PLC_CCRatesVets
- 1. Veterans and Course Completion Rates Submitted by Faith Bell Pamela Monroe Boubacar Vilane Susan Walker Action Research Project Grantham University Lenexa, Kansas December 8, 2015
- 2. 4 Table of Contents Abstract............................................................................................................................................5 Introduction......................................................................................................................................6 Background......................................................................................................................................6 Literature Review.............................................................................................................................8 Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................................................8 Example of VIP2TM in Practice...........................................................................................................9 Veterans Transition to Education Challenges..................................................................................10 Student Success Strategies............................................................................................................11 Operational Definitions...................................................................................................................12 Data Collection...............................................................................................................................15 Data Analysis..................................................................................................................................15 School ofBusiness....................................................................................................................15 School of Engineering & Computer Science ............................................................................16 School of Arts & Sciences ........................................................................................................16 School of Nursing & Allied Health...........................................................................................16 Findings..........................................................................................................................................17 Limitations and Recommendations.................................................................................................18 Limitations ...................................................................................................................................18 Recommendations........................................................................................................................18 Conclusions.....................................................................................................................................19 References .......................................................................................................................................21
- 3. 5 Abstract Veterans represents a large number of students returning to college, whether it is online or traditional settings. Veterans are considered non-traditional students secondary to many factors such as working a full time job and having families to support. They are also faced with unique challenges that may affect their ability to complete courses. With that in mind, it is important to analyze course completion rates here at Grantham University. This study reviewed archives data for foundations courses completed at Grantham University during the first and second quarters of 2015. The completion rates among veterans and nonveterans were analyzed. The results shows that a difference in foundation course completion rates between both categories. Keywords: foundation courses, completion rates, graduation rates, veteran’s resources, student success, military friendly, veterans, non-veterans, and non-traditional students.
- 4. 6 Introduction The new reality of higher education contains a fundamental shift in student demographics, which consist of traditional and nontraditional students. According to the Center of Posts and Economic Success (2011), a traditional college student is considered a recent high- school graduate who enrolls full-time and has limited work and family obligations. According to Pelletier (2010), The National Center for Education Statistics defines nontraditional students as meeting one of seven characteristics: delayed enrollment into postsecondary education; attends college part-time; works full time; is financially independent for financial aid purposes; has dependents other than a spouse; is a single parent; or does not have a high school diploma(to Pelletier 2010). Background College is an important asset for many individuals, whether it is on a traditional campus or online environment, because it opens doors and provides many advantages and opportunities such as being financially stable and also a competitive “entity” in the job market. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2011), between 2002 and 2012, enrollment in postsecondary institutions increased 24%, from 16.6 million to 20.6 million. Much of the growth during this time period was in full-time enrollments; the number of full-time students rose 28%, while the number of part-time students rose 19%. Moreover, between 2002 and 2012, the number of 18- to 24-year-olds increased from 28.5 million to 31.4 million, an increase of ten percent, and the percentage of 18- to 24-year-olds enrolled in college rose from 37% in 2002 to 41% in 2012. In addition to enrollment in accredited 2-year colleges, 4-year colleges, and
- 5. 7 universities, about 504,000 students attended non-degree-granting, Title IV eligible, postsecondary institutions in fall 2012 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2011.). There are challenges that veterans are faced with includes moving from a more structure environment to the “openness of a college campus”, physical and mental disabilities that they are faced with in regards to traditional or online education (Brown & Gross, 2011). Since Grantham University has a large number of nontraditional students that are veterans, it is important to focus on course completion rate of veterans and nonveterans. Grantham University serve a large number of nontraditional students that are veterans that totaled 11,336 students between 2011-2012 (MilitaryTimes, 2012). Veterans are men and women who have served even for a short time in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or the Coast Guard, or who served in the U.S. Merchant Marine during World War II. People who served in the National Guard or Reserves are also classified as veterans only if they were ever called or ordered to active duty, not counting the 4-6 months for initial training or yearly summer camps (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). For the purpose of this study, veterans is defined as students using VA funding. All other students using other sources of funding will be considered as non-veterans. It is possible during this study that the data may not capture the veterans that are not using VA funding. While it is possible for 17 year olds to be veterans of the Armed Forces, ACS data products are restricted to the population 18 years and older ( United States Census Bureau, 2013). In its 2008 edition, KMI Media Group/Military Advanced Education ranked the Grantham’s undergraduate program 10th out of 20 military-friendly universities and in 2010, the KMI Media Group listed Grantham in its Guide to Military-Friendly Colleges and Universities for the fourth year in a row (Higher Ed Assessment, 2009).
- 6. 8 Nonveterans would consist of individuals that are not served in the US armed forces. When veterans return from military service, one important concept is to return to civilian life and to obtain a college education that are met with challenges that may hinder them from obtaining a postsecondary degree. We anticipate that veterans would have a higher completion rate than non- veterans based on their background, discipline, and behaviors. The purpose of this study was to investigate what level a relationship exists between veterans and non-veterans students when it comes to college completion rates. The research question addressed in this study is: what is the correlation between veterans and completion rates? Literature Review The purpose of this study is to compare course completion rates among veterans and non- veterans students who have taken foundation courses with the intent to provide the institution with valuable insight to aid in increasing the student success and learning experience. Examination of the literature review consisted of the foundational theoretical framework, exploring challenges that veterans face when transitioning to college enrollment and strategies focused on student success. Theoretical Framework Knowles’ (1970) concept of andragogy provides the basis for understanding the unique ways that adults learn (Knowles, 1970). Knowles first termed andragogy as the “art and science of helping adults learn” (Knowles, 1970). The basis of this concept is to move the learner from dependency to a more self-directed learning that encompasses the learner to draw upon accumulated past experiences to enhance their learning experience (Knowles, 1970). Mezirow (1997) extends Knowles’ andragogy theories by offering a theory on adult learning that is based
- 7. 9 on the way individuals think about themselves and their world around them, a concept that involves a shift of consciousness (Mezirow, 1997). Hence, a need for institutions to change their approach to meet the needs of the learning adult is critical (Laher, 2007). Adding to the literature on adult online learning, Hayek (2011) found a relationship between satisfaction among military students and retaining the students in their respective courses. Hayek’s (2011) VIP2TM framework provided the basis for institutions to increase satisfaction and retention among the military student population which supports Laher’s (2007) observation regarding the importance of changing approaches to meet the needs of special populations. Grantham University adapted the VIP2TM from an institutional standpoint, where being Visible, Immediate, Proactive, and Personal are the critical components that aid Grantham in serving those who serve. Hayek’s VIP2TM framework is the foundation for this study to help the authors explore the challenges student veterans face while they transition to obtaining their education and strategies implemented to aid student veterans to be successful in their educational experience including completing their courses. Example of VIP2TM in Practice The VIP2TM philosophy is embedded in Grantham University’s teaching philosophy and enforces the need for instruction approaches that create a deeper learning experience for the students. Creating a deeper learning experience for Grantham students, is fourfold. First, VIP2TM instructors reinforce relevance and practical application to theories being learned. Next, they show flexibility and work with the student regarding milestones and deadlines. Moreover, instructors follow the grading expectations closely and provide constructive feedback that allows the learners to improve. All of these approaches align well with the VIP2TM philosophy yet, these are the practices of that one department has implemented. Little is known if these VIP2TM
- 8. 10 practices alone help student veterans complete their courses which drives further exploration of the study’s research question. Moreover, further examination of existing literature in terms of the challenges veterans face when transitioning into education, and exploring recommended strategies to serve this specific population of students will allow the authors of this study to gain a deeper understanding of the student veterans’ success in terms of completing courses. Veterans Transition to Education Challenges Veterans are considered nontraditional students because of many factors. These factors includes they are older; they usually have financial benefits (for example the GI Bill); they have college credits that they have obtained while in the military; and many have families (O’Herrin, 2011). When veterans return from military service, one important concept is to return to civilian life and to obtain a college education. The National Conference of State Legislature (NCSL, 2014) recorded that roughly 85% of veterans and active duty service members who are enrolled in undergraduate programs are 24 years of age or older. The federal law has encouraged thousands of veterans to pursue higher education, and more are enrolled in postsecondary education than ever before. This focus creates many challenges that could hinder the veteran from obtaining a postsecondary degree (NCSL, 2014). Brown and Gross (2011) found that some of the challenges that exists when veterans transition include moving from a structured environment to non-structured college campus. In addition physical and mental disabilities also pose to be challenges as well (Brown & Gross, 2011). Veterans also face difficulty in obtaining credit for military training and experiences (Vaachi, 2012), and also may have concerns about targeted recruiting by for-profit institutions, or state residency requirements. Moreover, veterans may not be familiar with programs offered by the institution and available or could be a few years removed from formal education (Brown & Gross, 2011). They may face challenges and
- 9. 11 disruptions. Surprisingly, many students are not using their VA or DOD funding to pay for school, because they are unaware of these benefits or have exhausted them (Callahan & Jaret, 2014). In his study, Vacchi (2012) found five challenges for veterans to have to overcome when transitioning to the college experience, including issues with processing the GI bill, academic advising practices and faculty practices (Vacchi, 2012). Student Success Strategies When student veteran’s needs are addressed, institutions are coined as being “Military Friendly” which leverages processes that benefits the student (Brown & Gross, 2013). Moreover, management’s role to help increase student success is centered on designing processes and best practices that, when implemented, are beneficial to students (Brown & Gross, 2013). The National Center for Education Statistics does not recognize the student veteran population, which creates the challenge for institutions to know when a student is a veteran Vacchi (2012). Students within this population must identify themselves as a veteran which often times does not occur during the enrollment process (Vacchi, 2012). Therefore, institutions may not understand when a student veteran requires additional help or assistance during their learning experience (Vacchi, 2012). Best practices to serve the student consists of student advisors understanding the true needs of the veteran and faculty interaction increases the likelihood that the student veteran is successful (O’Herrin, 2011; Vacchi, 2012). In contrast, O’Herrin (2011) recommended a collaboration with other community organizations to provide comprehensive services for student veterans and suggested that veterans receive a thorough introduction to the university through an orientation program developed specifically for student veterans. Additionally, institutions that create veteran specific communities on campus improves
- 10. 12 the campus climate by establishing student veterans groups and providing education to faculty and staff about the veteran specific resources (O’Herrin, 2011). In their study, Bean & Eaton (2002) found that retaining student veterans involve creating an environment where the student has a positive experience, they feel a part of the institution, and they have the ability to do well in their classes which increases the likelihood that they will have a desire to complete their program (Bean & Eaton, 2002). This idea equates to how Grantham University well works to retain students and depicts the VIP2TM philosophy in its core. One approach mentioned by Bean and Eaton (2002) is to mentor students as a way to enhance and guide their success. The authors also discussed the need for institutions to facilitate the student’s psychological growth which goes beyond students learning skills. They suggested that staff development programs that focus on the facilitation of psychological growth could significantly have an impact on students completing courses and their degree program (Bean & Eaton, 2002). Operational Definitions Traditional students: The “traditional” undergraduate—characterized here as one who earns a high school diploma, enrolls full time immediately after finishing high school, depends on parents for financial support, and either does not work during the school year or works part time( NCES,2003). Nontraditional students: is defined as meeting one of seven characteristics: delayed enrollment into postsecondary education; attends college part-time; works full time; is financially independent for financial aid purposes; has dependents other than a spouse; is a single parent; or does not have a high school diploma (Pelletier, 2011).
- 11. 13 Veterans: A veteran is a former member of the Armed Forces of the United States (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard) who served on active duty and was discharged under conditions, which were other than dishonorable. Veterans are men and women who have served (even for a short time), but are not currently serving, on active duty in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or the Coast Guard, or who served in the U.S. Merchant Marine during World War II. People who served in the National Guard or Reserves are classified as veterans only if they were ever called or ordered to active duty, not counting the 4-6 months for initial training or yearly summer camps (U.S Census, 2013). Nonveterans: are men and women who have never served on active duty in the United States military (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2014) Military friendly: the term means that veterans are welcome, while the school has Veterans Administration-approved programs for using the G.I. Bill and also by the federal Department of Defense related to tuition assistance. (Grantham, 2015). Course completion rate: The completion rates represent the percent of students who completed courses (i.e., earned credit) out of the total number of students who attempted courses. A (90-100) Excellent A = 4.0 B (80 - 89) Above Average B = 3.0 C (70-79) Average C = 2.0 D (60 - 69) Below Average D = 1.0 F (below 60) Failure F = 0.0 I Incomplete Not computed (Grantham, 2015). Foundation course: a general course of study that introduces students to a subject, and is taught in the first year at Grantham University. (Grantham, 2015). Deployment: refers to activities required to move military personnel and materials from a home installation to a specified destination (MilitaryTimes, 2012). A transition all service members take part in sometime in their military career.
- 12. 14 Learning communities: Learning communities begin with a block scheduling that enables students to take courses together. An organizing theme typically links courses (Engstrom & Tinto, 2008; Wilson-Ahlstrom & Yohalem, 2011).
- 13. 15 Data Collection The archival reports were generated through the Grantham University dean’s dashboards. The reports were accessed via Blackboard Learning Management System. The data were collected during the first two quarters of 2015 for all foundations courses offered at Grantham University. All foundations courses were reviewed across all schools within the university. Data Analysis The data provided for this research were collected from Blackboard. Reports were run for the first quarter of 2015 for all foundations courses and exported with excel application. The descriptive statistics used to analyze the research variables include averages and graphic representations. School of Business. Table 1 is a descriptive statistics comparative analysis between all funding students and VA funding students. The course number along with the sample size were utilized to compute the successful completion rate. The average completion rate during this period for these four business foundations courses is 66.70% for all funding students versus 72.76% for identified VA students. Table 1 School of Business - All Funding Sources versus VA Funding Course Successful Completion Rate - All Funding Active All Funding Students Successful Completion Rate – VA Funding Active VA Students BA150 54.39% 763 57.64% 85 BA101 72.86% 597 77.11% 118 BA250 80.35% 392 83.52% 85 BA181 59.20% 277 72.72% 33 Avg Completion Rate 66.70% 72.76%
- 14. 16 School of Engineering & Computer Science. Table 2 is a descriptive statistics comparative analysis between all funding students and VA funding students. The course number along with the sample size were utilized to compute the successful completion rate. The average completion rate during this period for these Engineering & Computer Sciences foundations courses is 56.94% for all funding students versus 72.07% for identified VA students. Table 2 School of Engineering and Computer Science - All Funding SourcesversusVA Funding Course Successful Completion Rate - All Funding Active All Funding Students Successful Completion Rate – VA Funding Active VA Students CS105/CS105 56.94% 288 72.07% 265 School of Arts & Sciences. Table 3 is a descriptive statistics comparative analysis between all funding students and VA funding students. The course number along with the sample size were utilized to compute the successful completion rate. The average completion rate during this period for these Arts and Sciences foundations courses is 66.63% for all funding students versus 77.19% for identified VA students. Table 3 School of Arts and Science - All Funding Sourcesversus VA Funding Course Successful Completion Rate - All Funding Active All Funding Students Successful Completion Rate – VA Funding Active VA Students GP210 65.85% 1473 75.21% 230 HU260 64.43% 1510 79.52% 254 GS102 70.12% 1225 73.39% 218 EN101 61.95% 1046 75.31% 158 MA105 77.86% 768 83.55% 152 CO101 59.54 917 76.15% 151 Avg Completion Rate 66.63% 77.19% School of Nursing & Allied Health. Table 2 is a descriptive statistics comparative analysis between all funding students and VA funding students. The course number along with
- 15. 17 the sample size were utilized to compute the successful completion rate. The average completion rate during this period for these Allied Health and Nursing foundations courses is 56.75% for all funding students versus 83.33% for identified VA students. Table 4 School of Allied Health/Nursing - All Funding Sources versus VA Funding Course Successful Completion Rate - All Funding Active All Funding Students Successful Completion Rate – VA Funding Active VA Students AH111 56.35% 1473 66.66% 15 AH112 57.14% 1510 100.00% 9 Avg Completion Rate 56.75% 83.33% Findings The study’s sample population consisted of students enroll to all foundations courses at Grantham University during the first quarter of 2015. The date was collected via Blackboard. The independent variable was the students and the dependent variable was the completion rate. Variable. The purpose of this study was to investigate what level a relationship exists between veterans and non-veterans students when it comes to college completion rates. The first research question addressed was R1: What is the correlation between veterans and completion rates? The corresponding hypothesis tested was H1: There is a correlation between being a veteran and completion rates H0: There is no correlation between being a veteran and completion rates With respect to this research question and corresponding hypothesis, the results shows that the veterans have a higher completion rates than non-veteran students across all colleges at Grantham University on foundations courses. Therefore, the null hypothesis was refuted.
- 16. 18 Surprisingly, we found that the number of active students is considerably lower compared to the non-veteran students across all schools at Grantham University. For example, the school of nursing and allied heath recorded a 100% completion rates for AH112 for the first and second quarters of 2015. This could be attributed to the sample size. This is supported by Vacchi’s (2012) findings that universities rely on veterans to self-report their status. Limitations and Recommendations Limitations. One of the limitations of this study is that the funding sources were the only criteria to identify the veteran’s population. Some veterans that may not use this specific funding are not captured on this research. Another limitation is that there are other behavioral variables that could impact the student’s success. The data did not capture the instructor’s usage of the VIP2 Model in these foundations courses which could impact these findings. It is important to mention that BA181 was revised and implemented after the second quarter of 2015 which could possible alter the results associated with this specific course. The study only utilized archival data which limit the data collection process. Another limitation of this study would be that the research focused on the entire pool of instructors at Grantham University and did not categorize full time versus adjunct status. The data was collected only for Grantham University which could limit the generalization of the results of the study. Last, there is the limited scholar research available pertaining to course competition. Recommendations. One of the recommendation for further research is to focus on the graduation rate instead the course completion rate. The length of the data collection period could also be extended. Other types of instruments could have been utilized to better capture the essence of student’s success. Instruments such as questionnaires or pre and post questionnaires in the foundations
- 17. 19 courses to better gauge their goals, needs and characteristics. It would be interesting to see further researches comparing course completion rates between adjuncts and full-time faculty instructors. To reach a complete alignment with the US Department of Education and Veterans Affairs, would be to create a designated space (BlackBoard for example) for GU Veteran’s Resources Center. Conclusions Serving those who serve has always been Grantham University’s philosophy. As of 2012, Grantham University served over 11,000 veterans students (MilitaryTimes, 2012). The organization, as the whole, is dedicated to the success of the veteran population. Several initiatives were put in place in order to support such beliefs and ideas. The organization has received several accolades throughout the years as one of the most military friendliest school in the country. Grantham University has received the GI jobs recognition for the past seven years consecutively. The organization also holds the best practices on hiring vets and partnered with the American Federation of Government employees to offer scholarship to the marines’ veterans. With all the recognitions, it is important to investigate the veterans and their course completion rates. The Obama Administration implement strategies to help ensure that veterans make a successful transition to higher education. More than 250 schools across the nation have already committed to the effort. The program, called “8 Keys to Success”, aims to help veterans obtain college degrees and other credentials required for competitive jobs in the workforce (Insight for Diversity, 2013). These strategies are aligned with the Grantham’s philosophy in general and the VIP2TM model in particular. With its large veteran population’s size, Grantham University could implement some strategies to improve veteran’ success. This could be achieved by having
- 18. 20 specific departments, courses, logistics, measures, surveys and resources what would ensure their overall experience in the classrooms and beyond.
- 19. 21 References Bean, J., & Eaton, S. B. (2002-2003). The psychology underlying successful retention practices. Journal of College Student Retention, 3(1), 73-89. Retrieved from http://www.cscsr.org/jcsr/index.php/jcsr Brown, P.A. & Gross, C. (2011). Serving those who have served- Managing veterans and military student best practices. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(1), 45-49. doi:10.1080/07377363.2011.544982 Callahan, C, & Jarrat, D. (2014). Helping student service members and veterans succeed. Change, 46(2), 36-41. Retrieved from http://www.changemag.org/ Engstrom,C.,& Tinto,V.(2008). Learningbettertogether:The impactof learningcommunitiesonthe persistence of low-income students.OpportunityMatters,1,5-21. Grantham University (2015) Military Programs. Retrieved from http://www.grantham.edu/online-college-tuition/military-programs/ Grantham University (2015).Grantham University Catalog. Retrieved from http://www.grantham.edu/m/catalog.pdf Hayek, C. T. (2011). A nonexperimental study examining online military learner satisfaction and retention. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database. (UMI No, 3475761). Higher Ed Assessment (2009). Top Military-Friendly Colleges & Universities. Retrieved from http://higheredassessment.blogspot.com/2009/01/top-military-friendly-colleges.html
- 20. 22 Insight for Diversity (2013). Helping veterans succeed on campus. ‘Eight keys to success’. Source: U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Retrieved from www.insightfordiversity.com Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of adult education (Vol. 41). New York, NY: Association Press Laher, S. (2007). Reflections on teaching undergraduate psychology to part-time adult students. South African Journal of Psychology, 37, 383-388. doi:10.1177/008124630703700215 Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 5-12. doi:10.1002/ace.7401 MilitaryTimes (2012). Best for vets. Retrieved from http://bestforvets.militarytimes.com/2015/colleges/online-nontraditional/ National Conference of State Legislatures (2014). State and Community Roles in Supporting College Completion for Veterans. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/veterans-and-college.aspx#_edn4 National Center for Education Statistics (2011.). Fast facts. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372 O’Herrin, E.(2011). Enhancing veteran success in higher education. Peer Review 13(1), 15-18. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/publications
- 21. 23 Vacchi, D. T. (2012). Considering student veterans on the twenty-first-century college campus. About Campus, 17(2), 15-21. doi:10.1002/abc.21075 Wilson-Ahlstrom, A., & Yohalem, N. (2011). Changing the odds for students: Spotlight on Kingsborough College. Ready by 21, Credentialed by 26, 3, 1-7. U.S. Census Bureau (2013). Definitions and Concepts. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/hhes/veterans/about/definitions.html