Summerlot, J., Green, S., & Parker, D. (2009). Student Veterans Organizations.
New Directions for Student Services, (126), 71-79. doi:10.1002/ss.318
This article focuses on the effect that Student Veteran Organizations or SVO’s have on the veteran populations at universities. It details factors to be considered in this transition by campus administrators and faculty. Some of these factors include whether or not the campus climate is supportive, the number of student veterans’ organizations there are on campus, and how effective these communities may be. The authors, all of whom are veterans who have made the transition from military to civilian life, suggest that SVOs are an integral part of any campus life. They can help veterans navigate the bureaucratic pitfalls of the benefits process. They can also lobby on campus and at a local government level. According to the article, this advocacy helped to shape initiatives at college campuses across the country that allowed for ease of readmission after a long deployment. In addition, many SVOs also helped to set up vet specific payment plans. This allowed many veterans to continue their education without the worry of delayed benefit payments. Most importantly, SVOs both past and present provide a social outlet for those who are seeking an environment of common experience. This helps to stem the alienation that veterans can feel amongst fellow students.
Assessment: This article provided insight into the unique student experience felt by many veterans. Advocacy, for whichever cause, is an important ingredient in the whole of academia. This is particularly important for a group that may already feel disenfranchised by campus relations and the difficulty of dealing with the VA. As a drawback, the article often refers back to an SVO based out of the University of Kansas. This might lead the reader to believe that the overall success of these organizations is more limited than the authors would like to think. Furthermore, the article was written by student organizers which demonstrate a potential bias to uphold the effectiveness of these organizations. The article lacked definitive proof that this is a necessary measure to assist veterans transitioning back to student life.
If I derived anything from this article it was where to seek out my sample sources. I believe that campus advocates would be the best conduits for conducting a research survey, as they would be able to help me with response rates, and also to narrow my sample group. The article evoked the notion that student veterans are very interested in bettering the collective. It gives hope that research into their unique situation would be welcome. The article reinforced the notion that approaching a whole community for research is simpler than dealing with individuals.
Showing posts with label Veterans Students. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Veterans Students. Show all posts
Monday, February 14, 2011
Student Veterans in Transition
Rumann, C. B., & Hamrick, F. A. (2010). Student Veterans in Transition: Re-enrolling after War Zone Deployments. Journal of Higher Education, 81(4), 431-458. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
This article discussed a study conducted by the authors aimed at addressing the specific transitions made by National Guard and Reserve members of the military. Specifically, they focused on how these individuals defined their roles as soldiers and students. In order to understand these students’ experiences from their unique perspectives, the researchers chose a qualitative, phenomenological research design using Schlossberg’s theory of transition to guide their theoretical framework. They interviewed respondents from one large university for their method of data collection. They sampled students who met the criteria by having withdrawn and re-entered school. In total they interviewed six individuals over the course of nine months.
In their findings it was determined that most all of the respondents reported basic administrative concerns. According to Rumann, “Virtually all respondents reported practical transition concerns, most of which related to university infrastructure or policies that complicated re-enrollment. According to respondents, minor annoyances (e.g., closed e-mail accounts, temporary loss of technology and facilities access) could be readily addressed; more serious problems (e.g., lapses in student insurance, cancellation of financial aid, or being off-sequence for infrequently offered courses) required more time and, in some cases, intervention by others on their behalf ”(Rumann, 2010). Furthermore, the experience of combat affected many of the respondent’s temperament and stress levels. Universally, all of the respondents reported at least mild aspects of Combat Stress Disorder.
Assessment: Although this study was very interesting, in-depth, and related to my topic of interest, it has so narrow a pool of participants that applying it to other types of research would not be advisable. Along these lines, the research has several limitations. Not all branches of service were represented, nor were any of the respondents diagnosed with physical disabilities or PTSD. The emphasis was placed on in-depth analysis of only a few select veterans. The article gave me a better understanding of how to approach a research project. As enviable as their ability to conduct a longitudinal study is, it is not practical for a grad student with limited resources.
This article discussed a study conducted by the authors aimed at addressing the specific transitions made by National Guard and Reserve members of the military. Specifically, they focused on how these individuals defined their roles as soldiers and students. In order to understand these students’ experiences from their unique perspectives, the researchers chose a qualitative, phenomenological research design using Schlossberg’s theory of transition to guide their theoretical framework. They interviewed respondents from one large university for their method of data collection. They sampled students who met the criteria by having withdrawn and re-entered school. In total they interviewed six individuals over the course of nine months.
In their findings it was determined that most all of the respondents reported basic administrative concerns. According to Rumann, “Virtually all respondents reported practical transition concerns, most of which related to university infrastructure or policies that complicated re-enrollment. According to respondents, minor annoyances (e.g., closed e-mail accounts, temporary loss of technology and facilities access) could be readily addressed; more serious problems (e.g., lapses in student insurance, cancellation of financial aid, or being off-sequence for infrequently offered courses) required more time and, in some cases, intervention by others on their behalf ”(Rumann, 2010). Furthermore, the experience of combat affected many of the respondent’s temperament and stress levels. Universally, all of the respondents reported at least mild aspects of Combat Stress Disorder.
Assessment: Although this study was very interesting, in-depth, and related to my topic of interest, it has so narrow a pool of participants that applying it to other types of research would not be advisable. Along these lines, the research has several limitations. Not all branches of service were represented, nor were any of the respondents diagnosed with physical disabilities or PTSD. The emphasis was placed on in-depth analysis of only a few select veterans. The article gave me a better understanding of how to approach a research project. As enviable as their ability to conduct a longitudinal study is, it is not practical for a grad student with limited resources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)