ACUHO-I News Blog

When veterans enroll in college after leaving active duty, they often feel lost and alone. The unstructured, somewhat willy-nilly nature of college life is unsettling after years of strictly ordered schedules and rules in the military. Lingering, sometimes lifelong injuries from their service, both mental and physical, dog them. Other students are at least five years younger, often naive, usually with much less world-experience. At best, their classmates are blissfully ignorant of the combat in Iraq and Afghanistan; at worst, they are insensitive and ask intrusive questions. Classrooms are claustrophobic and loud noises unnerving.

On top of all this, until recently, the veteran’s benefits offered by the G.I. Bill barely pay for two years at a modest community college–if combined with full-time work–which discouraged many veterans from using the benefit at all, even though it was the reason many had enlisted. However the new G.I. Bill covers more classroom benefits as well as books and a living stipend, and an uptick in veteran enrollment is expected in August 2009, when the bill takes effect. The law, and higher education’s embrace of it, is seen as a way to do well by veterans, in contrast to the cool reception many recieved in many venues after the Vietnam conflict.

This New York Times Education Life story profiles three veterans who returned to college after their service, the struggles they encountered and the coping skills they developed. The students profiled needed more academic assistance, ways to manage stress, and support from others in their situation. Veterans in the story established their own campus veteran groups.

Since we know there will likely be an influx of veterans in about 9 months, that gives us time to prepare; to establish support groups (if they don’t yet exist); prep the health center, and otherwise prepare campus to be a welcoming place for veterans. What have you done, what will you be doing? Share ideas here.

Also, stay tuned: The next issue of the Talking Stick (leaving the printer’s as I type) will feature a story on veterans on campus.

According to this Inside HigherEd story, some colleges are beginning financial literacy classes for their students. Some are a part of the counseling that comes with accepting federal student loans, but they go beyond the basic you-must-repay-this message required by federal loans. Some schools are offering the classes as a part of their general curriculum.

Hardly anyone could argue that such courses aren’t a great idea; not only are young adults graduating with breathtaking debt to their names, both in educational loans and other areas, such as credit cards. Oddly, many young people plan to live comfortably, if not in wealth, but seem ill-equipped to manage the transition from student to financially secure adult.

Does your institution offer such classes? Are briefer sessions a part of your residence programming?

Hudson Valley Community College in New Albany, NY, a part of the SUNY system is trying a different approach to retention. Hudson Valley noticed what other schools have noted-too few students, especially those most at-risk, seek out student services for help until it is too late. Retention is an issue everywhere, but especially at community colleges. A recent study noted that community college students are more likely to not complete their desired degree, whether it was an associate degree or a bachelor’s degree. Of course, there are complicating factors. Researchers attempted to control for these, but it’s impossible to do this perfectly. Among these factors:

• Community college students are a different demographic than students at four-year schools. Community college students are more likely to be older, with families of their own and careers. There are many compelling “distractions” they have that four-year students are less likely to have.
• A community college student may enter with the goal of completing a four- or two-year degree, but change his mind for financial, professional or familial reasons. Or he might leave because college wasn’t what he thought it was.

Thus, Hudson Valley has consolidated its student services and retention efforts under one umbrella, in order to identify and assist students who may leave the school prematurely. Professors advise academic counselors on the students who seem to be having problems; the counselors direct the students to the appropriate services. A remedial summer program helps get everyone up to speed on college-level math, reading and writing. Full-time tutors are employed at Hudson Valley’s Learning Center, ready to aid the 1,800 students who visit a semester. In addition, an emergency fund helps students cover books, bus passes and even groceries with short-term loans. Often students are in a pinch at the begining of the year, when their student loan checks haven’t yet arrived.

Obviously, this sort of program and some of its elements would be more complicated-if not near-impossible-at a larger school. But Hudson Valley Community College’s efforts may inspire others.

It’s like a decree issued by King Solomon: Wi-Fi or Beer? Obviously, most college students would beg not to make the choice, but if they had to, 48% would pick the Wi-Fi, according to a survey recently released by the clearly unbiased Wi-Fi Alliance and Wakefield Research. Wi-Fi improves their college performance, says 79% of students, though since more than half use WiFi to check Facebook, MySpace or other non-academic things in the classroom, this finding may not be entirely reliable. Sixty percent would not go to a school that doesn’t have free WiFi.

Exciting, ground-breaking news from Consumer Reports: Children’s cereal contains a lot of sugar.

I know, can you believe it, either? I almost blinked when I read that!

[Gulps artificially-orange-flavored, sugar-free water.]

Ah, okay, I’ve regained my composure.

Apparently Honey Smacks contain more sugar than honey (which is what you’d expect, I guess, from a cereal that promises to backhand you with the stuff) and Golden Crisp has as much sugar as a glazed donut from Dunkin’ Donuts. Yellow No. 5, a key ingredient to Cap’n Crunch’s St. Tropez golden glow, has been linked to childhood ADHD. I don’t know how they can separate the effects of the sugar from the Yellow, though.

At least none are known to include “flesh-eating bacteria in every box!”

[Sip diet soft drink. Notice Yellow No. 5 among its ingredients. That might explain something…]

But this isn’t just an issue for the primary set; as we all know, college students eat cereal religiously. The nostalgic appeal of childhood cereals is hard to resist, and in moderate amounts, on occasion, there’s nothing wrong with it. Some cereals can provide the warm fuzzies and good nutrition: Cheerios and Life rated well.

What can student affairs professionals do to help students make wise choices, without making the consumption of sugared cereal into a bigger deal than it is? After all, there are health issues that loom larger than this.

Let’s sum up the young folks in a few words:

I’m Okay, You’re Doomed.
But in the meantime, science technology and math are very important.

Freshman 15 more like “Freshman 5″
It might be 5 pounds of muscle though.

Most college freshmen expect to be wealthy.
But many are in need of financial literacy.

They are the ‘net generation.’
Perhaps we can’t sum them up so easily.

More on pets in residence halls:

CNN reports that MIT, Stephen’s College and SUNY-Canton allow pets-within certain restrictions of course. CNN also points out that Tufts tried a pet-friendly policy for faculty, residence directors and graduate teaching assistants living on-campus, but abandoned it after students with allergies and asthma complained about the dander.

USA Today highlights a Washington & Jefferson student and her bichon frise, Vinny, and also talks to officials at Eckerd College and Stephens College.

Both stories point out the complications of pet housing:

• Dander and student allergies complicate things. As one official points out, after a dog or cat has lived in a room for a year, it is non-allergenic for several years afterward, even with thorough cleanings. Housing professionals often re-appropriate rooms and halls from year to year (making a single sex hall co-ed for example) in reaction to changing demands for housing. A pro-pet policy could limit their flexibility in this way.
• The Humane Society of the United States, while not outright condemning pet ownership by college students, strongly cautions against it. The ASPCA takes a similar stance. According to the USA Today article, the ASPCA is “cautiously supportive” of pro-pet policies, hoping such allowances prevent students from sneaking forbidden animals into their rooms and poorly caring for them as a result of their secrecy. Both organizations point out what housing professionals already know: students are prone to emotional, impulsive decisions and may not think through all the ramifications of owning, say, an adorable little puppy who will grow up to be a ungangly dog, bored and in need of something to chew. The timeline stretches beyond move-out, or even graduation: A commitment to a pet can span 15 years or longer, depending on the animal. (The Humane Society frowns on keeping reptiles as pets in any situation for example, in part because the creatures can live far longer than humans’ attention spans.) Both organizations worry students will poorly care for their charges, or abandon them at move-out time.
• Making and enforcing rules on pets-how big, shots, length of ownership, etc.-is complicated. Stephens College temporarily confiscated dogs from owners who were not caring for them properly; Eckerd codified its policy on snakes after a student brought a 12-foot boa constrictor to live in the hall, which frightened his hall-mates.

For those of us who are pet-lovers, the issue seems simple at first: I can bring my dog to school? Great! But as you dig deeper, it is more complicated, especially when you try to determine who such a policy benefits: the humans, the animals, or both?

With the Olympics complete, all eyes are now turning to the politics game. As the political conventions are in full-swing in the United States, the interest will only rise and college campuses can become active sites of debate and campaigning.

How important a role will college students play in the upcoming presidential election? A study by the Center for Information and Research Civic Learning and Education (CIRCLE) explains that 79 percent of the youth in the 2008 Super Tuesday primaries on February 5 had attended college. It also noted that one in four eligible young voters with college experience voted on that day, compared to only one in 14 eligible individuals with no college experience. Fortunately, there are a number of initiatives working to engage students to be productive partners in the process.

The National Campus Voter Registration Project is making news with its Your Vote Your Voice program. The informative Web site offers practical and applicable information regarding election laws and policies as well as guidelines on how to organize campus voter registration drives.

The Campus Compact Web site has details on its Campus Vote Initiative, designed to encourage higher institutions to educate and empower students to stay engaged throughout  the election. Author Paul Loeb — who many of you may remember from his presentation at the 2007 ACUHO-I Annual Conference & Exposition in Seattle — has also taken on the cause of engaging students in the electoral process and has created his own starter’s guide to organizing a non-partisan voter registration drive.

And, as a bona fide Generation Xer, I would be completely remiss if I didn’t include Rock the Vote.

Finally, NASPA has made a number of voting resources available on its Web site including details about discovering whether or not your campus is in compliance with the 1998 reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, in which it was mandated all colleges and universities participating in federal student aid programs must make a good-faith effort to distribute voter registration forms to students.

Will it be a hot campaign season on your campus? Do you have plans and programs in mind for voter registration? Share your thoughts and check back as we highlight some stand-out programs we’ve heard of.

The latest in a series of books with literal one-word titles, Nudge explains that our free-will is not our own, and that our decisions are heavily influenced by the choices we’re given and how these options are presented.

Authors Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein discuss examples from 401K plans to supermarket layouts. Everyone’s heard about how producers pay for product placement at supermarkets. In some ways the book repackages things we already know (i.e.: buy insurance with the highest deductable possible; invest aggressively in your retirement fund).

But of course, I thought of ACUHO-I’s members when I read the NY Times book review on Nudge. ACUHO-I’s members are often trying to persuade people - mainly students - to make certain choices over others, but the tricky part is doing this without the source of the persuasion being obvious. If students think the administration at their school would particularly like them to choose one option over another, they might be less inclined to do so. The mask of Authority tends to blunt the attractiveness of that option.

What are your “nudges” aimed at students? How would you like to “nudge” them, but can’t figure out how? How are you “nudged” in your daily life?

Early this week, we heard a lot in the news about college presidents who had signed a petition advocating re-thinking the drinking age: specifically, considering the costs and benefits of lowering it to 18 again. Some signers argue that raising the drinking age to 21 has caused more problems than it solved, by encouraging an underground drinking culture, the use of fake IDs and “preloading,” i.e.: drinking heavily in seclusion before a night out on the town.

The New York Times writes today that two presidents, Kendall Blanchard of Georgia Southwestern State University in Americus, GA and Robert M. Franklin of Morehouse College in Atlanta, recinded their signatures. Blanchard told the NYT he felt critics misunderstood the petition’s intended purpose, to start a dialogue, and instead thought it is “some kind of effort on our part to turn our schools into party schools.”

Yup, because college and university presidents love for their institutions to be known as “Ibiza, But With Football”.

However, 15 more presidents have signed on, resulting in 123 signatories, some from household names such as Dartmouth, Duke, Tufts and Ohio State. Of course, the petition has its detractors, namely the Governors’ Highway Safety Administration and Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

What do you think about the proposed “dispassionate public debate”?