684
.428 .166 .247
leadership .603
.175
.413 -.132 -.120
academics .196 .834 .179
-.116
timemanagement
.808
.156
.192
studyskills .243 .808
-.190
academically .167 .640 .220
-.110
confidencesocial .326
.751
.312
-.112
spirituality
.650
.131
friendships
.365 .644
-.167 -.104 -.115
understanding .440
.470
-.126 -.118 .312
emotional .275 .202 .465 -.461 .131 .227 -.232
colleagues
.106
.856 -.131 .228
Boss
.132
.841
.146 .197
Friends .119 -.294 -.315 .496 .174 .321 -.225
Risk
.107
.770
.164
physicalhealth
.169 .166
-.219
.706
parents
.225
.110
.752
.194
relationshipother
-.133 -.197
.165
.291
.773
children
-.118
.290
.718
Qualitative Findings
The researcher organized the data in the thematic structure, and then combined the
themes to develop meaning and provide collective descriptions of the experience as ascertained
by Creswell (2007). Six of the 38 questions (Q7, Q13, Q26, Q34, Q37, Q38) in the survey were
open-ended questions that were used to enhance the accuracy of the study. Questions 7, 13, 26,
34, and 37 were designed to augment the quantitative questions in each of the respective 4S’s
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 71
(Table 9). Question 38 was designed to enrich the study and provide additional perceptions of
the student-veteran. As discussed, a triangulation method was utilized to corroborate the data
and extract common themes endemic to each question (Table 10). These commonalities,
congruent to Schlossberg’s transition theory (1981) were then used to augment the results of the
quantitative portion of the study and increase an understanding of where student-veteran’s lie in
their transition to higher education. The following sections discuss the themes that emerged
from answers to each of the qualitative questions of the survey and relate them to Schlossberg’s
(1981, 1995) theoretical framework.
Table 9
Coding Defined by Framework
Situation Self Support Strategies
Q7: If not, please describe what led to you
to enroll in college.
X
Q13: Describe your first day class as an
enrolled college student.
X
Q26: Looking back at your first semester of
college, is there anything that you would
do differently…
X
Q34: How is your life different today than
it was before enrolling in college?
X
Q37: Have you helped fellow students
navigate college policies, procedures, or
offices? (Yes or No)
X
Q38: Is there any information that you
would like to include in the study regarding
the understanding…
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 72
Table 10
Emerging Themes
Q Emerging Themes
Q7: If not, please describe what led to you
to enroll in college.
a) Financial Support
b) Upward Mobility
c) Motivation
Q13: Describe your first day class as an
enrolled college student.
a) Emotional Responses
b) Expectations
c) Value Systems
Q26: Looking back at your first semester of
college, is there anything that you would
do differently…
a) Study Habits/Time Management
b) Change Priorities
Q34: How is your life different today than
it was before enrolling in college?
a) Intrinsic Motivation
Q37: Have you helped fellow students
navigate college policies, procedures, or
offices? (Yes or No)
a) Approximately half of the participant
sample did not identify themselves as helping
fellow students
b) The other half of the participant sample
that did identify themselves as helping fellow
students disclosed a wide variety of
assistance, from policies, procedures,
resources, and experience.
Q38: Is there any information that you
would like to include in the study regarding
the understanding…
a) Understanding/Respecting Student-
veterans
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Situation
Evans (2010) defines situation as an individual’s ability to have a sense of control over
what is happening during the transition. Anderson et al. (2012) further purport that perceived
stressors present can exacerbate the transition. These challenges can range from the change
being seen as permanent or temporary or as good or bad. Grant and Gilbert (2015) also suggest
that inherent differences between military and academic culture can pose challenges for student-
veterans. The researcher, to augment the quantitative data of the Situation tenet, earmarked
survey questions 7 and 13.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 73
Survey Question 7 - If not, please describe what led you to enroll in college? Three
themes emerged from the data collected from survey question 7 as the researcher explored how
the institution aimed to facilitate student-veteran transitions. Based on participants’ perspective,
the themes were financial support, upward mobility, and motivation.
Financial Support. With the enactment of the Post-9/11 Bill and the tuition assistance
incentives provided to active duty personnel, student-veteran enrollment has dramatically
increased in higher education. With an influx of over 600,000 student-veterans enrolled since
2009, the participants described their gratitude for the opportunity to utilize educational benefits
and the impact a degree would have on their future (Gonzalez et al., 2015). Pursuant to the
American Council on Education (2009), the pursuit of higher education for most, if not all
participants, was completely dependent upon the availability of education benefits through the
various versions of the G.I. Bill:
I was unhappy in the military and I saw the Post 9/11 GI Bill as a positive way to exit the
military and provide a happier life for myself.
The opportunity to go pay for it through VA benefits was an incentive to pursue an
education.
So, after about eight months looking for a job and not finding anything, I decided to go
back to school. At least with the Post 9/11 I can have an income while going back to
school, you know, at least do something.
I decided I have all these benefits and they are so many people who cannot afford to go to
college. I basically have a golden ticket to go to school and walk out with minimal or no
debt. I might as well take advantage of that.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 74
Upward Mobility. Employment pressures reportedly contributed to enrollment. Many
conveyed a passion for academics and felt a great sense of ownership in the educational pursuit.
Their individual reasons for enrolling in higher education centered on skill enhancement for job
placement, academic exploration while acclimating to civilian life and seeking out the next
challenge in life:
Exiting the military soon, all jobs know require some type of higher education degree.
Army was planning on requiring an associate’s degree to get promoted…the policy never
came to fruition, but the concept of education to enhance career progression was vivid in
my mind.
I joined the military because I didn't want to go to school, but as I got older I realized you
wouldn't get far without an education. Then the Post 9/11 GI Bill came out and that made
it easier.
The findings in this portion of the study illustrate that the resources and drive to excel in
pursuing an education is not a journey that the student-veteran is not willing to confront.
The ability and the resources provided by military education programs facilitate the
decision to advance academically and obtain credentials necessary to enhance their
resumes and portfolios.
Motivation. Motivation significantly affects achievement (Clark, 2006). Viewing the
military as a way to earn the financial means to attend college, participants indicated the
aspiration to attend college was motivated by military service. For these participants, the value
the military places on education is evidenced by the generous educational benefits. Importantly,
many of the participants did not indicate a desire to attend college before joining the military.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 75
Results suggest that their military service instilled or incentivized an aspiration to attend college
and that college attendance is becoming the norm for military personnel:
It was when I was in Iraq…when looking outside and I said: I should’ve gone to college.
What am I doing here?
Didn’t think I could pass college. My military experience made me realize I
could…realized college is necessary for life success.
My experience in the military and wanting to do more and do more with my life.”
Knowing that I wasn’t going to have a career in the military, I needed to get a degree for
my kids, so that I would have a foundation when I entered civilian life.
Survey Question 13 – Describe your first day of class as an enrolled college student.
Four themes emerged from the data collected from survey question 13 as the researcher explored
how the institution aimed to facilitate student-veteran transitions. Based on participants’
perspective, the themes were emotional responses, expectations, value systems, and instructor.
Emotional Responses. The experiences of the participants during their first day as a
college student ranged from excitement, anxiety to pure nervousness:
Excitement:
I had two combat tours under my belt; I was ready for anything.
I remember being both excited and nervous. I wanted to do really well and start off right.
I remember feeling like I was in a class of peers.”
Anxiety:
My first day of class, I felt like I was surrounded by kids. Most of my classmates were
fresh out of high school and complained about the silliest stuff.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 76
Three of my classes were online, and one in class. I was 27 years old and surrounded by
18 year olds in my on-campus class. I felt very stupid. My classes gave me a lot of
anxiety, because I was new to the learning environment. My syllabi gave me so much
stress and I never thought I would get through my classes. It was a lot of information to
take in all at once as far as the expectations for the entire semester. It sent my brain into
overdrive.
Nervousness:
I was nervous, I felt out of place, didn't feel that I knew as much as my peers I don't recall
the material.
Felt nervousness in the beginning. I wanted to talk to other students, but I had a hard time
doing so because of our age difference.
I remember feeling like I was in a class of peers. I was taking a psych class, so whatever
we were talking about I was into.
The spectrum of emotions experienced by the student-veterans highlight a desire to fit in.
The military is a highly structured organization with a tradition of leader/follower constructs.
The ability to adapt and overcome in this new environment is hindered by not only the unknown,
but the lack of the cohesiveness and teamwork that student-veterans are used to in the military.
Participants wonder if their military skills and training enough to successfully confront the
challenges of academic rigor.
Expectations. In this area, findings support that student-veterans expressed a concern on
the lack of knowledge university administrators and personnel possessed concerning their needs.
Student-veterans voiced disappointment when they believed they were given inexact information
or were redirected to a multitude of offices and support centers. Military personnel are trained in
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 77
specific areas and expected to perfect and know what the latest revisions in policy and
procedures are. Participants found that too many questions were left unanswered, they were sent
to too many offices and that the majority of the staff members working to assist entering students
did not have the knowledge base to point them in the right direction. For example, although
senior leadership at the university took strides in aligning programs to assist this population, their
ability to properly train personnel and filter new policies and procedures down to the trenches is
lacking. One participant was informed that he owed the university $2,700 dollars due to a
benefit overpayment:
I think the veterans need to understand that enrolling into college is a very messy thing to
do. It’s easier to go downrange and fight any enemy on any battlefield versus navigating
the red tape of the VA, Financial Aid, or administrative offices of the college.
This vicissitude points to the necessity of qualified, erudite, and experienced personnel in
key positions. Another student-veteran, with a disability, not only experienced the plight of
navigating the confusing network of university policies and procedures, but was confronted by
university personnel who were unsupportive. They stated:
Instructors/Staff do not seem to understand just how different we can be on the inside.
They only notice what is portrayed on the outside, and I know of other veterans with
PTSD that have nearly snapped and done something bad.
I registered with the Office of Disability and identified myself with a disability and I was
able to sit down with a counselor…She was like, “Why did you drop this class? Why did
you do this? You could have done this, this and this.” I am dealing with all my other
medical issues, and then you are sitting here ripping me apart.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 78
While the level of unmet/unsure negative interaction with institutional personnel this student
describes was uncommon, these examples do speak to the way in which personnel and services
can negatively affect student-veterans. These encounters with institutional agents perceived to
be unknowledgeable and unsympathetic made transitions more challenging, as student-veterans
wanted individuals who understood their concerns and needs.
Value systems. Student-veterans viewed that, although they served in different branches
of the military and in different statuses, they all shared the common denominator of serving their
country. This camaraderie permeated in the classroom and served as a catalyst in terms of whom
they considered friends and who could give them an honest opinion of how to navigate the
vicissitudes of collegiate life. The majority of participants in this category felt different from
their non-military peers on campus. The findings concluded that age difference was a factor and
that due to this difference in age; traditional students did not take college seriously and would not
make good classroom allies. One student-veteran explained:
It is not an easy expectation, but veterans are some of the most persistent and perseverant
people that I meet. They are always the most confident and are easily determined in the
crowd. It is harder to make friends with students who have not served in the military.
After leaving the battlefield, I expected a peaceful environment in the class but found the
students were young, naïve and completely oblivious to realty. Also, their understanding
about life in general was very different from mine. Their experience levels are so vastly
different that I have to explain many of the things I know or understand automatically.
Student-veterans appreciated and welcomed the prospect of interacting with student-
veterans, relate stories and compare their life experiences, as only a fellow warrior can
understand. These participants made efforts to engage with their classmates, seek out social
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 79
groups and elaborated on how they tried to mix in with the general student population. One
respondent stated that he felt like the odd person out. He further stated that “it wasn’t like I was
being alienated or ‘gaffed off,’ I just didn’t feel like I had anything in common with these people
– maybe I was old, or maybe I just saw them as immature.” The finding suggests that, although
his classmates were not aloof or discriminatory, it was critical to him to make connections with
students who were his age and had similar interests. Another respondent commented as well:
There are things you can’t do anymore because you are a vet. You can’t have arguments.
It's not a matter of the transition. It's because the public is assuming you are unhinged,
and anything you do gives them an excuse to point and say, “Look! A crazy veteran!” I
got into school, and they mismanaged my GI Bill and other financial aid soooo bad.
When I called them on it in a totally normal way, the financial aid officer claimed she
was afraid to come to work because I had been trained to kill people. Seriously, I am a
40-year-old overweight woman. They actually kicked me out of school before I could
even start. Lucky for me, I have a great record and great friends (mostly Vets) and things
worked out great for me - three weeks later I was sitting in a classroom in another college
in a comparable program. But I see things exactly like this happening all around me. We
need to stick together. Civilians don’t get it.
O’Herrin’s (2011) stated that numerous student-veterans experience a degree of
frustration when trying to connect the overwhelming and foreign bureaucratic world of higher
education. Displaying a tendency to only feel comfortable with fellow student-veterans,
Ackerman et al. (2009) posit that student-veterans self-isolate themselves creating difficulties in
initiating and maintaining relationships.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 80
These themes contribute to the moving in construct of Schlossberg’s theory (1981).
When finally making the decision to pursue higher education, respondents were excited and
ready to couple their military skills with a college degree. Participants regarded their initial
enrollment with positive effects and most should have the skills to adapt to life as a student-
veteran.
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Strategies
Griffin and Gilbert (2015) assert that Strategies “speak to abilities to manage transitions
through one’s own behaviors” (p. 4). Goodman et al. (2006) and Anderson et al. (2012) maintain
that there are three categories of coping responses: modifying the situation, controlling the
meaning of the problem, and managing stress after the transition. They also iterate that
individuals can employ three different coping modes as they engage in these responses:
information seeking, direct action, and inhibition of action (Anderson et al., 2012; Diamond,
2012; Goodman et al., 2006; Minnis, 2014; Van Dusen, 2011). Cook and Kim (2009), also
ascertain that, while these strategies are valuable in isolation, it is imperative for the individual to
be flexible, while employing several strategies concurrently (Cook & Kim, 2009). The
assistance institutions offer can help student-veterans transition to campus, which facilitates
individuals’ abilities to modify the situation, control the meaning of the problem, and manage
stress (Lang & Powers, 2011). The researcher, to augment the quantitative data of the Strategies
tenet, earmarked survey question 26.
Survey Question 26 – Looking back at your first semester of college, is there anything
that you would do differently? Based on participants’ perspective, they wished they had
cultivated certain academic strategies to facilitate their transition to higher education. The
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 81
findings indicated that study habits, and time management were strategies that would have
assisted in their journey back to school.
Study habits/Time management. Remarks such as “review study habits to set myself up
for success,” and “I wish I could somehow teach my former self the study habits required to
succeed in an academic environment,” were recurring statements. The ability to organize and
read ahead was a trait that was non-existent in the student-veterans that carried their study habits
from high school. One student-veteran extolled that he “should’ve been more proactive in my
studies by reading further ahead and doing my best to study more before going to work.” In
hindsight, many student-veterans wished they had come up with a plan for studying and
completing assignments throughout the entire semester.
Ryan et al. (2011) depict that the non-traditional identifier also associated with student-
veterans, is “another self-issue connected with the experience of role change” (p. 123).
DiRamio’s (2008) research indicates that the student-veteran may require leveling courses in
order to refine forgotten skill sets while adjusting to civilian classroom environments. Many of
the participants that have indicated that this was their first encounter with college or have
revisited the campus after a tour or career in the military, found themselves unprepared for the
academic rigor (DiRamio, 2008).
Whether participating in a part time or full time status, all student-veterans surveyed
regarded their perspective role change as beneficial. The moving through construct is slower
because of their reluctance to participate in extracurricular activities, their lack of confidence in
institutional support and their preference for student-veteran friends during their tenure in higher
education.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 82
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Self
Survey Question 34 – How is your life different today than it was before enrolling in
college? Based on participants’ perspective, student-veterans almost unanimously alluded to the
importance of intrinsic motivation. This theme was prevalent throughout the answers to question
34.
Intrinsic Motivation. According to Ryan and Dei (2000), “social environments can
facilitate or forestall intrinsic motivation by supporting versus thwarting people's innate
psychological needs” (p. 43). Respondents suggested that motivation and a positive outlook
could assist in transitions and facilitate adjustment. One student-veteran stated he had to deal
with a lot of personal emotion. “I’ve gotten better at not procrastinating and now am a grad
student.” This motivation was also prevalent in the response of one student-veteran who
exclaimed, “college had taught me that my career opportunities are endless. I can become a
doctor if I would like to.”
This particular attribute also assists in the moving through process elaborated on by
Schlossberg (1981). By finding the means to cope and adapt to the obstacles of higher
education, self-efficacy is a critical tool. All participants believed they faced some
barrier/challenge during their enrollment but found the fortitude to strive in the face of perceived
hindrances.
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Support
Anderson et al. (2012), assert that support is “largely social, and addresses the ways in
which caring, affirmation, and positive feedback can facilitate transitions” (p. 123). Research
consistently highlights the critical nature of support as a vital tool for the student-veteran. Cook
and Kim (2009) assert that student-veterans regularly experience lack of support on college
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 83
campuses and that the institution cannot accommodate their needs because of the university’s
inability to understand the needs and mentality of this new student body.
Survey Question 37 – Have you helped fellow students navigate college policies,
procedures, or offices? (Yes or No). Approximately half of the participants did not identify
themselves as helping fellow students. The other half who did identify themselves as helping
fellow students disclosed a wide variety of assistance, from policies, procedures, resources and
experience. One student-veteran stated that they only recommended active engagement with the
advising office reiterating that he was not a subject matter expert and deferred to those in power.
Other avenues of assistance came from teaching new student-veterans the ins and outs of the
veteran system at the campus and from helping with questions with the Post 9/11 Bill.
As an indicator of the lack of institutional support afforded on campus, student-veterans
helped other student-veterans navigate the GI Bill process. One respondent indicated, “it takes
more time than financial aid counselors are willing to spend to explain it.” One student took
command and decided to take arms as student representative for fellow classmates. The student-
veteran assisted in helping them locate policies as they pertained to various classes,
requirements, and expectations. He elaborated by stating, “the position has allowed me to
mentor student-veterans and provide a less intimidating link between the student and institution.”
The support team forged between student-veterans to assist their new classmates is
almost entirely military to military. Helping out your brother in arms is an attribute endemic to
the military and a concept that is foreign to their traditional student classmates. This concept
assists in the moving through process. Unfortunately, the data points out that student-veterans
seek out student-veterans to assist rather than turning to campus personnel.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 84
Open-Ended Survey Questions – Catch All
There is a very different level of responsibility inherent to being a student-veteran. The
findings of this survey question brought forth one undeniable theme: understanding and
respecting student-veterans.
Survey Question 38 – Is there any information that you would like to include in the
study regarding the understanding of student-veteran transition to college? Instructors, staff
and campus administration and their relationships to student-veterans were elaborated on by
participants.
Instructors. Several participants alluded that instructors should be cognizant of the fact
that many student-veterans are not traditional students and should be respected. Understanding
tenets (special needs/health problems) that are endemic to this population can assist in classroom
transition and management. One respondent said, “instructors need to listen when we have
issues. I picked a seat I felt the safest in and the instructor assigned me a seat with my back to the
door and refused to change it.” Student-veterans, especially those who have PTSD do not like to
have their backs to the door. The inability to see who may come in traumatizes them and makes
their stay in the classroom stressful. This subconscious decision by the instructor can accidently
trigger emotions and disrupt classroom management. Student-veterans, according to one
participant, “shouldn’t be treated like children in class. Treating them like kids that just
graduated high school is unfair and disrespectful.”
Campus administration. The lack of trust in campus administration is evident in the
findings of this portion of question 38. One student-veteran felt that this university in the Pacific
region counted heavily on the student-veteran for a higher degree of guaranteed revenue and a
favorable reflection of academic and professional achievement, “but the civilian population
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 85
benefits the most.” Several student-veterans proclaimed that they should get special
consideration in regards to attendance. “Some student-veterans became dangerously anxious in
crowds and classrooms. They should be awarded the opportunity to catch assignments via
email/blackboard if they feel uncomfortable in class.”
Elaborating on the distrust of campus administration, respondents stated that, in order to
excel or receive all that you are eligible to receive in terms of benefits, the student-veteran and
his/her fellow veterans are their own best advocates. Depending on campus administration to
assist “is asking for redundancy, red tape and minimal time for service.”
The disconnect between student-veteran and faculty/staff intensifies the inability to
properly maneuver the moving through phase of Schlossberg’s (1981) transition theory. A
proper alignment, according to the findings, can assist in the student-veteran’s timely transition.
Summary
Student-veteran perceptions of transitional services and support systems at a four-year
institution in the Pacific region provided an understanding of the campus services and resources.
The mixed-method research approach served to capture individual student-veterans’ encounters
in order to gain in-depth understanding of their experiences (Orneck, 2008). The chapter
included data collection procedures along with reliability, credibility, and trustworthiness
measures. The participants’ demographics, quantitative results, themes and sub-themes
transcribed from the qualitative portion of the study provided insight of the perceptions of
student-veteran respondents.
Utilizing a mixed-method, convergent parallel design, the data were analyzed using a
factor analysis and open and closed coding technique incorporated through a constant
comparison method. This study sought to address:
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 86
1. How do military students perceive their transition experience from the military to
higher education?
2. What is the transitional process that military students exhibit when acclimating to an
academic environment?
The research questions were answered by a combination of factor analysis and qualitative
data triangulation. Chapter 5 consists of the researcher’s interpretation of the findings, with a
detailed discussion of each of the research questions. Implications for student-veterans, student
services, institutional effectiveness, and academic advisement are included in the chapter as well
as recommendations made in accordance with the study.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 87
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
As student-veteran enrollment increases on America’s college and university campuses, it
is important that institutions make strides to promote and facilitate their transition into higher
education. Although some of the results of the study confirm existing literature on student-
veterans’ experiences, this study adds a new awareness, integrating the chronicles of student-
veterans to encourage more nuanced understandings of how institutions succeeded and
sometimes struggled to promote success within this student community (Gilbert & Griffin,
2015). The data suggests that the university in the Pacific region was actively trying to facilitate
student-veterans’ transitions through three types of engagements: staff services, institutional
programs, and socio-cultural support. Some policies were successful, but some of the ideas that
were designed to be supportive were perceived as challenging or a “complete waste of time” in
the eyes of the respondents. Viewing the survey results, the researcher used Schlossberg’s
transition theory, which, according to Evans (2010), is rarely used in higher education research,
to cast a better understanding on how the university’s actions are particularly important for
advancing theory and practice. This lens reveals how institutional efforts can ameliorate or,
sometimes, inhibit the resources student-veterans bring to academia as they transitioned out of
the military and into higher education (Green & Hayden, 2013). This chapter presents
conclusions related to Schlossberg’s transition theory (4S’s), implications for practice, and
recommendations for policy and practice and finally, recommendations for future research.
Situation
The results of this study are that student-veterans consistently conveyed the desire for
additional resources specifically targeting the situation dimension or promoting initiatives to
increase their sense of control during the transition. Communication and timely receipt of
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 88
educational benefits were two critical areas that respondents stated needed to be addressed in
order to enhance the transition process. Anderson et al. (2012) emphasize that financial concerns
can make transitions more problematic and ambiguous. Earlier studies also presented data on the
adverse effects that student-veterans encounter when educational benefits are late, Veterans
Affairs offices provide incorrect guidance on GI Bill uses or when paperwork is lost during inter-
office journeys (Griffin & Gilbert, 2015; Schiavone & Gentry, 2014; Moon & Schma, 2011;
Strickley, 2009). While these topics have been elaborated on and discussed in previous research,
the results of this study redirects the perspective to the institution’s ability to cater to the student-
veteran body and the challenges institutions must surmount in order to improve customer service
with properly trained personnel and services. The results also imply that, while the university
provided Veterans Affairs offices and programs to mitigate the academic and enrollment
labyrinth, student-veterans found their transitions more challenging and exasperating when
encountering key administrative personnel whose attitudes and demeanor exuded disrespect and
disinterest.
Griffin and Gilbert (2015) and Vacchi (2012) emphasize the importance of
communication and information transfer to student-veterans, and similar results emerged from
this study. The requirement to be well informed is critical to a student-veteran and expected in
order to attain the ultimate goal of graduation. When student-veterans are sent from office to
office with no results, are burdened by the bureaucratic red tape of an academic institution or
receive no answers as why tuition benefit payments are late or why they owe the university
money, the frustration level increases. Student-veterans have a difficult time making critical
decisions without the proper information to guide them throughout the process (Lokken et al.,
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 89
2009). They come from an organization permeated by meetings, status reports and
accountability to an organization that, in their eyes, extols mediocrity.
Gonzalez et al. (2015) state that, by providing a point of contact to coordinate services or
a one-stop shop to house pertinent departments endemic to advisement and enrollment,
institutions can ameliorate stresses and promote better transitions. In addition to this
synchronization, the results underline the importance of personnel supporting the student-veteran
cause by promoting the development of policies and procedures that would eventually taper the
pressures linked with transitional concerns, particularly those related to financial benefits and
communication. According to the results of the survey, the majority of the unpleasant
encounters with university staff were a result of miscommunication, ill-trained personnel or a
misunderstanding of school policy or regulation. The amount of institutional governing
documents coupled with the inordinate amount of Veterans Affairs rules and regulations create a
perfect storm. Having the right person with the right tools in the right office could rectify these
issues.
Support
The results regarding the support dimension were very similar to findings in previous
studies. The concern of not being able to understand and interact with traditional students or
seek their support in any way was prevalent as was their inability to or disinterest in embracing
social support from campus organizations (Griffin & Gilbert, 2015; Gonzalez et al., 2015;
Schiavone & Gentry, 2014; Diamond, 2012; Elliott et al., 2011; Vance & Miller, 2009). This
study adds to Griffin and Gilbert’s (2015) findings that many student-veterans did not display an
interest in participating in the institution’s social support programs. Existing literature finds
value in student-veteran organizations (Summerlot, Green & Parker, 2009; Hamrick & Rumann,
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 90
2010) and the majority of the respondents appreciated the university’s efforts to accommodate
them.
Support, for many student-veterans, is reserved to those individuals who are closest to
them (e.g., spouses, children, parents, religion). In fact, many respondents were not concerned
with what their fellow traditional students were involved in as long as they pulled their weight in
the classroom. They were interested in listening to the professor, understanding the syllabus and
ensuring that traditional students assigned to group presentations were equally accountable for
the deliverable. Respondents also indicated that they reach out to other student-veterans for
advice and, in particular, lessons that could restructure their handling of the transition. As with
Van Dusen’s study (2011), this study’s results also imply that respondents find trust is very
important. The closely-knit external relationship nurtured by student-veterans (family, church,
medical) is the nucleus for their success or failure. Results also illustrate that, although there is a
bond among student-veterans, the association is rarely social and normally not extended beyond
the campus.
Given the results, student-veterans do not consistently seek out social programs and their
lack of certain interest indicates that transitions can be multifaceted journeys. Consequently, an
institution’s interest to cater to student-veteran populations cannot be a one-size-fits-all concept.
The best a university can hope for is for a program that will cater to the majority of these
students with opportunities to constantly evaluate and adjust in order to produce the best value
for both parties involved.
In this particular dimension of the 4S’s, it is important to note that the results foster a
theme that indicates that there are differences even among student-veterans. These differences
may extend from the diverse occupational fields, branch affiliation, status, or gender to pre-
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 91
enlistment socio-economic standings and values. While some participants felt the necessity to
find and engage with other student-veterans, many felt comfortable with non-traditional students,
finding similarities in being part of an older generation with families and juggling an academic
career with work.
Self
According to Ryan and Dei (2000), “social environments can facilitate or forestall
intrinsic motivation by supporting versus thwarting people's innate psychological needs” (p. 43).
Respondents suggested that motivation and a positive outlook could assist in transitions and
facilitate adjustment. Several participants stated having to deal with personal emotion. In this
dimension, the self-factor targets the individual’s internal means to cultivate coping mechanisms
(Anderson et al., 2012). A multitude of studies indicated the importance of having psychological
support services to assist in the transition from the military to higher education. According to
Glasser, Powers and Zywiak (2009), there is a significant difference between student-veterans
and traditional students when it comes to cultural and perceptual perspectives. Hanafin (2012)
ascertains that staff, faculty, administrators and students with no military backgrounds find
themselves unprepared to deal with or identify the challenges and problems of the student-
veteran populace. Elliott, Gonzalez and Larsen (2011) posit that, in order to address many of the
challenges student-veterans face in higher education, the student-veterans may need to monitor,
self-assess, and self-adjust.
Results indicate that respondents evaluated themselves as ready to engage the academic
world with tools they acquired throughout their military careers. They were very confident in
their abilities to dig deep and find the intestinal fortitude to accomplish the mission. All
participants believed they faced some barrier/challenge during their enrollment but found the
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 92
fortitude to strive in the face of perceived hindrances. Although armed with these tools, the they
faced various scenarios they were incapable of handling due to the new non-militaristic
environment. While the university provided advisement and guidance for enrollment, the
programs were conceptualized with traditional students in mind. The results further showed that
the university was minimally equipped, professionally and financially, to deal with the issues
endemic to the student-veteran population, thus precluding their ability to even identify issues of
PTSD, disabilities and initiate outreach programs to enrich the transition process. This endorses
the work of DiRamio and Jarvis (2011) and Gonzalez et al. (2015) which found that a lack of
trained, certified and professional personnel in key offices in the university structure can create
greater challenges for student-veteran transition. Griffin and Gilbert (2015) also emphasize the
divergence created by the institution’s ability to provide resources and manpower to these
specific services can and will encumber student-veteran assimilation. Self-efficacy is a critical
tool in finding the means to cope and adapt to the obstacles of higher education,
Strategies
The final dimension in Schlossberg’s (1981) 4S’s elaborates on how institutions can aid
in creating or perfecting strategies to assist the student-veteran traverse the transitional maze.
Although survey results showed that student-veterans were grateful for the university’s efforts in
providing veteran-specific programs, they complained about the lack of personnel and resources.
Consequently, many student-veterans indicated that a viable strategy was to seek out other
student-veterans to provide proper guidance and direction.
Ackerman et al. (2009) stated it is beneficial for student-veterans to engage with other
student-veterans when it comes to sharing their encounters and providing their experiences.
Cook and Kim (2009) further particularize that senior student-veterans can assist in the transition
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 93
process by providing lessons for managing the academic maze and sharing proven coping
mechanisms. Unfortunately, there were some responses that specifically warned incoming
student-veterans to be leery of the information they receive from certain other student-veterans.
Some of the them stated that the only reason they are attending classes was to receive the Post
9/11 GI Bill housing stipend; this stipend, in many areas, can reach over $3,000 monthly. Their
academic intentions were completely financial, and the information received from them was less
that credible and, at many times, resulted in irreparable damage like loss of money or costly
changes to degree plans). Nonetheless, many countered statements like these by elaborating on
the benefits of a social outlet or organization. University leadership can foster these
relationships by endorsing student-veteran clubs or organizations. These judgment-free zones
can enhance the transfer of information and the strategies required to navigate the system while
in the company of fellow warriors.
Implications
As the results indicate, there is no one solution that can assist student-veterans in their
quest to transition and eventually graduate from higher education. Nevertheless, by studying and
comprehending the particular needs and common emerging themes derived from Schlossberg’s
(1981) transition theory and the 4S’s, institutions can formulate schemes embedded in empirical
research that can provide the foundation for successful student-veteran transitional programs.
This study provides research data that can assist key senior stakeholders in higher education to
understand this new student body, understand their inherent differences and champion the cause
for appropriate change across college campuses.
The Post 9/11 GI Bill provided an avenue for student-veterans to pursue academic growth
and the means skills to aid in their reintegration into society. This influx of student-veterans
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 94
engenders a need for college administrators to augment financial aid offices with personnel who
are proficient in Veterans Affairs educational benefits, especially the directives of the Post 9/11
GI Bill. The ability to provide useful, timely and correct answers to student-veterans is critical.
This is indicative of the concerns that respondents expressed that payments to the institution
were late, they missed deadlines or eventually owed the school or VA money. The transition to
higher education is difficult enough without the added stress of financial burdens.
Facilitating the enrollment process was another concern for participants. Ackerman et al.
(2009) propose that universities should initiate strategies that can facilitate the propagation of
information to student-veterans. Bauman (2009) as well as Vance and Miller (2009) further
expound on the importance of providing the right tool for the right job as it comes to helping
student-veterans navigate the academic labyrinth. For new personnel assigned to a military unit,
a checking-in checklist is provided wherein the new member is told to visit the main offices and
facilitate their transition to the new organization. The authors suggest a similar vehicle to guide
new student-veterans to key offices and return to a point of contact who will review and ensure
all places were visited and the process was successfully completed. An additional benefit to
completing the checklist is that, while the new member, goes from office to office, new friends
are made, points of contact are established and the campus is demystified (Pallant, 2013). The
American Council of Education (2014) also highly endorses the point of contact initiative as a
tool to assist throughout the various phases of the academic adjustment.
Creating functional systems for incoming student-veterans involves a collaborative
partnership throughout the network of campus stakeholders (McBain et al., 2012). Burnett and
Segoria (2009) recommend a multilateral agreement among key university personnel to
champion cross-institutional collaboration through a variety of student clubs, professional
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 95
development for faculty and staff, and counseling programs to foster an esprit de corps
environment between student-veterans and the general student population. Griffin and Gilbert
(2015) add on to this study by expanding the collaborative umbrella to include external
stakeholders who have a vested interest in student-veteran concerns. By including reputable
military veteran organizations, higher education can team up with experienced personnel who
have firsthand knowledge of the issues veterans face in their transition to civilian society. This
alliance can provide additional support, provide campus liaisons, or outreach programs to
augment university policies and programs.
Recommendations for Policy and Practice
This study outlined areas for consideration with respect to the support of service
members and veterans as they transition to college following enlistment. One way to enact
change on campus is to inform leadership of this important and timely issue. This study
developed a model for use in the aid and understanding of individuals and provides a holistic
overview of this sub-population. The dissemination and use of this theory and its model is
suggested along with the following five recommendations.
First, a voluntary peer-mentoring program for entering student-veterans could mediate
the stress of the initial adaptation to college life and serve as a valuable resource throughout the
transition experience. Second, transition courses specifically aimed at advising and counseling
student-veterans would assist transition while supporting retention and success. Third, a student-
veteran cohort model could be developed for those student-veterans who happen to be following
the same academic plan or major. Fourth, staff, faculty, and administration need training focused
on the unique needs of student-veterans. These should include family members as well to allow
them exposure to the requirements and expectations of higher education as well as the student-
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 96
veteran’s feelings about transition. Lastly, the institution should retain additional mental health
personnel trained and certified to deal with post traumatic stress disorder and illnesses endemic
to student-veterans
Recommendations for Future Research
This study was limited by access and time constraints with regard to the sample
population. While data on student-veteran studies are extant, this study assisted by providing
more research while illustrating the need to continue studying this phenomenon. Each
subsequent study not only increases knowledge, but also assists in the plight of this flouted and
often-underserved population. The following recommendations are presented.
First, this study focused on a four-year university in the Pacific region. Any change of
institutional size, private or public, or demographics can alter the results. Second, the
demographics of this study included student-veterans of all branches of the military, regardless
of status. A study of a particular student-veteran ethnic group can provide insight as to whether
socio-cultural identities exacerbate the transition into higher education. Third, this study was
conducted with student-veterans in a face-to-face classroom environment. A study earmarked
toward student-veterans who obtain their degrees solely through an online format would have
substantially different results s. Fourth, this study was conducted at a private, non-profit
institution. Studies on public or for-profit institutions can be valuable to ascertain if problems are
endemic across the board for all student-veterans or if institutional status affects the transition
process. Lastly, survey results indicated that 60% of the respondents were male and 40% were
female. Historically, the gender composition of the U. S. armed forces is roughly 80% male and
20% female. It is worthy of further study to investigate whether female veterans take advantage
of their educational benefits more than their male counterparts do.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 97
Conclusion
Colleges and universities in the Unites States are unprepared to embrace the multitude of
student-veterans presently forming up at their gates. Unable to properly service the unique needs
of this new student population, administration is forced to invest in new services and training
programs to assist staff and faculty in their daily encounters with these students (Vacchi, 2012).
Senior leaders in higher education must be aware of the differences the student-veteran body
bring to the campus. By assessing the existing programs aimed at these students and adjusting
for the increased number of them enrolled, campus leaders can formulate the best course of
action and appropriate resources accordingly (Hanafin, 2012). It is only through these
concordant efforts that the relationship between student-veteran and higher education can
complement one other and provide a mutually positive manner.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 98
References
Ackerman, R., DiRamio, D., & Mitchell, R. G. (2009). Transitions: Combat veterans as college
students. New Directions for Student Services, 126, 5-14.
Adams, J., & Corbett, A. (2010). Experiences of traditional and non-traditional college student:
A quantitative study of experiences, motivations and expectations among undergraduate
student. Methods of Social Research. Retrieved from
http://www.unh.edu/sociology/index.cfm?id=ADF0DA25-E4F5-8F19-
0AECEFEB8F59549F.
American Council on Education. (2008). Serving those who serve: Higher education and
America’s veterans (Issue Brief No.1108). Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/news-
room/Documents/Serving-Those-Who-Serve- Making-Your-Institution-Veteran-
Friendly.pdf
American Council on Education. (2014) Serving those who serve: Making your institution
veteran friendly. Washington, DC: Author.
Anderson, M. Goodman, J., & Schlossberg, N. (2012). Counseling adults in transition: Linking
Schlossberg’s theory with practice in a diverse world. New York: Springer.
Asbury, E., & Martin, D. (2012). Military deployment and the spouse left behind. Family
Journal, 20(1), 45-50.
Baechtold, M., & De Sawal, D. (2009). Meeting the needs of women veterans. New Directions
for Student Services, 126, 35–43.
Bannier, B. (2006). Join the conversation: The impact of the GI bill on developmental education.
The Learning Assistance Review, 11(1), 35-44.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 99
Baptista, A. V. (2013). Non-traditional adult students: Who are they and what are the
implications for Higher Education? Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(2), 235-
246.
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of non-traditional undergraduate
student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485–540.
Beausoleil-Holt, A. L. (2008). Challenge and Support: Facilitating Success of Soldiers in Degree
Programs. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.
Bichrest, M. (2013). A formal literature review of veteran acculturation in higher education.
InSight Rivier Academic Journal, 9(2), 1-12.
Black, T.G., & Papile, C. (2010). Making it on Civvy Street: An online survey of Canadian
veterans in transition. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 44(4), 383-
401.
Black, T.G., Westwood, M.J., & Sorsdahl, M.N. (2007). From the front line to the front of the
class: Counseling students who are military veterans. In J. Lippincott & R. B. Lippincott
(Eds.), Special populations in college student counseling: A handbook for mental health
professionals (pp. 1-31). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
Briggs, B. (2012, July 2). Thousands of veterans failing in latest battlefield: College. MSNBC.
Retrieved from http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com
Brown, T. T., (2009). Societal Culture and the New Veteran. International Journal of Scholarly
Academic Intellectual Diversity. 11(1), 1-9.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 100
Brown, P. A. & Gross, C. (2011). Serving those who have served – Managing veteran and
military student best practices. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(1), 45–
49.
Buckley, M. (2004). A magic carpet to the middle class. The Officer, 80(7), 24-27.
Burnett, S. E., & Segoria, J. (2009). Collaboration for military transition students from combat to
college: It takes a community. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 22(1),
53-58.
Butcher, M., Taylor, F., & Wallace, W. (2012). Developing multiculturally competent staff
members in higher education. Journal of Student Affairs, 21, 40–48.
Byman, D., (2007). The five front war: The better way to fight global jihad. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Carlstrom, A. H., Harris, B. S., Hughey, K. F., & Ryan, S. W. (2011). From boots to books:
Applying Schlossberg’s model to transitioning American veterans. NACADA Journal,
31(1), 55–63.
Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (2013). The Role of Disability
Resources and Services (Author) Retrieved from https://www.cas.edu
Covert, C. (2002). Counseling Adult Learners for New Careers: The Motivations and Barriers
Associated with Postsecondary Educational Participation of Soldiers in Transition.
Report No. CE 084 207). Columbus, OH: U.S. Department of Education Office of
Educational Research and Improvement. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED
471458.
Chartrand, J. M. (1992). An Empirical Test of a Model of Nontraditional Student Adjustment.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39(2), 193-202.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 101
Center for Education Attainment & Innovation (2014). Student Veterans/Service Members’
Engagement in College and University Life and Education (Author) Retrieved from
http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/Student-Veterans-Service-Members-
Engagement.aspx.
Center for Postsecondary Research. (2010). National Survey of Student Engagement.
Bloomington, IL: Indiana University.
Church., T. E. (2009). Returning veterans on campus with war related injuries and the long road
back home. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 22(1), 43- 52.
Clark, G.M. (2006). Transition education and services for students with disabilities. New York:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Clegg S. (2005) Managing and Organisations: An introduction to theory and practice. Sage,
London, UK.
Clemens, E. V. & Milsom, A. S. (2008). Enlisted service members’ transition into the civilian
world of work: A cognitive information processing approach. The Career Development
Quarterly, 56(3), 246–256.
Creswell, J.W. (2011). Educational research: planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research, (4
th
ed). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Conway, K. M. (2009). Exploring persistence of immigrant and native students in an urban
community college. Review of Higher Education, 32, 321-352.
Coreyman, M. (2001). Basic back to school training. Christian Science Monitor, 93(18).
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 102
Corsica, J. Y., Johnson, D. R., & Lancaster, W. R. (2002). SUNY colleges in the north country:
A successful partnership with the military. New Directions for Higher Education, 120,
73- 80.
Costen, M., & McNamara, J. (1997). Self-concept and perceived social support among college
students with and without learning disabilities. Learning disability quarterly, 20(1), 2-12.
Demetre, J., & Corney, R. (2010). The variable experiences of becoming retired and seeking
retirement guidance: a qualitative thematic analysis. British Journal of Guidance &
Counselling, 39(3), 239-258.
Diamond, A., (2012). The adaptive military transition theory: supporting military students in
academic environments (Doctoral Dissertation) Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses.
DiRamio, D., & Jarvis, K. (2011). Veterans in Higher Education: When Johnny and Jane Come
Marching to Campus: ASHE Higher Education Report. J-B Ashe Higher Education
Report Series. Wiley.
DiRamio, D. & Spires, M. (2009). Partnering to assist disabled veterans in transition. In R.
Ackerman & D. DiRamio (Eds.) Creating a veteran-friendly campus: Strategies for
transition and success. New Directions for Student Services, no.126. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
DiRamio, D., Ackerman, R., & Mitchell, R. L. (2008). From combat to campus: Voices of
student-veterans. NASPA Journal, 45(1), 73-102.
Diyanni, R. (1997). How to succeed in college. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn, and Bacon.
Donahue, W. T., & Tibbitts, C. (1946). College and university procedures in the reorientation of
veterans. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 2(2), 131-139.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 103
Eckstein, M., (2009). College’s city inequities in new benefits for veterans. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 55(32), p. A-1.
Edmondson, E. (2002). Without comment or controversy: The GI Bill and Catholic colleges.
Church History, 71, 820-847.
Elliott, 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.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student
development in college: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ford, B., & Miller, M. (1995). The GI Bill of Rights legacy to American colleges. Retrieved from
ERIC database. (ED390345)
Ford, D., Northrup, P., & Wiley, L. (2009). Connections, partnerships, opportunities, and
programs to enhance success for military students. New Directions for Student Services,
126, 61-69.
Frederiksen, N., & Schrader, W. B. (1950). Adjustment to College. Princeton, NJ. Educational
Testing Service.
Garza, H., & Fattah, C. (2005). The 2005 catalogue of funded programs, effective practices, and
lessons learned to improve student success and academic achievement. Washington, DC:
National Council for Community and Education Partnership. Retrieved December 21,
2015 from http://www.edpartnerships.org
Gilardi, S., & Chiara G. (2011). University Life of Non-Traditional Students: Engagement Styles
and Impact on Attrition. Journal of Higher Education 82(1), 33–53.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 104
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
Glasser, I., Powers, J., & Zywiak, W. (2009). Military veterans at universities: A case of culture
clash. Anthropology News, 50(5), 33.
Gonzalez, G., Miller, L., Buryk, P., & Wenger, J. (2015). Higher education benefits for post-9/11
military service members and veterans. RAND Office of External Affairs, March 2015
Goodman, J., Schlossberg, N., & Anderson, M. (2006). Counseling adults in transition: Linking
practice with theory (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.
Green, L., & Hayden, S. (2013). Supporting student veterans: Current landscape and future
directions. Journal of Military and Government Counseling, 1, 89–100.
Green, S., Parker, D., & Summerlot, J. (2009). Student veterans organizations. New Directions
for Student Services, 126, 71-79
Greenberg, M. (2004, June 18). How the GI Bill changed higher education. The Chronicle
Review, 50(41), p. B9.
Griffin, K. & Gilbert, C. (2015). Better transitions for troops: an application of Schlossberg’s
transitional framework to analyses of barriers and institutional support structures for
student veterans. The Journal of Higher Education, 86(1), 71-97.
Grimes, A., Meehan, M., Miller, D., Mills, S. E., Ward, M. C. & Wilkinson, N. P. (2011).
Beyond the barricade: A holistic view of veteran students at an urban university. Journal
of the Indiana University Student Personnel Association, 62–74.
Hale, C. J., Hannum, J. W., & Espelage, D. (2005) Social support and physical health: The
importance of belonging. Journal of American College Health. 53(6) p. 276-284.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 105
Hamrick, F. & Rumann, C. (2010). Student Veterans in Transition: Re-enrolling after War Zone
Deployments. Journal of Higher Education. 81(4), 431-458.
Hanafin, R. L. (2012). Clash of Cultures: Veterans and Non-Veterans in Academia. Military &
Foreign Affairs Journal. Retrieved January 6, 2016, from http://www.veteranstoday.com
Harmeyer, E. (2007). Dartmouth president founds college service for wounded veterans.
Retrieved September 14, 2015 from VFW Magazine, http:www.vfw.org
Hayes, A. (2012, January 17). Experts: Vets’ PTSD, violence a growing problem. CNN News.
Retrieved from: http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-17/us/us_veterans-violence_1_iraq-war-
vet-face-death-penalty-homeless- men?_s=PM:US
Haynie, J. M. & Shepherd, D. (2011). Toward a theory of discontinuous career transition:
investigating career transitions necessitated by traumatic life events, Journal of Applied
Psychology, 96(3), 501-524
Herrmann, D., Raybeck, D., & Wilson, R. (2008). College is for veterans, too. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 55(13-20). Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.ezp-01.lirn.net
Herrmann, D. (2009). Serving those who serve. The Talking Stick, 26(2), 18-21.
Hoge, C., Auchterlonie, J., & Milliken, C. (2006). Mental Health Problems, Use of Mental
Health Services, and Attrition From Military Service After Returning From Deployment
to Iraq or Afghanistan. JAMA, 295(9):1023-1032.
Hoge, C. W., Castro, C. A., Messer, S. (2004). Combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, mental
health problems, and barriers to care. New England Journal of Medicine, 351, 13-22.
Hopkins, C., Herrmann, D., Wilson, R., Allen, B. & Malley, L. (Eds.) (2010). Improving college
education of veterans. Washington, DC: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 106
Horan, M. (1990). Stepchildren of Archaoes: An ethnography of a support group for Vietnam
veterans at the Florida State University. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No.
ED347331.
Humes, E. (2006). Over here: How the GI Bill transformed the American dream. Orlando, FL:
Harcourt, Inc.
Hurst, D., & Smerdon, B. (2000). Postsecondary Students with Disabilities: Enrollment,
Services, and Persistence. (NCES 2000-092). Washington, DC: United States Department
of Education.
Jackson, A., & Sheehan, J. (2005). The returning college veteran: Challenges and strategies.
NASPA Leadership Exchange. 26-27.
Johnson, T. (2012). Ensuring the success of deploying students: A campus view. New Directions
for Student Services, 126, 55-60.
Kennedy, K., & Ishler, J. C. (2008). The changing college student. In V. N. Gordon, W.R.
Habley, & T. J. Grites (Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (2nd ed.),
123–41. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kenner, C., & Weinerman, J. (2011). Adult learning theory: Applications to non-traditional
college students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41(2), 87-96.
Kiester, E. (1994). The GI Bill may be the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam. Smithsonian,
25(8), 128-136.
Kim, Y., & Cook, B. (2009). From soldier to student: Easing the transition of service members
on campus. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Kirchner, M. (2015). Supporting student veteran transition to college and academic success.
Adult Learning, 26(3), 116-123.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 107
Kleykamp, M. (2009). A great place to start? The effect of prior military service on hiring.
Armed Forces & Society, 35(2), 266-285.
Kortegast, C. A., & Hamrick, F. A. (2009). Moving on: Voluntary staff departures at small
colleges and universities. NASPA Journal, 46(2), 183-207.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates. (2005). Student success in
college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lane, D. (2004, March 13). Effect size calculator. In HyperStat online (measuring effect size).
Retrieved from: http://davidmlane.com/hyperstat/index.html
Lazarus, R. S. (2000). Toward better research on stress and coping. American Psychologist
55(6), 665-673.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer.
Leech, N. L. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for
data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557-584.
Lokken, J. M., Pfeffer, D. S., McAuley, J., & Strong C. (2009). A statewide approach to creating
veteran-friendly campuses. New Directions for Student Services, 126, 45-54.
Lolatte, T. E. (2010). Veterans in Transition: The Implications to Higher Education. (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.
McBain, L. (2008). When Johnny [or Janelle] comes marching home: National, state and
institutional efforts in support of veterans’ education. Retrieved
http://www.aascu.org/media/pdf/08b_ perspectives.pdf
McBain, L., Kim, Y. M., Cook, B. J., & Snead, K. M. (2012). From soldier to student II:
Assessing campus programs for veterans and service members. Washington, DC:
American Council on Education.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 108
McMurray, A. J. (2007). College students, the GI Bill, and the proliferation of online learning: A
history of learning and contemporary challenges. Internet and Higher Education, 10,
143-150.
Mettler, S. (2005). Soldiers to citizens. The GI Bill and the making of the greatest generation.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Megivern, D., Pellerito, S., & Mowbray, C. (2003). Barriers to higher education for individuals
with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 26(3), 217-231.
Merriam, S., & Caffarella, R. (1999). Learning in adulthood. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mitchel, D. (2009). Coming home: Student veterans’ articulation of college re-enrollment.
Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48, 315–331.
Moon, T. L., & Schma, G. A. (2011). A proactive approach to serving military and veteran
students. New Directions for Higher Education, 153, 53–60.
Morreale, C. (2011). Academic motivation and academic self-concept: Military veteran students
in higher education. (Doctoral dissertation). Retreived from ProQuest Dissertations &
Thesis A & I.
Morrow, J. & Jackson, A., (1993). How significant is your reliability. U.S. National Library of
Medicine, 64(3), 352-355.
Murphy, M. P. (2011). Military veterans and college success: A qualitative examination of
veteran needs in higher education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
North Carolina, Greensboro, NC.
Murt, T. (2006, September 27). Advising returning combat veterans. Presentation at the Fifth
Annual Professional Development Conference on Academic Advising, University Park,
PA.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 109
National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Remedial education at degree-granting post-
secondary institutions in fall 2000, NCES 2004-010. Washington, DC: US Department of
Education.
Ogren, C. A. (2003). Rethinking the Nontraditional Student form a Historical Perspective. The
Journal of Higher Education, 74(6), 640-664.
O’Herrin, E. (2011). Veterans find that their transition from combat to college can be difficult.
The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-
science/veterans-find-that-their-transition-from-combat-to-college-can-be-
difficult/2011/10/20/gIQAugW54N_story.html
Padilla, A. & Perez, W., (2003) Acculturation, Social Identity, and Social Cognition: A New
Perspective. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences. 25(1), 33-55.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS Survival Manual (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Pascarella, E.T., & Terezini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of
research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Pedigo, K. (1994). Happy birthday GI Bill. Mortgage Banking, 54(9), 54-60.
Pekow, C. (2008). Newly formed group would assist, advocated for student veterans. Community
College Week, 20(14), 10.
Persky, K. R., & Oliver, H. (2011). Veteran Education: Coming Home to the Community
College Classroom. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses.
Pew Research Center (2011). War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era. Retreived from
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/10/05/war-and-sacrifice-in-the-post-911-era/
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 110
Radford, Alexandria Walton. 2009. Military Service Members and Veterans in Higher
Education: What the New GI Bill May Mean for Postsecondary Institutions. Washington,
D.C.: American Council on Education.
Radford, A.W., & Wun, J. (2009). Issue tables: A pro le of military service members and
veterans enrolled in postsecondary education in 2007–08. Institute of Educational
Sciences No. 182. Retrieved from: http://nces.ed.gov/ pubs2009/2009182.pdf
RAND Corporation. (2015). Higher education benefits for Post-9/11 military service members
and veterans. RAND Office of External Affairs, March 2015, 1-10
Redden, E. (2009, April 4). New GI Bill becomes law. Retrieved from
http://www.insidehighered.com
Ruh, D., Spicer, P., & Vaughan, K. (2009). Helping veterans with disabilities transition to
employment. Journal of Postsecondary Education & Disability, 22(1), 67–74.
Rumann, C. B. & Hamrick, F. A. (2009). Supporting student veterans in transition. In R.
Ackerman & D. DiRamio (Eds.) Creating a veteran-friendly campus: Strategies for
transition and success. New Directions for Student Services, no. 126, San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Rumann, C., & Hamrick, F. (2010). Student veterans in transition: Re-enrolling after war zone
deployments. Journal of Higher Education, 81(4), 431-458.
Rumann, C., Rivera, M., & Hernandez, I. (2011, Autumn/Fall). Student veterans and community
colleges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 155, 51-58.
Ryan, S. W., Carlstrom, A. H., Hughey, K. F., & Harris, B. S. (2011). From boots to books:
Applying Schlossberg’s model to transitioning American veterans. NACADA Journal,
31(1), 55–63.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 111
Sander, L. (2012, March 11). Out of uniform: At half a million and counting, veterans cash in on
Post 9/11 GI Bill. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from:
http://chronicle.com/article/At-Half-a-Million- and/131112/
Schiavone, V., & Gentry, D. (2014). Veteran-students in transition at a midwestern college. The
Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 62(1), 29-38.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1981). A model for analyzing human adaptation to transition. The
Counseling Psychologist, 9(2), 2–18.
Schlossberg, N. K. (2011). The challenge of change: The transition model and its applications.
Journal of Employment Counseling, 48, 159-162.
Schlossberg, N., Waters, E. B., & Goodman, J. (1995). Counseling adults in transition: Linking
practice with theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
Sewell, P. (2000). Mature Students in Part-time Higher Education – Perceptions of Skills.
Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(4), 304-313.
Simon, C. J., Negrusa, S., & Warner, J. (2010). Educational benefits and military service: An
analysis of enlistment, reenlistment, and veterans’ benefit usage 1991-2005. Economic
Inquiry, 48(4), 1008-1030.
Solomon, L. C., & Gordon, J. J. (1981). The characteristics and needs of adults in postsecondary
education. Lexington, MA: Heath.
Steele, J.L., Salcedo, N., and Coley, J. (2010). Military Veterans’ Experiences Using the Post-
9/11 GI Bill and Pursuing Postsecondary Education. Washington, DC: American
Council on Education and RAND Corporation.
Strickley, V.L. (2009). Veterans on campus. Little Falls, NJ: Paperclip Communications.
Stone, M. (2008, November 13). We’re calling out to veterans. Kennebec Journal, Augusta, ME.
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 112
St. John, A. (2011, February 9). Veterans struggle with TBI. KPBS. Retrieved from:
http://www.kpbs.org/ news/2011/feb/09/veterans-struggle-with-tbi/
Student Veterans of America (SVA). (2012). Combat to college: A guide for the transitioning
student veterans. Retrieved from www.studentveterans.org
Summerlot, J., Green, S., & Parker, D. (2009). Student veterans organizations. New Directions
for Student Services, 126, 71–79.
Teachman, J. (2005). Military service in the Vietnam era and educational attainment. Sociology
of Education, 78, 50–68.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of Educational Research, 45, 89-125.
Tinto, V. (2002, June). Promoting student retention: lessons learned from the United States.
Paper presented at the 11th Annual Conference of the European Access Network, Prato,
Italy.
United States Army. (2011). Education Division, U.S. Army Human Resources Center of
Excellence. Retrieved from http://www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/demographics.asp
United States Department of Veterans’ Affairs. (2004, October). The Montgomery GI Bill: Active
duty (VA Pamphlet 22-90-2, Rev). Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.
United States Department of Veterans Affairs. (2012). Upcoming Changes to the Post-9/11 GI-
Bill. Retrieved from http://www.gibill.va.gov/benefits/
post_911_gibill/Post911_changes.html.
United States Department of Veterans Affairs. (2013). National Survey of Veterans (NSV) final
report. Retrieved from http://www.benefits.va.gov/gibill/
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 113
United States Army. (2012). 2012 demographics: profiles of the military community. Office of
the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Military Community and Family Policy),
under contract with ICF International. Retrieved from http://www.icfi.com/workforce.
Vacchi, D. T. (2012). Considering student veterans on the twenty-first century college campus.
About Campus, 17(2), 15-21.
Vance, M., & Miller, W. (2009). Serving wounded warriors: Current practices in postsecondary
education. Journal of postsecondary education and disability, 22(1), 18-35.
Van Solinge, H., & Henkens, K. (2007). Adjustment to and satisfaction with retirement: Two of
a kind? Psychology and Aging, Vol 23(2), 422-434.
Warner, J., & Pleeter, S. (2001). The Personal discount rate: evidence from military downsizing
programs. The American Economic Review, March 2001, 33-53
White, J. (2004). Recruiting bonus, retention onus: The GI Bill. Military Review, 84(4), 83-85.
Wilson, J. D. (2013). The Post 9/11 veteran and adjustment to higher education (Doctoral
dissertation). University of Oklahoma. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11244/10406
Wilson, K. B., Smith, N. L., Lee, A. L. & Stevenson, M. A. (2014). When the army post is the
campus: understanding the social and academic integration of soldiers attending college.
Journal of College Student Development, 54(6), 628–642.
Zarecky, A. (2014). How strengths-focussed coaching can help military personnel in their
transition to ‘Civvy Street.’ International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and
Mentoring, 8, 54-66
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 114
Appendix
Student Veteran Transition Survey
Student-Veteran Transition Survey
Question 1 – Choose One Answer
Branch of Military Service:
Army Navy Air Force Marines Coast Guard
Question 2 -
Rank/Grade:
E1-E4 E5-E6 E7-E9 O1-O3 O4-O6
Question 3 -
Gender:
Male Female
Question 4 – Choose One Answer
Military Status:
Active Duty Reserve National Guard Veteran
Question 5 – Choose One Answer
How long ago did you first enroll in college? ___________________
Question 6 – Yes/No
Did you always plan to go to college?
No
Yes
Question 7 – Open Ended
If not, please describe what led to you to enroll in college.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Questions 8 – 12 (Rating Scale)
Since enrolling in college, how has it been to (mark one numerical answer for each question)
Very Difficult Somewhat Difficult Somewhat Easy Easy
1 2 3 4
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 115
Question 8 -
- Understand what your professors expect from you academically:
Very Difficult Somewhat Difficult Somewhat Easy Easy
1 2 3 4
Question 9 -
- Develop effective study skills:
Very Difficult Somewhat Difficult Somewhat Easy Easy
1 2 3 4
Question 10 -
- Adjust to the academic demands of college:
Very Difficult Somewhat Difficult Somewhat Easy Easy
1 2 3 4
Question 11 -
- Manage your time effectively:
Very Difficult Somewhat Difficult Somewhat Easy Easy
1 2 3 4
Question 12 -
- Develop friendships with other students:
Very Difficult Somewhat Difficult Somewhat Easy Easy
1 2 3 4
Question 13 – Open Ended
Describe your first day class as an enrolled college student. Be as detailed as possible. What
were you expecting? What did you think of other students in the class? What did you think of
the material covered on that first day?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 116
Question 14 – Rating Scale
I balance my role as a student with the rest of the responsibilities in my life.
Disagree Undecided Agree
1 2 3
Question 15 – 25 (Rating Scale)
Rate yourself on each of the following traits as compared with students at your enrolled college
(Mark one numerical answer for each item).
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 15
Academic Ability:
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 16
Competitiveness: _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 17
Drive to Achieve: _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 18
Emotional Health:
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 117
Question 10
Leadership Ability: _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 20
Physical Health: _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 21
Risk-Taking: _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 22
Self Confidence (Intellectual): _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 23
Self Confidence (Social): _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 24
Spirituality: _______
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 118
Question 25
Understanding of Other:
Lowest 10% Below Average Average Above Average Top 10%
0 1 2 3 4
Question 26 – Open Ended
Looking back at your first semester of college, is there anything that you would do differently in
order to be prepared for college? Please be as detailed as possible.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Question 27–33 (Rating Scale)
Since enrolling in college, how have your relationships with the following people changed (Mark
one numerical answer for each item)?
Question 27 -
Spouse, Partner, Girlfriend, Boyfriend, Significant Other:
Not At All Very Little Somewhat To A Great Extent N/A
0 1 2 3 4
Question 28 –
Children:
Not At All Very Little Somewhat To A Great Extent N/A
0 1 2 3 4
Question 29 -
Parents:
Not At All Very Little Somewhat To A Great Extent N/A
0 1 2 3 4
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 119
Question 30 -
Siblings:
Not At All Very Little Somewhat To A Great Extent N/A
0 1 2 3 4
Question 31 -
Friends:
Not At All Very Little Somewhat To A Great Extent N/A
0 1 2 3 4
Question 32 -
Boss:
Not At All Very Little Somewhat To A Great Extent N/A
0 1 2 3 4
Question 33 -
Colleagues:
Not At All Very Little Somewhat To A Great Extent N/A
0 1 2 3 4
Question 34 – Open Ended
How is your life different today than it was before enrolling in college? Hoe you changed
academically, personally, emotionally? Have your expectations for the future changed?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Question 35 – Choice
Does your future goal include?
Associate Degree No Yes
Bachelor Degree No Yes
Master Degree No Yes
Doctorate (Ph.D, Ed.D) No Yes
Professional Doctorate (M.D., D.D.S, J.D.) No Yes
Begin a career (No Degree) No Yes
Re-Enlist No Yes
STUDENT-VETERANS’ TRANSITION TO HIGHER EDUCATION 120
Question 36 – Yes/No
Which of the following resources have you used since enrollment?
Financial Aid Office No Yes
Counseling Center No Yes
Academic Support Center No Yes
Question 37 – Yes /No
Have you helped fellow students navigate college policies, procedures or offices? If yes, briefly
describe how.
No
Yes
Additional Comments
______________________________________________________________________________
Question 38 – Open Ended
Is there any information that you would like to include in the study regarding the understanding
of student-veteran transition to college?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The United States consistently drew down forces and reduced military spending following large-scale commitments in time of major conflicts (Warner & Pleeter, 2001). Previous draw down periods shared the common thread of veterans’ physical and emotional trauma, homelessness, unemployment and educational needs as they reintegrate to civilian society. Pursuant to the American Council on Education (2014), over five million post-9/11 GI Bill service members are expected to transition out of the military by 2020. Since the enactment of the Post-9/11 GI Bill in 2008, the Department of Veterans Affairs denotes Americans invested over $42 billion on educating many of these transitioning service members (Center for Education Attainment & Innovation, 2014). Increased enrollment and revenue possibilities mean senior leadership at higher education institutions see the recruitment of the student-veteran population as critical (Vacchi, 2012). The purpose of this study was to explore the transitional experiences of service members and veterans (student-veterans) enrolled at a four-year institution in the Pacific region using Schlossberg’s (1981) transition theory as a framework. This mixed-method study grounded in the transitional perspective of adult development allows for a broader examination of the challenges today’s student-veterans face. Results indicate student-veterans would benefit from peer-mentoring program, courses aimed at easing the transition, a cohort education mode. Institutions can better train staff, faculty, and administration on issues, particularly mental health issues, affecting the student-veteran.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Exploring the satisfaction, experiences, institutional support of student veterans in transition to higher education: a case study
PDF
Applying Schlossberg’s transition theory to the student veteran transfer experience at the University of Southern California: a qualitative case study
PDF
Development of higher education student affairs staff to assist U.S. military veteran college students
PDF
Chameleons and kungas: the perceptions and experiences of military veteran faculty members in their transitions to academic service
PDF
Applying Schlossberg's transition theory to students with learning disabilities in the transition from high school to college
PDF
Equity and access for veteran's students in the California community colleges
PDF
Serving those who have served: the role of university career services in student veteran degree completion
PDF
Veteran student success
PDF
Intent to transition: practicioner intentionality in supporting veteran transition in a graduate business program
PDF
The mentoring experience: a case study of a mentoring program for first-generation students transitioning to a postsecondary institution
PDF
Creating a community of practice: serving student veterans in higher education
PDF
Persistence of Asian and Pacific Island students on a special financial assistance program (I-WORK) in a small, private institution of higher education
PDF
Persistence interventions for Native Hawaiian students
PDF
Student engagement in online education: an evaluation study
PDF
Advisor impact on student veterans at a post-secondary institution: an evaluation study
PDF
Developing a student athlete mentoring program to improve college readiness at a rural Hawaii public high school
PDF
A case study of the academic and behavioral support provided to military-connected children in public schools
PDF
Walking away from the game: a phenomenological study on student-athletes career transition
PDF
Examining the implications of return on investment using the gap analysis framework on the executive master of business administration program at a four year research university
PDF
Decision-making and graduate school debt: a focus on master's degree students
Asset Metadata
Creator
Morales, Alberto, Jr.
(author)
Core Title
Schlossberg's transition theory: a framework for evaluating student-veterans’ transition to higher education institutions
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
10/18/2017
Defense Date
01/22/2016
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Military,OAI-PMH Harvest,Schlossberg,student-veterans,transition
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Keim, Robert G. (
committee chair
), Datta, Monique C. (
committee member
), Outlaw, Michael T. (
committee member
)
Creator Email
maraca44@yahoo.com,moralesa@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-231399
Unique identifier
UC11277412
Identifier
etd-MoralesAlb-4281.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-231399 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-MoralesAlb-4281.pdf
Dmrecord
231399
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Morales, Alberto, Jr.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
Schlossberg
student-veterans