support for implementing these ideas into the classroom.Incentives Extra credit in academic settings is a hot topic depending on what side of the institutionyou reside. For instructors, it can be hotly debated on the practical use for increasing learningwhile others will debate the grade inflation aspect [1, p. 27]. As for students, a much moreoptimistic view of the concept is more widely accepted since extra credit works in the benefit ofthose partaking. In the existing literature, there is no universal positive or negative opinion onextra credit in the classroom as the practice is mostly left up to the individual instructor. Whetherthe practice remains in a contested environment or not, the use of extra credit can have positiveimpacts in
), a review ofbranch specific websites (e.g. search for “Navy education benefits”) for education benefitsrevealed the most common and longstanding programs that are highlighted in this paper.History / BackgroundSince its inception in 2009, the Post-9/11 GI Bill has been a transformative investment of morethan $53 billion to support the post-secondary education of more than 1.4 million servicemembers, veterans, and their families [1]. Prior to World War 1, there was little to none in theprovision for veterans’ participation in higher education. It seems the only compensation was inthe form of pensions for some disabled veterans following the Revolutionary War. Thiscompensation continued into the next century through the Civil War [2]. However
US Department of Veteran Affairs estimates that over 1 million veterans and familymembers have used these benefits to attend college.Student veterans continue to face myths, stereotypes, and bias on campus and in employmentdespite their growing presence on college campuses and the value they contribute to theclassroom and their post-graduation employers. Myths about student veterans are persistentamong the public and while not intentionally malicious, can impact student veteran learningoutcomes and transition experiences [1].The research reported in this paper investigates stereotypes of student veterans by using acounter-balanced survey with two populations: student veterans and non-veteran student peers.Questions from this survey sought
their choice [1].In 1984, the program was revived as the “Montgomery G.I. Bill”, named after its primarysponsor, Mississippi Congressman Sonny Montgomery [2]. Unlike the original bill, active dutyservicemembers had to pay into the system during the first twelve months of service, received amaximum of $1564 per month for educational spending, and had a 10-year time limit afterseparation to use the benefits [3].In the summer of 2008, Congress approved a major expansion to veterans’ educational benefits.Known as the Post 9-11 G.I. Bill, these included the full cost of tuition of any public college intheir home state, a housing allowance, and a $1000-a-year stipend for books and materials. Thetime limit was extended to 15 years for veterans who
stereotypes and perceptions retained by faculty and staff. Questions from thissurvey sought the level of agreement or disagreement regarding several known veteranstereotypes. Preliminary results from mixed model logistic analyses indicate that these biases orperceptions are active in non-veteran faculty and staff populations.1. BackgroundResearch on the student veteran educational experiences typically adopts an impoverishmentapproach to understanding student veteran deficits and challenges in the classroom [1]. Whilethis research posture is not malicious— it is empirically easier to study the absence of particularstudent behaviors or skills than student veteran educational and experiential assets—the result isliterature that focuses on effective
results.Logistical regression was used to evaluate the impact of academic majors.The results show that the most highly correlated variable was the Physical Fitness score of eachCadet. The article discusses different possible reasons for this relationship. Results also showmoderate to weak relationships between academic performance and any event at Cadet SummerTraining. These findings suggest that evaluations outside of a classroom environment could bemore effective at predicting future real-world success.KeywordsJob Preparation, Army, ROTC, Order of Merit List, Linear Regression, Logistic Regression 1. Introduction An age-old question is how to prepare students most effectively for post-graduation life. Inmost circumstances, it is difficult to
thelearning of various topics and concepts introduced in a course. PLTL has been a successful peersupport intervention in traditional classroom environments in science, technology, engineeringand mathematical (STEM) education and is yet to be fully explored in an online asynchronouslearning environment [1] [2]. This National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsored work under theImproving Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE) program seeks to investigate theeffectiveness of PLTL in an online campus environment at Embry-Riddle AeronauticalUniversity Worldwide campus.Approximately 54% of the undergraduate population of the online campus are either militaryveterans or currently serving military personnel. As a result, a larger percentage of military andveteran
. Dinse 1 and Vahid Motevalli 2,3 Penn State HarrisburgAbstractAt Penn State Harrisburg, veterans and military personnel constitute between 3-6% of studentenrollment. About 26% of these students are enrolled in engineering majors and another 8% areenrolled in other STEM fields. To serve this population with intentionality and purpose, as wellas enhance student success, we find it essential to explore the social and academic gaps for ourstudents, and what types of programming could best address those needs. Past and currentsurveys of this student body have proven to be effective due to a higher than usual response rate.Questions assessed a range of topics, including recruitment pathways, experiences with a
duty members who face similar, and often times, different challenges than traditionalstudents. Student Veterans confront many misperceptions and stereotypes from faculty, staff,fellow students, often exacerbated by media. Some perceptions may paint the Student Veteranspositively, while some perceptions over-simplify them negatively.This paper is part of a larger study of faculty and staff (mis)perceptions towards StudentVeterans and various factors that can neutralize these misperceptions. Using a counter balanced,quantitative survey instrument across several institutions (TABLE 1), GZT was found to have aneutralizing effect on some of the perceptions, but also found to statistically reinforce others. Thesurvey questions compare the agreement
, EngineeringThriving. Engineering Thriving is defined as the process by which engineering programs facilitatethe environments for students to develop optimal functioning in engineering programs [1]. Thesignificance of this study lies in the need to identify physical indicators or biomarkers that correlatewith a student’s subjective psychological experience, and, if such indicators exist, to answer ourresearch question regarding the key indicators of thriving. Although survey tools have beendeveloped to assess thriving in undergraduate engineering students [2], physical indicators arenecessary for students who may be less likely to engage with survey tools. For this work-in-progress, we choose to focus on Veteran students, who are less connected to the student
, the challenge of creating effective assessments and evaluations.Additionally, there are concerns about the potential for microcredentials to create "badges" thatare not truly indicative of mastery or competence. Many researchers have already emphasized theimportance of technology in education and provided a theoretical foundation for the role oftechnology in the design of microcredentials in computer science. For example, Lamb and Beck[1](2017) highlighted the benefits and challenges of microcredentials and provided a foundationfor considering best practices in the design of microcredentials, especially for computer science.McGivney-Burelle et al. [2] provide a comprehensive review of the literature on microcredentialsin higher education. The
%) veterans. There are 251 undergraduate students:123 (4.72%) active duty, 128 (4.91%) veterans. It offers ABET-accredited B.S. degrees in civilengineering, electrical engineering, computer engineering, mechanical engineering, modelingand simulation engineering, and engineering technology (majors: civil engineering technology,electrical engineering technology, and mechanical engineering technology) with military andactive-duty representation in every major. See Table 1 for a breakdown of active duty andveteran students by class level and major for Spring 2023 as an example of military and veteranpresence within BCET. Student veterans/military students (SVMS) are a logical population toexamine when considering the critical STEM workforce and diversity
make military engineers at all ranks valuable candidates for humanitarian, peace, ordevelopment focused engineering programs.IntroductionCombat is not the only form of military engagement. In 2022, the Congressional ResearchService reported 471 deployments since 1798 with 11 formal declarations of war [1]. These factsconfirm that 98% of U.S military engagements are for operations other than war. The 460 otherengagements involved engaging military partners and allies through military training,peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, and disaster management or response. Theseexperiences give military engineers insight to the challenges that global communities face andthat are addressed through some type of construction project in a community. Some
summer of2022, several major airlines in the United States canceled a record number of scheduled flights orran delayed due to the same reason [1]. A unique approach adopted by the airlines to address thischallenge is to look for non-traditional sources such as retired military and veteran rotary wingpilots. This led to a growing shortage of helicopter pilots in the medical transport and offshore oilsupport industries [2]. This challenge also opens new opportunities and career pathways forveterans. Additionally, special training and experience requirements for certificated flightinstructors (CFIs) to be able to provide flight instruction in the Robinson R22 and R44 variantsmake it cost-prohibitive for most military helicopter instructors to
universitiesthat are a) known for being military-friendly schools and/or b) located in military-friendlycommunities, often in close proximity to U.S. military installations, that offer substantial socialsupport for veterans and servicemembers outside of school [1]. Little research exists thatexamines military student experiences in other contexts, such as 2- and 4- year public collegesand universities that may have limited supports (and support dollars) for military students, and/orare not located in or near military-friendly communities. Despite this dearth of research, there isboth a need and desire to increase awareness and support for military students at theseinstitutions.LiteratureResearch with military students who are engaged in undergraduate
Charlottethat is currently in its third year. Shaping Experiential Research for Veteran Education (SERVE)program is a partnership between the University of Tennessee (UTK) and the University ofNorth Carolina at Charlotte (UNCC) that provides US military veterans an opportunity to receiveundergraduate research experience in a science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fieldat a partner university. The University of Tennessee is also referred to as the lead university.The University of Tennessee is a large public land-grant research university which is also knownas the flagship campus of the system. The University of Tennessee has over 33,805 students,~4,000 of which are considered non-traditional or adult students [1]. As of Fall 2019
of leadership, project management, accountability, andsolutions-focused mental posture are a natural fit for the engineering field—a match that studentveterans can use to build a sense of ‘belonging’ as they transition.1. Background - Student VeteransStudent veterans are older, post-traditional students who pursue higher education [1-2]. Ohlandreports that economics plays a major role for non-traditional students, and especially for studentveterans. It is the primary factor to return to school, where to attend, and what degree program tostudy [3]. Institution preference is often affected by proximity to current location and to family,cost and reputation. Student veterans are motivated by career opportunities, self-improvementand personal
research advisors, andadministrators alike to help inform policy, student support, and best practices.Keywords: veterans, GI Bill, graduate students, diversity, exploratory factor analysis.IntroductionEnacted in the 1940s, the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act and its successors—commonlyreferred to as to the GI Bill—increased student veteran enrollments in college and contributed toincreased diversity, perspectives, programs on campus [1]. Since then, the succession of GI Billsenacted since 1944 has facilitated over one million veterans attending college [1] and contributedsubstantially to the development of the U.S. skilled technical workforce. Despite historicallyhigh military student enrollments in college today [1], student veterans and service
versus veteran students is intentionalto ensure the focus on students who happen to be veterans rather than on veterans who happen tobe students. However, the existing biases and perceptions by faculty and students to include theveterans themselves can affect the interaction with veterans within the classroom, and eventuallyhow prepared they are to enter the civil workforce (learning outcomes). As presented in recentpapers, the generalized perceptions can be either positive or negative without a desire to do sowith intent [1]. Informing faculty of these possible perceptions is critical based on the highnumbers of current and future student veterans due to the Post 9/11 GI Bill and the veterans’desire to pursue their educational goals once they
this foundational level can compromise the integrity of entire systems [1],potentially causing to catastrophic consequences, especially in critical applications such asmilitary and commercial cyberinfrastructure.Unlike software and network security, which have been extensively analyzed and deployed,hardware security is a relatively new field. Historically, there has been a flawed assumption thathardware is inherently secure and trustworthy, making it immune to cyber threats [2]. However,experts have increasingly highlighted vulnerabilities in hardware and embedded systems,pointing out significant risks posed by malicious actors exploiting complex and distributedsemiconductor supply chains. Consequently, this misconception has led to a critical
militarystudents in a plethora of ways. Other institutions have limited or no access to similar levels andvariety of resources for military students. Still others experience difficulties justifying fundingallocations to support military students, among competing priorities, considering their oftencomparatively low, and sometimes hidden, enrollment levels. For these latter types ofinstitutions, our prior work suggests that one viable strategy for supporting military studentsacross a range of higher education institutional contexts is to provide institutional-level andcollege-level (i.e., engineering college) programs that serve military students through theirintersectional identities as post-traditional students [1]. For the purposes of this study, we
aheterogeneous group comprising prior enlisted military veterans (i.e., those who have served inthe enlisted ranks of the U.S. military but no longer serve) and those who concurrently serve asenlisted service members such as in the Armed Forces Reserves or National Guard whileattending college [1]. Compared to their civilian counterparts, SVSM have a strong potential tobring intersectional diversity [2], along with matured technical skills and teamwork andleadership experience.While institutional support has been shown to positively influence student success andexperience [3], the efficacy of targeted support for SVSM in college has fluctuated due to a lackof standardized best practices within and across institutions [4]. Improving programs for SVSMin
members as they pursue higher education. With less than one percent of theU.S. population serving in the active duty military, even after twenty years of conflict, only about6% of the U.S. adults are veterans [1]. This marks a significant drop since the 1980s and is thelowest percentage since WW2; it can be challenging for civilians to understand a veteran’sexperience [2] and this lack of understanding often leads to negative perceptions.After twenty years as a nation at war, veterans face many challenges in reintegrating back intothe population. Many veterans choose to pursue higher education for a variety of reasons butoften face negative perceptions from faculty and staff who may not have any personal connectionto veterans. Perceptions and
(IUSE) program, seeks to investigate the effectiveness of peer-led team learning (PLTL) in an online campus environment at Embry-Riddle AeronauticalUniversity Worldwide campus. PLTL is an intervention where a fellow student who has alreadyachieved success in the course facilitates active learning sessions with a small group of students.The sessions are designed to reinforce and clarify student understanding of specific topics in thecourse [1] [2] [3]. In the traditional classroom environment, PLTL has been a successfulintervention in STEM education [4] [5]. The purpose of this research is to investigate theeffectiveness of PLTL in an asynchronous, online classroom environment.The student population of this online campus is primarily adult