 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
Tapping the Military Market
Thursday, July 6, at 12 noon, U.S. Eastern time
College degrees are increasingly becoming a prerequisite for promotion in the military, which now spends nearly half a billion dollars a year in tuition assistance. As a result, colleges are rushing to add programs -- including online ones -- for service members and designing new pricing strategies to increase military enrollment.
In that rush to make money, critics say, some colleges may be using misleading, high-pressure tactics to sell programs of dubious quality. What changes should be made in setting up and selling military programs? Should colleges be providing more information upfront about their prices and the nature of their accreditation? And how can colleges meet the needs of servicemembers who may be shipped suddenly across the world?
» The Military Market (7/7/2006)
» Be All You Can Be -- Online (7/7/2006)
Thomas H. Beebe is director of military programs at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. He and several colleagues have recently proposed changes in how colleges market such programs.
Goldie Blumenstyk (Moderator):
Good Day All.. I'm Goldie Blumenstyk, a senior writer here and author of one of the two articles appearing this week in The Chronicle about colleges that serve the military. I'll be moderating this live chat with Thom Beebe, director of military programs at Southern Illinois University. We appreciate his being here and look forward to your questions.
Question from Goldie Blumenstyk:
Are there steps that the services, or perhaps the Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges consortium ( the group known as SOC ) could be taking to help ensure that service members are clearly informed about the accreditation of the college where they are taking course? After all, some may not realize that colleges that are regionally accredited, like state universities and many traditional colleges, might not readily accept credits earned at a college that is is accredited by one of the national organizations.
Thomas H. Beebe:
The goal of accreditation is to ensure that education programs provided by institutions meets acceptable standards of quality. These standards are determined by the respective accrediting agencies, not by the U.S. Secretary of Education.
The key in your question is really, "might not readily accept.." Each institution makes their decision not based on accreditation but rather based on quality standards. However, just because my quality standards and your definition of quality standards may differ slightly, I have no legal right to declare your programs inferior. I can only counsel that I may not accept some of the transferred courses. This is done at all levels by bona fide institutions.
Question from Dr. Larry Schuetz, USCG, Education Services Officer:
(1) In my experiences as an employee with Navy College, Army Education Centers and now the Coast Guard I see no policies or procedures in place for selection of on-base colleges. Why?
(2) Why is there not one system for all VOL ED [Voluntary Education] in all services? Shouldn't there be a one-stop shopping service...that is...one counseling and administrative system...one Tuition Assistance form...one source of funding...FOR ALL SERVICES. A servicemember ought to be able to walk into any base from any branch and get the same voluntary educational services.
Thomas H. Beebe:
Regarding question one: That would be utopian for institutions. However, the way it is now, each ESO appears to determine needs based upon what I personally call a "less than adequate" needs assessment instrument and then decisions are made.
Question 2 assumes we might have only one chief of staff instead of the Joint Chiefs. As long as we have different education chiefs answering to different command generals/admirals, we will have different systems. The idea is magnificent! Just imagine, any soldier, sailor, airman, marine or coast having exactly the same benefit, the same portal, the same 100% funding up to $4500 dollars or $250.00 per credit hour, able to take more than 16 credit hours per year without "special permission", and to top it all off, always getting a cheerful and prompt response to every inquiry. WOW! Unfortunately, to quote Oscar Wilde, "I'm not young enough to be that smart." I really like the idea and pardon the sarcasm but I don't think I'll see it in my career.
Question from Steven Brown, Education Specialist, US Dept of Defense:
Is it a reasonable request to ask that educational institutions stand by the tenets of accreditation agencies and provide programs only when the quality is/or can be controlled and managed in order to meet the standards of normal course/program accreditation? Can penalties be tied to Federal Funds being withdrawn from the institution if they deliberately deceive our military personnel about the quality of their courses/program. We owe our troops at least the quality promised by an educational education.
Thomas H. Beebe:
It is an ABSOLUTE that quality MUST be expected from any educational institution offering a degree or certificate or even individual courses to our military personnel. On base institutions are reviewed, and have been reviewed, as part of the MIVER --that's an acronym for an accreditation-like process -- (and the old Air Force QES and other systems) regularly. Off base and distance learning institutions do not have to participate in the MIVER process. I have long asked in presentations at conferences, "Who is examining the quality of online courses?" The only way Federal monies can be withheld is if the institution loses its accreditation.
One of the difficulties we face is that there will always be those who are less than focused on the student and more focused on money. I receive at least 10 emails a week promising me degrees for my life experiences. If someone has not had appropriate counseling they may fall prey to this con and after spending several hundred dollars be the proud owner of a "degree" that they can hang on the wall.
Some of the other providers are even more dishonest and provide them "classes" requiring less than a third grade education to complete and then award them a degree after charging them the maximum $4500 a year for 4 years, having them unknowingly sign loan papers, and commit themselves financially to ruin. There are federal laws prohibiting such activities and they fall under the Department of Commerce. To date I have not really seen Commerce pay much attention to seeking out and prosecuting these sham institutions.
Question from Goldie Blumenstyk:
Actually, Thom, I'd like to follow up on that question. I think we all see that distance education is a great way for many service members to attend college. But, just as for the population at large, that format is not for everyone. Do we know anything about the proportion of service members who actually are able to complete their distance-education classes? What happens to them -- and to the tuition assistance provided -- if they don't finish?
Thomas H. Beebe:
No one seems to want to answer that question and with good reason. Let's use EArmyU as an example. Please---I am only using them as an example I am not implying these figures are in any way true. Let's say they enroll 1000 soldiers this semester. For a variety of reasons only 300 soldiers are able to complete their requirements for the courses. 700 do not. That means only 30% were successful. There is no way I would want to publically report figures like this and let anyone know I was having to collect TA back from 70% of the soldiers. Remember--I am only using EArmyU as an example, I could have said the same thing about the Navy's PACE program. I used the 0% figure because much of the literature estimates that distance learning (strictly another mode of delivery, not a panacea for all) is not for everyone.
Question from Daniel Hayes, Community College of the Air Force (CCAF):
Tom, CCAF is unique within the military higher education setting. We are an Air Force institution offering duty-related associate degrees to Air Force enlisted personnel. We produce approximately 17,000 AAS graduates each year (92K+ FTEs). We believe that our unique model promotes collaboration with civilian institutions since we do not offer General Education courses. GE courses are transferred into our program from civilian colleges and universities. We believe we offer a gateway into lifelong learning for our enlisted personnel who pursue and earn our degree and then move forward into baccalaureate programs.
My questions: 1) Do civilian colleges and universities generally view CCAF as a competitor or as a partner in recruiting and educating military students? 2) What is the perceived value of the AAS degree within the larger higher education community and does the AAS serve as a viable platform for the baccalaureate (e.g., BAS)?
Thomas H. Beebe:
Hi Dan--Hope you are doing well--long time no see. Institutions view the CCAF degree as a very valid degree contrary to what some of the old guard at SACS would like you to believe about it being a terminal degree. I have always found CCAF graduates to be well prepared to enter upper division courses and complete baccalaureate degrees. You are definitely a partner and I am unaware of many who would consider you to be a competitor. You offer AF members an opportunity that is unique among the services.
Question from Ken Brauchle, Boise State University:
Thom, I'd like to hear more about the recommendations your committee is making and how SOC or the Services can influenece ethical marketing and recruiting practices.
Thomas H. Beebe:
Hi Ken: We have met and drawn up standards of good practice to be followed by institutions who are members of SOC. Keep in mind that the SOC membership today is viewed highly and has almost become a prerequisite for institutions offering education services to military personnel. I apologize Ken but I think I would be remiss to disclose the details until the standards are voted upon and either approved or disapproved by the SOC Board later this year. I think the services need to do more training especially with younger members re the need to carefully review and even seek out legal help before signing any contract for educational services with an online school.
Question from Jim Sweizer, VP, Federal Programs, American Military University:
I agree some institutions engage in agressive marketing tactics that cast a shadow on institutions that try to conduct business in a legitimate manner on military installations. However, the installation Education Officer is empowered to curtail the activities of schools engaging in questionable practices. What other "enforcement" tactics do you propose which will curtail agressive marketing tactics?
Thomas H. Beebe:
Hi Jim: Agreed the ESO can do that but as you are probably aware, the ESO [Education Service Officer] may not even be involved until the servicemember has already committed themselves via an electronic signature to several thousands of dollars of debt. I believe if the SOC standards are approved they will help.
Question from Meredyth Leahy, Excelsior College:
It would seem that SOC has always served as a sort of gate keeper for military education. Do we know what standards or evaluation strategies SOC employs to determine if a college actually follows SOC guidelines once they are admitted to the various networks?
Thomas H. Beebe:
SOC does monitor institutions and does followup on any and all complaints they recieve from students. Most people would be surprised at the interaction SOC does have with students.
Question from Mike Lambert, DETC:
Tom, are there not sufficient rules on the books in the various states and the Federal Trade Commission and in accrediting agencies to handle any of the alleged consumer abuses? Do we need more rules, or can the existing body of rules and regulations be better enforced?
Thomas H. Beebe:
Hi Mike. We do have sufficient rules on the books as you know with Commerce but unfortunately the Commerce Department doesn't seem to want to enforce the Federal Laws. I firmly believe if they started tu pursue some of the most flagrant violators we might see some changes. After all, where else do you know that one can become a "licensed minister" with credentials from an "accredited" institution for just $39.95 except here in the good ole USA via the internet?
Question from Roger Rippy, Alumni of Montana State Univ:
How does Southern Illinois market such programs and is this the norm? Is the marketing aggressive or passive in nature.
Thomas H. Beebe:
SIU's marketing is probably best done by word of mouth from satisfied students. I would say our marketing is somewhat passive. Their is a strong belief that if we continue to offer extremely high quality programs, studnets will come. Our programs are not distance learning but are rather delivered at military and civilian locations in a weekend format.
Question from Todd Higgins, US Army and Sometime Adjunct:
Having taught at Army Education Centers, I've observed that there is a great disparity in facilities - especially labs - that either limit the courses offered to students or the level of education provided. As providers of education services, do the sponsoring institutions work with the military to establish minimum standards for Ed Centers?
Thomas H. Beebe:
Institutions do not dictate to the Army minimum standards. MIVER does review the ed center to see if they do meet standards.
Question from Bob Cyboron, Hawaii Pacific University:
What reference (or references) provides information about best practices in delivering online degree programs and courses? Are there any that focus on providing education services to the military?
Thomas H. Beebe:
Both SOC as well as the ACE MIVER Project have best practices for distance learning programs. So also does the Accrediting agency.
Question from Jennifer, large private school:
I have had G.I. Bill students in the past who have had a difficult time in getting reimbursement for books & supplies because their degree program (e.g. 3D animation or another similar new degree) has not been recognized by the VA yet as a career path. Is there anyone who is making sure that the VA is keeping pace with the ever-widening array of offerings?
Thomas H. Beebe:
The State Approving Agency in each state is charged with approving the programs and then forwarding that approval to the VA. If you are experiencing problems contact your SAA.
Question from Jim Sweizer, American Military University:
Tom..A follow-up to Goldie's comment on distance education being a great way for military members to attend college. Much mention has been made about the proliferation of schools seeking a share of the military market since the advent of 100%TA. Don't you agree that it was just more than an increase in TA funding that changed the landscape? Hasn't the increased ops tempo and prolonged deployments forced military members to seek portability of their classes? Thus, the emergence and tremendous growth of online programs which thrive more on "word of mouth" than overly agressive marketing tactics?
Thomas H. Beebe:
That's a difficult one to really answer, Jim. We have a number of competing factors. Yes, we have more deployments now than a few years ago. We also have a need for a more highly trained military. We are also requiring degrees for enlisted personnel. 20 years ago, officers had college degrees, the enlisted person with a degree was the rarity. If you examine the differences in the TA monies between the 75% and the 100% you will find that the budgets at 100% have drastically increased while the actual numbers of military personnel have dropped. This means more are using TA now that it is at 100% and they do not have to pay the 25%. I don't think any of us can answer that question appropriately for another few years unless we suddenly see TA drop back to less than 100% and we see a subsequent drop in enrollments.
Question from Goldie Blumenstyk:
I understand that the Army is revamping its college-enrollment system and that there is now a new online "portal" through which soldiers can enroll in courses, GoArmyEd. But apparently, many college haven't yet been able to get their info-tech systems ready enough to tie in to that portal.
Are they now at a disadvantage in tryintg to reach potential Army students?
Thomas H. Beebe:
I suspect they are still reaching them through advertisement. We have struggled thru the startup of GoArmyEd and it is now functioning but I have not seen any increase in enrollments because of our participation.
Question from Jeff Young, The Chronicle:
Should the eArmyU program allow more colleges to join, or should it keep the numbers small and focus its efforts on monitoring the quality of the institutions participating? As it stands, the program works with 28 colleges, but there is talk of expanding it in the near future.
Thomas H. Beebe:
That's a tough one from where I sit. Yes, I would like to see more institutions be able to participate although with GoArmyEd there is some cross over now but I also strongly believe the Army needs to focus first on quality of instruction and second on completion rates of soldiers enrolled in EArmyU.
Thomas H. Beebe:
As the clock ticks down I want to say Thank You to all who participated. It was also great to talk to old friends again. If I didn't answer your question with enough detail, email me at tbeebe@siu.edu and I will try to provide more. Thank you all.
Goldie Blumenstyk (Moderator):
And thanks to you, Thom, for agreeing to field these questions.