[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 111-178]
A QUESTION OF QUALITY AND VALUE: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OVERSIGHT OF
TUITION ASSISTANCE USED FOR DISTANCE LEARNING AND FOR-PROFIT COLLEGES
__________
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
SEPTEMBER 22, 2010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TONGRESS.#13
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
62-592 WASHINGTON : 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the
GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office.
Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
VIC SNYDER, Arkansas, Chairman
JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina ROB WITTMAN, Virginia
SUSAN A. DAVIS, California WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina
JIM COOPER, Tennessee MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania TRENT FRANKS, Arizona
GLENN NYE, Virginia CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
John Oppenheim, Professional Staff Member
Thomas Hawley, Professional Staff Member
Famid Sinha, Staff Assistant
C O N T E N T S
----------
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS
2009
Page
Hearing:
Wednesday, September 22, 2010, A Question of Quality and Value:
Department of Defense Oversight of Tuition Assistance Used for
Distance Learning and For-Profit Colleges...................... 1
Appendix:
Wednesday, September 22, 2010.................................... 29
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2010
A QUESTION OF QUALITY AND VALUE: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OVERSIGHT OF
TUITION ASSISTANCE USED FOR DISTANCE LEARNING AND FOR-PROFIT COLLEGES
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Snyder, Hon. Vic, a Representative from Arkansas, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations................... 1
WITNESSES
Gordon, Robert L., III, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Military Community and Family Policy, Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness)................. 3
Larsen, Timothy R., Director, Personal and Family Readiness
Division, Manpower and Reserve Affairs Department, U.S. Marine
Corps.......................................................... 9
Lutterloh, Scott, Director, Total Force Training and Education
Division, U.S. Navy............................................ 5
Sitterly, Daniel R., Director of Force Development, Deputy Chief
of Staff, Manpower and Personnel, U.S. Air Force............... 7
Stamilio, Anthony J., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Civilian
Personnel and Quality of Life, U.S. Army....................... 4
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Gordon, Robert L., III....................................... 33
Larsen, Timothy R............................................ 66
Lutterloh, Scott............................................. 52
Sitterly, Daniel R........................................... 57
Stamilio, Anthony J.......................................... 42
Documents Submitted for the Record:
[There were no Documents submitted.]
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
Mr. Jones.................................................... 79
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Dr. Snyder................................................... 83
A QUESTION OF QUALITY AND VALUE: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OVERSIGHT OF
TUITION ASSISTANCE USED FOR DISTANCE LEARNING AND FOR-PROFIT COLLEGES
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations,
Washington, DC, Wednesday, September 22, 2010.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 8:04 a.m., in
room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Vic Snyder
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. VIC SNYDER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
ARKANSAS, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
INVESTIGATIONS
Dr. Snyder. Good morning, and welcome to the Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations hearing on the Defense
Department's oversight of the quality of college education
programs available to active duty servicemembers.
I understand there are many representatives in attendance
here today from the National Association of Institutions for
Military Education Services and others interested in college
education for military members.
Since World War II, the Department of Defense has offered
servicemembers opportunities to pursue a college education
during off-duty time. Education is important to servicemembers
and is often identified as a key factor in recruiting and
retention. Also, in today's complex national security
environment, a more highly educated force is important for the
military and its ability to carry out missions. Congress is
supportive of these kinds of programs.
Traditionally, the Defense Department has provided
opportunities by, one, allowing qualified colleges and
universities to establish programs on military installations
and, two, providing tuition assistance funding to help members
afford the cost. Participation in the program has remained high
for many years. In fiscal year 2010, the Services programmed
about $580 million for tuition assistance, and even with high
operations tempo and deployments, more than 380,000
servicemembers will use tuition assistance.
Over the past decade, however, there has been a dramatic
shift in the way in which college programs are provided to
military personnel. Colleges are still an important presence on
military installations, but distance learning has recently
become the predominant method of taking courses. Approximately
70 percent of tuition assistance goes to distance learning.
Distance learning provides military personnel flexibility and
portability. With a laptop and access to the Internet, courses
can be taken virtually anywhere and anytime.
There has also been a proliferation of for-profit colleges
which cater to military students. DOD estimates that more than
40 percent of its tuition assistance now goes to these for-
profit schools. While most for-profit colleges adhere to the
same standards as non-profit and public schools, a variety of
government and public interest organizations have raised
concerns that some provide a lower quality of education, use
overly aggressive marketing and recruiting practices, and have
poor student outcomes.
DOD and the Services have had policies and processes in
place to manage and oversee voluntary education programs for
many years. However, the structure that exists is largely
oriented towards college programs located on military
installations. Since 2005, DOD and the Services have recognized
the need to adapt their management and oversight structure to
include distance learning programs, but progress has been slow.
The purpose of this hearing is to examine how the
military's voluntary college education programs have evolved
over time and learn what steps DOD and the Services are
planning to oversee the emergence of distance learning and for-
profit schools, and when. Ultimately, the subcommittee wants to
ensure that military servicemembers are receiving a quality
education for the resources invested in these programs and to
determine if Congress can help.
Mr. Wittman commutes in from Virginia, and we understand he
has hit some traffic this morning and will be delayed.
Mr. Jones, I will be glad to recognize you for any opening
comments you may want to make.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. I want to
hear from each of the witnesses.
I want to thank you. I have three bases in my district.
This is becoming an issue and I want to thank you and the
staff. We need to look seriously at the quality of education
for our men and women in uniform, and that is why I am here.
And I look forward to hearing our witnesses, and I will have
questions.
Mr. Chairman, since Mr. Wittman cannot be here, I ask
unanimous consent that his statement be put in the record.
Dr. Snyder. Yes, without objection.
We will also give him an opportunity to make a statement
when he arrives.
Our witnesses today are Mr. Robert L. Gordon, III, Deputy
Under Secretary of Defense for Military Community and Family
Policy; Mr. Anthony Stamilio--is that the correct
pronunciation, ``Stamilio''?
Secretary Stamilio. ``Stamilio.''
Dr. Snyder [continuing]. Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Army for Civilian Personnel and Quality of Life; Mr. Scott
Lutterloh, Director, Total Force Training and Education
Division, U.S. Navy; Mr. Dan Sitterly, Director of Force
Development, Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower and Personnel,
U.S. Air Force; and Mr. Timothy Larsen, Director, Personal and
Family Readiness Division, U.S. Marine Corps.
We appreciate you all being here. Your written statements
will be made part of the record.
Since we don't have votes until six o'clock tonight, we are
not anticipating any interruptions. But we will turn the clock
on, and so the light will go on at the end of five minutes.
Don't feel like it is a hard stop if you have other things you
need to tell us, but just to give you an idea where you are at.
So we will begin with Mr. Gordon and go right down the
line.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT L. GORDON III, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE FOR MILITARY COMMUNITY AND FAMILY POLICY, OFFICE OF THE
UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (PERSONNEL AND READINESS)
Secretary Gordon. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Snyder, Representative Jones, distinguished
members of the subcommittee, the Secretary of Defense and the
men and women of the Armed Forces, as well as their families
and I thank you for your support. My role today is to focus on
what the Department is doing to provide lifelong learning
opportunities through our off-duty volunteer education
programs.
I am humbled to know that we are continuing the vision of
our first President, George Washington, who began the first
voluntary education program in 1778 when he directed his
chaplain to provide reading, writing, and arithmetic
instruction to his soldiers while encamped at Valley Forge. He
recognized the importance of literacy and instilling the quest
of lifelong learning in our nation's citizens, which is as
important today as it was over two hundred years ago.
Each year, a third of our servicemembers enroll in post-
secondary education courses, leading to associate's,
bachelor's, and advanced degrees. This past year alone, there
were more than 834,000 course enrollments, and over 46,000
servicemembers earned degrees and certifications. For the past
two years, we have held graduation ceremonies in Iraq and
Afghanistan for 432 servicemembers.
Servicemembers enrolled in voluntary education programs are
non-traditional students, as we know. They attend school during
off-duty and part-time, taking one or two classes per term.
When the military mission, deployments, transfers, or family
obligations impinge upon the continuation of education, this
can result in an interruption of studies and breaks of months
or even years between taking courses and completing degrees.
The military is keeping pace with the civilian Millennial
Generation's expectations to access information through
technology. To facilitate education in today's high-operations-
tempo environment, colleges and universities deliver classroom
instruction via the Internet and on military installations
around the world. There are no geographical confines. Courses
are offered aboard ships, submarines, and at deployed
locations.
All for-profit, non-profit, and public post-secondary
institutions participating in military tuition assistance
programs must be accredited by an accrediting body recognized
by the U.S. Department of Education. Also, colleges and
universities on our installations adhere to additional criteria
set by commanders.
To support these efforts, the Department contracted with
the American Council on Education to develop a process called
the Military Installation Voluntary Education Review, or MIVER,
which provides a third-party, independent review of our on-
installation programs.
DOD is proactively striving to ensure quality of our
education programs by implementing a new policy currently on
the Federal Register for public review. The policy states that
every institution participating in the tuition assistance
program will have a memorandum of understanding with the
Department, which includes an agreement to participate in the
MIVER process.
The Department provides incentives for recruitment,
readiness, and retention of the total force. One of the reasons
recruits join the military, as we know, is because of
educational opportunities, and they remain because of them.
For example, retired Air Force Senior Master Sergeant Eric
Combs entered the military with a GED, earned his Community
College of the Air Force associate's degree and his bachelor's
degree with tuition assistance, then went on to participate in
the Troops to Teachers Program. In 2005, he was selected as the
Ohio teacher of the year and is now a principal in the public
school system. The skills he earned while serving in the Air
Force had no boundaries. Our nation benefited in the long run
and continues to benefit.
Thank you again for your support of military families and
our military servicemembers. None of this could have been
possible without congressional support and funding designated
for off-duty and voluntary education.
I will be happy to respond to any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Gordon can be found in
the Appendix on page 33.]
Dr. Snyder. Thank you.
Mr. Stamilio.
STATEMENT OF ANTHONY J. STAMILIO, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR CIVILIAN PERSONNEL AND QUALITY OF LIFE, U.S. ARMY
Secretary Stamilio. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Jones, thank you for the opportunity to
appear today to discuss the Army's voluntary education programs
and Services which afford lifelong learning opportunities for
soldiers and their families. The knowledge, skills, and
abilities acquired from such opportunities help to sustain the
all-volunteer force and assist the Army in retaining its
position as the world's premier land force. As a result of
their educational experiences, soldiers become better critical
thinkers and decisionmakers, which is absolutely vital to
success in the world today, both on and off the battlefield.
Army VOLED [voluntary education] programs cover the
education spectrum, beginning with basic skills, professional
certificates, associate's, bachelor's, and master's degrees,
meeting soldiers where they are, allowing soldiers to learn as
they choose, thereby educating them for the Army's present and
future needs. The Army has consistently maintained voluntary
education as a priority by fully funding the tuition assistance
program and executing the program in accordance with the
Department's uniform tuition assistance policy.
The Army commitment to voluntary education extends to the
theater of operation. We have education centers, counseling
staff, and classroom instruction that is ongoing in Afghanistan
and Iraq.
Despite the high operational tempo of the past nine years,
soldier participation in education programs, especially college
programs, continues to grow. During the past two years alone,
Army college course enrollments have increased nine percent. To
date this fiscal year, nearly 250,000 Army active, reserve, and
National Guard soldiers have enrolled in over 500,000 courses
at 2,500 institutions across the nation.
Even more telling is the growth in soldier participation in
distance learning and online courses. In fiscal year 2005, our
enrollments were about evenly split between the traditional
classroom and online courses. This year to date, more than 76
percent of all of our enrollments have been in online courses.
Clearly, access to quality courses online enables our
warfighters to continue their progress toward degree
completion, regardless of deployment, duty location, work
schedule, or other commitments. In fiscal year 2009, over 4,000
soldiers received post-secondary education degrees. That number
has climbed to 4,500 so far this year in 2010.
We have in place a robust oversight program, beginning with
the over 200 members of our education center staffs, that are
required to provide information and counseling to soldiers even
before they apply for tuition assistance.
The GoArmyEd Portal is the Army's virtual gateway for
soldiers to request educational services and obtain tuition
assistance anytime or anywhere. Our education counselors use
the portal to track soldier progress and institution
performance, respond to issues and complaints, and provide
virtual educational counseling 24/7 around the globe.
Additionally, our partnership with Servicemembers
Opportunity Colleges, SOC, is critical to monitor the
performance of our academic partner institutions, including
for-profit schools, to ensure they comply with established SOC
guidelines and principles.
In conclusion, we are confident that our VOLED program
provides every soldier the opportunity to first identify and
then meet their professional and personal educational goals.
The Army provides a balanced approach that enables success on
the job and in the college arena, helping to ensure soldiers
are fully prepared to meet the challenges in the global
environment.
We thank you for your continued support of Army Continuing
Education Programs, and I would be happy to respond to your
questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Stamilio can be found
in the Appendix on page 42.]
Dr. Snyder. Thank you.
Mr. Lutterloh.
STATEMENT OF SCOTT LUTTERLOH, DIRECTOR, TOTAL FORCE TRAINING
AND EDUCATION DIVISION, U.S. NAVY
Mr. Lutterloh. Thank you, Chairman Snyder, Representative
Jones, and distinguished members of the Oversight and
Investigations Subcommittee. I am honored to have the
opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Navy's
approach to voluntary education. Our success is only possible
through your continued support, and we are deeply appreciative.
We are very proud of the program, which is compromised of
two key components: tuition assistance and the Navy College
Program for Afloat College Education, or NCPACE.
Tuition assistance offers funding to sailors to attend
courses from accredited institutions, providing up to $250 per
credit hour. NCPACE is a Navy-specific program providing
similar opportunities to our sailors at sea. Nearly 60,000
sailors and 4,000 officers participated in these two programs
in fiscal year 2009.
Program benefits are managed consistent with the individual
sailor's need to balance the pursuit of education with other
professional development priorities, such as mastery of rating
skills, obtainment of warfare qualifications, and progressive
refinement of leadership skills.
We have very effectively leveraged our investment in VOLED
through memberships and associations, such as the
Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges and the American Council on
Education. Through these programs, sailors are best positioned
to successfully overcome challenges to degree completion, gain
complete transferability of college credit, and maximize the
educational value of their military training and operational
experience, while doing so within the funding limits of our
programs.
Recognizing the advancing technological and communication
skills of our force and leveraging our solid foundation and
advancements in distance learning, we established the Navy
College Program Distance Learning Partners. These partners
develop rating-relevant associate and bachelor degree programs
for the 72 ratings and numerous career fields used by our
enlisted sailors worldwide. Partners agree to keep residency
requirements at a minimum and transfer credits from other
regionally accredited institutions, while striving to remain
within the DOD-established cap of $250 per credit hour.
In 2007, we established Enlisted Learning and Development
Career Roadmaps, integrating all learning, whether obtained
from training, education, or experience, across a career. These
roadmaps lay the foundation for sailor success in each rating.
In the case of the Legalman rating, we have advanced the
integration of training and education to the point where an
associate degree in paralegal studies from an American Bar
Association-accredited institution is now granted at completion
of the accession development process and is part of the job
requirement. Educational opportunities like this offer
potential to offset paths traditionally performed by officers.
We strive to ensure that every sailor who elects to enroll
in off-duty education courses has a positive learning
experience and satisfactorily completes those courses,
regardless of duty assignment. We are proud that we have
provided sailors a means to complete their degrees, regardless
of location, and to offer options that maximize their credits
through training and job experience.
We are confident that our voluntary education program
provides every sailor the opportunity to take college courses
in an environment where success is the norm. We provide a
balanced approach that ensures success as a professional
mariner and achievement of all their college goals.
On behalf of the chief of naval operations, Admiral
Roughead, and our entire Navy, I thank you for your continuing
support for the professional development of this fine force.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lutterloh can be found in
the Appendix on page 52.]
Dr. Snyder. Thank you.
Mr. Sitterly.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL R. SITTERLY, DIRECTOR OF FORCE DEVELOPMENT,
DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF, MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL, U.S. AIR FORCE
Mr. Sitterly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Jones,
Dr. Fenner, for the opportunity to discuss college education
opportunities and the quality of education available to airmen.
We face extraordinary challenges today, from growing our
economy to transforming our energy supply, improving our
children's education, safeguarding our nation, and more. We
pride ourselves in promoting a culture of lifelong learning not
only as a way to attract and develop diverse top talent but as
a way to enhance our airmen's military careers. In fact, we can
map the voluntary education courses our airmen take directly to
our Air Force institutional competencies. Simply put, voluntary
education has a direct mission impact. Equally important, we
return our airmen to society and to the nation better prepared
to face the extraordinary challenges I mentioned.
Every Air Force base has an education and training office
where airmen are counseled on military and civilian education.
Each office also provides a college-level examination program
that enables airmen to take advantage of lifelong learning and
possibly shorten degree completion time. In addition, the Air
Force Voluntary Education Center is an online resource tool.
Air Force policy regarding military tuition assistance
receives its authority from Title 10 and policy guidance from
DOD instructions. In fiscal year 2003, the Air Force
implemented the DOD military tuition assistance uniform caps
and ceilings, resulting in a 44 percent increase in
enrollments. Even with decreased Air Force end-strength and
increased operations tempo, the number of enrollments has
remained relatively stable.
One reason, as Dr. Snyder pointed out, is the high
participation rate in the ever-growing distance-learning
delivery methods of education. This allows airmen with
demanding work schedules and frequent moves and deployments to
learn and to progress toward degree completion more easily.
When it comes to quality, the key decision point for
authorization of tuition assistance is the accreditation of the
school. If the school is accredited by an accrediting agency
recognized by the Department of Education, tuition assistance
can be authorized when other eligibility is met.
Air Force policy provides specific guidance regarding
access to Air Force bases by school representatives.
Specifically, guidelines impacting the voluntary education
community are in an Air Force instruction on commercial
solicitation on DOD installations. The Air Force has a policy
of neutrality regarding schools. We neither endorse nor
discount any accredited school. The diversity of thought that
comes from learning across a wide range of schools is valued.
Ultimately, the airman, with proper counseling and degree
planning, makes the final decision of the specific school and
program to pursue.
The Community College of the Air Force (CCAF), my alma
mater, is the jewel of the Air Force education opportunities
for enlisted personnel. It is a regionally accredited school,
and 75 percent of the degree can be earned through Air Force
training. Twenty-five percent needs to be earned from an
accredited civilian college. Each year, more than 1.6 million
credit-hours are awarded through the Community College of the
Air Force, and more than 335,000 airmen have graduated from the
Community College of the Air Force. Many airmen are able to
transfer CCAF [Community College of the Air Force] credits
toward civilian college bachelor degrees.
Quality education is a valued part of our Air Force
culture. You heard from Mr. Gordon about Sergeant Combs, the
Ohio teacher of the year. We have hundreds of similar success
stories. NASA astrophysicist Dr. Richard Barry and Arthur
Tyler, former president of Sacramento City College and now the
COO of the Houston, Texas Community College system, are both
former airmen and CCAF graduates.
Any small successes I might have enjoyed in my 34 years in
the Air Force is because of tuition assistance and a very
motivated, dedicated, and perhaps persistent education services
officer, Mr. Neil Parasot from Malmstrom Air Force Base in
Montana. He mentored me through eight colleges and
universities, some non-profit, some for-profit, some public,
including the Community College of the Air Force, and 15 hours
of distance learning on the way to a master's degree in
education, all using military tuition assistance.
Looking back, I suppose the quality of the eight schools
did differ, depending on how one measures quality. But the real
measure of my learning was probably more closely aligned to my
effort, my concentration, my focus, my commitment, and the
goals at the time that I took each of these classes.
Our airmen are committed to learning. The culture of
education and the passion for learning comes from the many Neil
Parasots; Anne Smith, who is here with me today; the Jeff
Allens ; the Shelly Owczarskis; and our Air Force education
offices around the world today.
Airmen do have more education options than ever before. The
Air Force believes that personal and professional growth
through collegiate programs is essential and beneficial to the
Air Force mission and the nation. I have an obligation to
educate our airmen about all of the options that they can make,
so that they can make a wise and informed choice of schools and
degree programs and to assure that every airman receives the
best education possible for the time, effort, and resources
that they and our nation invest.
As the education landscape continues to change, we must
continue to partner with you, with the Department of Education,
and with America's educational institutions and others to make
sure that we have this right.
Thank you for the opportunity to work together. I look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sitterly can be found in the
Appendix on page 57.]
Dr. Snyder. Thank you.
Mr. Larsen.
STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY R. LARSEN, DIRECTOR, PERSONAL AND FAMILY
READINESS DIVISION, MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT,
U.S. MARINE CORPS
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Snyder, Representative Jones, thank you for the
interest in the military tuition assistance program and the
quality of education opportunities for marines. It is my
privilege today to represent the Commandant of the Marine Corps
to discuss this important issue.
Education opportunities are extremely valuable in growing
and maintaining the high quality of the Marine Corps. Tuition
assistance has a profound impact through the lifecycle of a
marine: from recruiting, where it is an incentive to assist in
the enlistment process; through career progression, to things
like discriminators for promotion of enlisted marines, and to
the reintegration to civilian life, to assist in preparing
marines for life beyond the Marine Corps.
Our goal is for every marine to have a quality education
experience, and there are three elements to that. The first is
a partnership between the student and the institution. The
student must be committed to the pursuit of education. The
second is relying on the Department of Education to ensure
institutions meet accreditation standards. And third, the
Marine Corps is focused on student success, particularly new
students.
Before tuition assistance is authorized, a mandatory
College 101 brief and an initial counseling session with a
qualified counselor occur. Eligibility for first time tuition
assistance is based on their general technical skills score. A
GT [general technical] of 100 or higher authorizes them to use
the program. Scoring 99 or below, we refer people to an
academic skills enhancement program to prepare them for
college-level work. Once they achieve a minimum standard, they
are allowed to use tuition assistance.
And the program has been very effective and has achieved
very positive results for new students. About 82 percent of the
Marines successfully complete their first course. And a request
for waivers due to failure or incomplete coursework decreased
about 40 percent, from about 1,100 in 2005 to about 700 in
2009.
Protecting marines from aggressive marketing is important
to unit commanders. The installation commanders have the
primary responsibility, and they take that responsibility very
seriously. Issues that are raised are given a critical review,
and then, if warranted, a local IG investigation is conducted.
What is important is the opportunity for marines to opt out
of the program or unsubscribe when they are no longer
interested in the program.
We appreciate the subcommittee's interest in tuition
assistance and quality education opportunities for marines, and
we look forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Larsen can be found in the
Appendix on page 66.]
Dr. Snyder. Thank you all for your testimony.
We will put ourselves on the five-minute clock here. And we
will do several rounds, I think, before the morning is over.
Who is controlling the clock here, Dr. Fenner? There you
go.
Is there more to the fairly rapid increase in online
learning than just convenience? Are there any factors out there
that concern you that it may be more than convenience, in terms
of quality issues of the education?
Maybe we will start with you, Mr. Larsen, and just go the
other way this time.
Mr. Larsen. I would offer that many times for-profit
institutions would probably market themselves very well. We
don't discriminate between any of the types of either for-
profit, non-profit, or traditional institutions. As long as
they are accredited, we support marines participating in those
programs. But I would offer that, if it is a for-profit
institution, they are probably very interested in marketing
themselves.
Dr. Snyder. No, I wasn't asking about for-profit versus
not-for-profit. I was asking about online learning----
Mr. Larsen. Oh, I am sorry.
Dr. Snyder [continuing]. Because traditional schools do
offer online distance learning also.
Mr. Larsen. Right. We actually have about 25 percent of our
students in traditional schools and the rest of them are in
distance learning programs.
So I think just the convenience, as you said before, and
the flexibility it gives the student to participate in the
program, particularly when they are deployed, allow them the
latitude to make the course fit to their schedule or when they
are available.
Dr. Snyder. Anybody have anything else to add to that?
Yes, Mr. Gordon.
Secretary Gordon. Actually, I do.
You know, this is the Millennial Generation. I think our
force is really a reflection of our larger society. And we have
Millennials who look at this, I think, not only in terms of
convenience but in terms of comfort. They are very comfortable
with consuming education in a different sort of environment. I
taught at the Academy, the Military Academy, for about 11
years. And I was thinking back, in terms of our 40 courses, 50
to 55 minutes per class, we had a structure, and that is how we
teach our cadets. Things have changed in terms of this younger
generation now, which is much more comfortable in a different
sort of space.
I think the other thing is education is becoming student-
centric. You know, our education heretofore has been very
focused on our curricula and how we then instructed in class.
And with student-centric education, students can go at
different speeds.
So I think it does go beyond convenience because of, first
of all, the technology, but also the generation is much more
used to consuming education and other different sorts of
phenomena on the Internet and online.
Dr. Snyder. But you don't see any potential downsides?
Secretary Gordon. Well, one of the keys, I think for our
business is ensuring that we have got systems in place to both
monitor and oversee it and ensure a quality education for our
servicemembers. And I think the first step to that is what we
have been doing in the past, which is ensuring that any
institution, whether they be online or brick-and-mortar, be
accredited by the Department of Education.
One of the differences today, though, is we used to have
the MIVER process, which was Military Installation Voluntary
Education Reviews. And what is up for public comment now is
MVER, but we took the ``installation'' out. So the key now is a
review process that will include not only those educational
institutions on our posts and bases across the world but also
online institutions and off-base institutions, as well. It is
key.
Dr. Snyder. We had a lot of discussion about the size of
the defense budget, always looking for savings. And we are all
in agreement with that.
Where are you at with--well, maybe we will start with you,
Mr. Gordon--for generally each Service, what is the number of
your counselors and your funding for education counselors?
Where has it been over the last several years and where do you
see it going in the future, in terms of the numbers? Have there
been reductions?
Secretary Gordon. Good question. I think we still need our
counselors on our facilities and our installations across the
country. But, as some of my colleagues mentioned as well, more
online counseling is available. The perfect example is our
Military OneSource system, where our servicemembers can go and
our family members can go to get some counseling, basically, on
things such as education.
But I think it is absolutely essential that we have the
face-to-face counseling, as well, on our installations. The
advantage, of course, to face-to-face is also those counselors
on installations have the records of our servicemembers. So,
while we can start and we will see, I think, an increase of
online counseling services available, face-to-face is still
very important. And I think we need to be consistent with that.
And I would like my colleagues to comment.
Secretary Stamilio. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, when the Army launched the GoArmyEd Portal,
it provided an opportunity to free up the education center
staffs from a bunch of administrative duty. As a result of
that, the Army took the opportunity to reduce the overall
education center staffing somewhat. We probably went, perhaps,
a little far in that regard, because our educational staff--
education center staff is stretched right now. We still have
coverage.
But we have come to reaffirm the commitment that face-to-
face counseling is absolutely important. And we are working
within the Army to figure out how best to restore the right
balance between automation, efficiency, and face-to-face
counseling for our servicemembers.
Mr. Lutterloh. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
Actually, both questions, I think, are pretty important.
I would like to just go back for a second. While I agree
with my colleagues, I would like to add that what we are
focused on primarily is sailor success. And that comes to pass
in several different measures.
First off, I would like them to successfully complete that
course. So we insist that they all have a college plan and that
they all talk to a counselor, whether that be face to face or
over the phone, before they engage in any educational
opportunity. We have laid in some requirements for them to have
completed some of their professional work before they embark on
an education plan. We want them to successfully complete that
course.
Relative to distance learning, the initial indications are
that the completion rates for traditional learning, traditional
education in a brick-and-mortar schoolhouse, are a little bit
higher, about 90 percent, compared to the lower number in
distance learning, 80 percent. We are still trying to
understand exactly what that means, but that is one of the
things that we look at and try and measure to understand the
effectiveness of those programs.
Dr. Snyder. Would you repeat that for me again? Ninety----
Mr. Lutterloh. Roughly 90 percent for our enlisted
undergraduate degree programs, about 90 percent of our enlisted
sailors, are completing those courses. It is roughly 80 percent
for distance learning. So we see a little bit of a difference
initially in the numbers that we are measuring there. So we are
keeping a pretty close eye on that to understand how that
happens.
Again, regarding success, another measure is
transferability. We want sailors to be able to get their
associate degree and go on to a bachelor's degree, transferring
all of those credits that they have engaged in for their
associate degree at the bachelor level and beyond that. So
accredited institutions are important to us.
Those are a couple of the measures that we have.
We have carefully reviewed our counseling staff across the
nation and around the world, keeping in mind that technology
has advanced over the last decade or so to the point that
virtual counseling is now well within the realm of possibility.
We have established just this past year the Navy's first
virtual education counseling center. Twenty-seven employees,
split between education technicians, who are there to make sure
all of the records are kept current, and eight counselors, who
operate from 6:00 in the morning until 9:00 at night, offering
counseling services to sailors around the world.
That workload is picking up. We have about--we average
about 150 counseling sessions per week. And that is keeping up.
We have in-sourced our contractor workforce to civilians, so we
are moving those contractors into the government service at our
Navy college offices around the world.
Mr. Sitterly. Thank you, Dr. Snyder. I would also like to
respond to the distance learning question for just a moment.
In fact, we in the Air Force have embraced that in our own
professional military education courses, recognizing that that
is sort of what the Millennials are looking for. And our
educational outcomes can be very closely measured to success.
For instance, at Air University, we now have an online
master's program that we offer, accredited with the rest of our
Air University courses. By law, our first-time supervisors for
civilians are required to do first-time supervisory training.
That is offered online with a facilitator around the world
through Air University. We find that that gives us a very
standardized opportunity versus having different people address
it differently. We ensure that all of our civilian supervisors
get that same quality of education.
That said, I don't know that I would want to go see a
physician who only has ever done distance-learning schools. So
I think there are some opportunities to do things the
traditional way. But most of our students that are enrolled in
voluntary education are taking business degrees, management
degrees, computers, and psychology. And I am comfortable that
the quality of that education through accredited schools is
very high.
The counselors--we do have 82 education offices throughout
the Air Force, and we have two or three counselors at each
installation, depending upon the size. And we have taken some
reductions, but we have offset that with our online voluntary
education office, as well. And then we can synergize with the
Community College of the Air Force, so if they have specific
questions, once they get the degree, then they can call into
the Community College of the Air Force to get direction there,
as well.
So I think we are doing fine.
Dr. Snyder. Any further comments?
Mr. Larsen.
Mr. Larsen. Yes, sir. Regarding counselors, you know, they
are very important to us. We have counselors at every one of
our installations.
I would offer that about 60 percent of our participation in
the program is the junior enlisted marines. And those people,
many of them are getting out at the end of their initial
enlistment and not making the Marine Corps a career. So those
people--it is very important to connect with them, to make sure
they have a good experience and make sure that they are
prepared for college-level work.
They are the preponderance of the work that is done by the
counselors. And every one of those individuals, when they begin
the program, have a face-to-face counseling session with a
counselor that lasts for about an hour. So----
Dr. Snyder. I apologize for my coughing here.
It would probably be helpful--let's take it as a question
for the record--to see the numbers and your evaluation of the
number of counselors and availability of counseling, online or
however you do it, over the last several years and as you go
forward.
Mr. Jones.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
And, gentlemen, thank you for your presentation.
I would like to start my question with a statement and a
reading from Bloomberg Business Week, ``For-Profit Colleges
Targeting the Military.'' Let me start here. ``Some Active Duty
personnel can earn an associate degree, which typically takes
two years of study, in five weeks.''
I am just going to throw out two or three points, and I
would like for you to respond.
``Three--American Military University, Phoenix, and closely
held Grantham--charge $250 a credit, or $750 a course, which
allowed them to receive the maximum reimbursement by U.S.
taxpayers without servicemembers having to pay any out-of-
pocket tuition. Publicly funded community colleges offer
classes on military bases for as little as $50 a credit.''
As the chairman said, we are in a terrible financial
situation as a nation. And there are many aspects to
government. That we all know.
I have had the opportunity to talk to several people in the
Third District of North Carolina. And we know that the military
deserves every opportunity that the taxpayer can give him or
her, especially in education. But when you see articles like
the one in Bloomberg--and Wall Street Journal has done a
couple, I think--it does not help the program, because the
taxpayer who is picking up the bill is looking at this and
saying, ``Is the soldier getting equal education?'' If he or
she can get education at a community college that offers
courses for $50 versus a for-profit university that is charging
$250 and $750, then something is not right.
My question to start is, how do you keep the good and weed
out the bad? Where is that check and balance that they report
to you or to DOD, Mr. Gordon? How can the taxpayer be assured
that the military is getting a quality education and really not
an education in being taken advantage of?
Secretary Gordon. Thank you, sir, for allowing me to
respond to that. It is a very good question.
I think, first of all, we have to ensure that we adhere to
the accreditation process, and we do. I did see that article
and read it. It made me think about, first of all,
accreditation. And we do; we adhere to the accreditation
process. So what we do is we ensure, regardless of the type of
educational institution, that they are accredited by the
Department of Education.
The second piece is oversight, I think. And we had the
MIVER process. We are changing that. That MIVER process was
focused on the educational institutions on installations, and
we are expanding that now. And our expectation is, if
successful, we will be able to use that basically to review and
monitor and oversee these educational institutions, regardless
if they are online, off-post, or on-post.
Now, the MIVER process is a process where--it is run by the
American Council on Education. They will send four to five,
basically, members in to take a look at curricula. They will
take a look at teachers. They will conduct interviews with
commanders and with students.
So I think, by expanding that process to all institutions,
we will assist once again in ensuring a quality education.
Because it gets down to quality, first of all, but also
adaptiveness, I think. You know, we have a very mobile
workforce. That is in society writ large. Multiple deployments,
of course, occur in the military Services now.
And I understand what you are saying about the $50 versus
$250, but at the same time, having the sort of flexibility and
agility in a system where individuals can have a choice among a
menu of different types of academic institutions that really do
suit them and will end up eventually in an education for them,
where they can complete it, I think that is absolutely key.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Gordon, that has been one of the problems
with education, is that--I am talking about not the military--
instead of giving the child the challenge along the way to the
12th grade, if we have made it easy for him or her, then when
they get that high school diploma, it doesn't have the quality
because the person really was not challenged to receive that.
I appreciate your comment about, you know, more oversight
and trying to weed out, I guess, the good and the bad, if I
could phrase it that way. But the American Council on Education
that will--that does report back, how many universities, online
or not online, just not-for-profit, have been delisted in the
last five or six years?
Secretary Gordon. Good question. I do not know the answer
to that.
I don't know if the Services know, delisting at all?
I don't know. We will have to--I will have to get back to
you on that.
Mr. Jones. Well, I wish, Mr. Chairman, we would get that
for the record because I think that will tell us a whole lot.
And again, I have great respect for the military. But we need
to know for the taxpayer and the military that those
universities that are in it just to make money from the
taxpayer and not give the quality education, that they don't
exist any longer, as it relates to the military.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 79.]
Mr. Jones. I will yield back at this time.
Dr. Snyder. Thank you, Mr. Jones.
The issue of for-profit schools, this full committee and
this subcommittee are not trying to solve and will not solve
this whole issue of for-profit versus not-for-profit schools or
private colleges. That is not what we are about. We are talking
here about how you all provide oversight of the substantial
amount of money that is going to your military personnel and
making sure they are getting what they want out of it, and your
help. So that is what angle we are coming from.
But in terms of looking at quality, following on what Mr.
Jones talked about, I don't think we have good employability
numbers, but my guess is you couldn't really tell us, well we
had a higher officer promotion rate if somebody went to a for-
profit school versus a non-profit or private college, you know,
down the road, or versus online. I mean, I suspect you don't
have the ability of throwing out any numbers in terms of
employability. In the private sector, that can be hard to get
at, too.
But in terms of loan default rates, there are some numbers
there. In 2009, students, within three years after leaving for-
profit schools, that had an associate degree had a default rate
of about 23 percent, compared to 15 percent at a public or non-
profit school. And when you look at students at for-profit
schools that offered a bachelor's or higher degree, they had a
default rate of about 18 percent, compared to 6 percent from
public or private schools.
Now, I don't know exactly what all that means, but I think
it means we ought to be asking some questions. What it says is,
in the private sector, the non-military world, is that, for
whatever reasons, the students that are going to for-profit
schools for an associate degree and the higher degree levels
are ending up with higher default rates. And one implication
could be they are not making as much money, that their
investment was higher than the payoff for it.
But those are,--in addition to anecdotal stuff, I mean,
some of the things that concern us as we see this fairly rapid
increase in the amount of money, federal dollars, that is going
to for-profit schools.
Do any of you have any comment about the default rate
issue? Maybe that is not anything you have thought about.
Mr. Lutterloh. Thank you, Chairman Snyder. It is an
interesting question.
And our Navy college offices, in particular our counselors,
are there to counsel sailors in the development of an education
plan that does not depend on loans. So we are counseling them
and directing them to colleges and universities accredited by
the Department of Education who are in our consortiums, more
often than not, and who are offering courses, fully accredited,
fully transferable, to these sailors within the constraints of
the tuition assistance limits that we have.
So, in my view, sailors should not be embarking in loans.
So I don't have data that would indicate default rates on these
loans.
Dr. Snyder. No, I recognize that. But that is not the
issue. The issue is, why is there a higher default rate in the
private sector for for-profit schools? Does it imply that there
is something qualitatively different with the quality of
product that these mostly young people are ending up with? That
is the issue.
And my guess, as I said before, that you can't analyze
officer promotion rates, for example, and say, oh, we are
seeing that the for-profit schools are doing better than the
not-for-profit schools. I think that would be tough for you,
other than anecdotally. But there is information out there that
says maybe we ought to be looking at this, maybe the quality
isn't as good.
I think I will curtail my time here. I notice we have been
joined by Mr. Wittman, who survived yet another commute. In
fairness to Mr. Wittman, there is really not a lot that goes on
in this town at eight o'clock in the morning, and so he doesn't
have to get going this early very often. He is one of those few
blessed Members that gets to live at home.
Mr. Wittman, if you would like to do your opening
statement, you are welcome to. We will give you as much time as
you want right now. Or if you just want to progress to some
questions, whatever you would like to do.
Mr. Wittman. Well, folks, thank you so much for joining us
today. And I am sure you have been quizzed on a number of these
issues, so I hope that my questions aren't going to be
repetitive.
But, you know, in looking at this whole scope of issues
that our men and women in uniform are dealing with, obviously
we want them to be pursuing higher levels of education. We also
want to make sure that it is convenient to their deployment
schedules.
So, trying to mix that in with all of the other issues here
and making sure that what they are paying for is truly the
value that they are getting and that that value translates
through their careers, I am just going to ask you in general:
Do you see the current opportunities in distance learning and
integrating that in with deployment schedules to make sure that
our men and women in uniform get those educational
opportunities?
Do you think the current system is doing all that it can to
do two things: to make sure that our men and women have access
and, secondly, to make sure that they are getting maximum value
for the opportunities that are out there?
And, Mr. Lutterloh, I will begin with you.
Mr. Lutterloh. Thank you, Congressman Wittman.
I think the distance learning offers tremendous access.
And, judging by the numbers, the increased utilization of
distance learning in the force, I would say there is some
value, from the sailor's perspective. Whether or not that is
providing maximum value is very difficult for me to tell.
The value--when I talk to sailors, the value that they get
out of education is, more often than not, linked to degree
completion. A degree from an accredited institution is what
they are looking for, more often than not. It gives them
greater range of job opportunity if they are to get out of the
Service. It means more money in their salary, more than likely,
in the future. All of these things are of value to the sailor.
So I would say a degree from an accredited university is
the value that they are looking for. And, judging by the fact
that all of our courses and institutions are accredited by the
Department of Education, I would say that there is quite a bit
of a foundational value to those sailors.
When we get into the value of the content, the curricula,
depending on where that sailor is in his or her life, what kind
of pressures they have on them, how eager to learn they are,
how much time they are able to put into that, I would say some
of that impinges on the value, as well.
But I couldn't comment on the content value other than to
say they are accredited or not by the Department of Education.
Mr. Sitterly. Thank you, Congressman.
And I agree. Access, absolutely, everyone has it, as
indicated by the number of folks taking distance-learning
courses, upwards of 70 percent for us now, with military
tuition assistance, as well.
Also, in those rare cases where an airman doesn't have
access perhaps to a laptop to get an online course, we can do
streaming video. There are other distance-learning
opportunities, you know, ``box of books'' that Chairman Snyder
loves so much in our PME [professional military education]
schools.
But distance learning comes in many forms. And so,
absolutely, yes.
And I think the goal of accreditation, of course, is to
ensure that the education provided meets a level of acceptance.
And the Department of Education recognizes certain accrediting
institutions that have the ability to evaluate those schools.
And so, I think, to the degree that the rigor and the
discipline of those agencies is acceptable, then I feel that
our airmen get a quality and valued education, as well.
I did want to go back, if I may, sir--and I recognize I am
on your time--to Congressman Jones's point. And, sir, I
recognize the cost, and I see your point exactly. But I did
want to make the point that we do have a cap on the annual
amount of tuition assistance that a military member can take.
So, even though the semester hours might be more expensive--and
they are capped. We have a $4,500-per-year maximum that a
military person can use.
So, when I was using my military tuition assistance, I sort
of shopped around and got a little more aggressive toward
finishing my degree. So I looked for a cheaper school, so I
didn't exceed the cap--the caps back then were, obviously, a
lot less. So there is a little bit of that, as well, sir.
Mr. Larsen. Yes, sir. The short answer is, in the Marine
Corps, not all of those that want to participate in the tuition
assistance program get the opportunity, primarily for
operational reasons or OPTEMPO [operations tempo] deployments.
Being a former recruiting station commander, I would tell
you that, if not the number-one reason, one of the very most
important reasons why people join the military and join the
Marine Corps is for off-duty education, the opportunity to
participate in that. They don't all get that because of the
deployment schedule right now, but I would offer that there is
somewhere around 31,000 marines that are participating in
tuition assistance right now.
If you look at those that get off active duty, there is
about 55,000 of them, or about that number, that are
participating in the Montgomery GI Bill, which tells me that
there is a lot more that would participate in tuition
assistance if the opportunity were there.
Mr. Wittman. Thank you.
Mr. Gordon.
Secretary Gordon. Thank you, Congressman Wittman.
I agree with my colleagues. I think, first of all, when we
take a look at distance learning, you know, it is the delivery
of education and training through electronic media, mediated
instruction. So it is expansive. And I think what we have is
the architecture, basically, in the military to provide that.
I agree with Mr. Larsen. The opportunities might not exist
as much as they could in an environment where we would not have
as many deployments. But we do; that is a fact of life. And I
think we do have that access.
In terms of maximizing effectiveness, though, I think it
behooves us to continue to be proactive in looking at how we
can provide the kind of oversight to ensure a quality
education. We do have the fact that, you know, these programs
are accredited by the Department of Education, but we are very
hopeful, with the new MIVER that I have discussed earlier, that
we will have the kind of oversight we need for all of those
institutions.
Mr. Wittman. Mr. Stamilio.
Secretary Stamilio. Thank you, Congressman Wittman.
Clearly, the issue of access to distance learning is
absolutely vital, and 76 percent of Army enrollments are
through the distance-learning mode. And that is very important
to an organization as busy and as far-reaching as the United
States Army. And so we certainly--our soldiers certainly take
advantage of that.
In terms of the value, in the context of the overall growth
of technology, as the Army has launched its integrated portal
to administer the Tuition Assistance Program, it also provides
soldiers an opportunity to look at a course catalog, or
actually multiple course catalogs, from the 2,500 institutions
that have committed to the Army that they will administer their
programs in accordance with our needs and consistent with the
SOC standards. So soldiers have a wide array of opportunities
that they can pursue and do some cost comparison, as well.
And so, in terms of value, we had set up the architecture
in the system so that a soldier can plot out his or her
collegiate future and then do the appropriate shopping,
recognizing that the courses that will be taken, if he or she
is choosing the right ones that are consistent with our overall
program, that those courses will be transferrable. And so a
soldier could have the opportunity to take a course from this
institution or that institution and it would be transferrable,
and maximize his or her value for the Tuition Assistance
dollar. And so there are some advantages to all of this.
The other point that I would mention is, many of our in-
classroom instructions--in fact, much of our in-classroom
instruction relies on adjunct professors that come from the
surrounding area. Now, in the case of a military base that has
universities nearby, those adjunct professors are sometimes
very easy to come by. In other locations, they rely on other
adjunct professors. What distance learning provides is an
opportunity for the institution to go find the best professor,
the best instructor, and remote that instructor in a distant-
learning environment. And so the potential exists, whether the
institution takes advantage of it or not, but the potential
exists to actually get the higher-quality instructor for the
particular program that is being offered.
Thank you.
Dr. Snyder. Mr. Jones.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I appreciate the
answers from the panel to each, the chairman as well as the
ranking member.
I want to go back and read a couple points, and then I am
going to make a statement and listen to you, and then I need to
leave. We are going to have a classified hearing on rules of
engagement today.
Mike Shields, a retired Marine Corps colonel and human
resource director of U.S. field operations for Schindler
Elevator, the North American arm of the Swiss Schindler Group,
says he rejects about 50 military candidates each year--50
military candidates each year--for the company's management
development program. ``Because their graduate degrees came from
online for-profits, we don't even consider them.''
That is a tragedy. I mean, this is a man, like yourselves,
who has served in the military. I am sure he would rather hire
a military retiree than not hire one. I don't know that because
I don't know the man.
Then another comment, made I guess by a counselor: ``Some
of these schools prey on marines,'' he says. ``Day and night,
they call you, they e-mail you. These servicemen get caught up
in that. Nobody in their family ever went to college. They
don't know about college.''
I hope you are asking--I guess, again, for this
recommendation as to how we move forward--meaning we, the
American people--it seems like to me that we have had a
system--and this does not blame anybody sitting at the table--
but we have had a system that really seems like it is not as
well-controlled as it needs to be. Because I cannot imagine, if
I was a marine or soldier, sailor, airman, whatever, and I
decided I wanted to better myself and go get online--and I
don't know Phoenix University from Duke University; let's say
that is the type of person, okay? And I don't know a thing
about Phoenix. I just happen to see their ads all the time.
That is the only reason I am using them. They might be the best
in the world.
But anyway, so I decide that I am going to go--I keep
getting these calls, I get these e-mails. And, you know, I am
just going to take one course, that is all, from this for-
profit. And then I find out, if I do complete the course, that
I don't have an equal opportunity to that person that went
maybe to a small school. Now, I am not talking about the big
schools, but a small school.
And I hope that the Congress of next year, whomever is
sitting here next year, that we will work with the Department
of Defense. Because, in my humble opinion--now, I am basing a
lot of this on conversation back on some of the bases that I
represent. We have a situation here that the taxpayers' dollar
is not being well-spent. And even more seriously than that, to
me, is that person in the military is not getting a quality
education. And when they get out of the military, they are
going to find out that what they thought they had that would
help them open a door will not open a door. That is a tragedy.
Mr. Chairman, I guess nobody is going to answer. I would
just----
Secretary Gordon. I would be happy. Thank you, Congressman
Jones.
You know, it is interesting, looking at society writ large
right now and the emergence of online education. As I said, I
read that article before----
Mr. Jones. Right.
Secretary Gordon [continuing]. And I looked at that
comment, and I think you are right: We have to ensure a quality
education for our servicemembers.
What we don't know right now is the degree to which our
society, our commercial sector, values an online education. So
I am not sure if that comment is a result of, ``It was an
online education; therefore, we don't hire them,'' or, you
know, ``The quality was not sufficient, and, therefore, we
don't hire them.'' I think it is a new day, that we are still
growing in terms of this online education process.
I do know that what we are better understanding is that we
all learn differently, even in this room. And whether the
delivery system is a brick-and-mortar system or an online
system, I think, for our servicemembers, being able to map out
a certain sort of educational delivery system that better
matches how they learn is something we can give them and a
great opportunity to do.
But, as you said, the key is ensuring that sort of quality.
And I think first with accreditation, but with this change in
MIVER, we can take a look at all those institutions and ensure
our commanders and our installations also have a part of the
process, we can ensure that quality education for our
servicemembers.
Mr. Jones. Thank you.
Mr. Larsen. Yes, sir, if I could, Congressman Jones, one of
the Marine Corps installations that is in your district, we
have an example of where we have one of the educational
institutions that was considered not of value by the local
commander. We have barred them from the base, from conducting
business on-base.
So it is very difficult when you put the onus on the
individual installation, on the individual education services
officer to make a determination to bar somebody, and then that
is done at one installation and not done across the board at
other installations.
So I think we need not only to put it at the local level,
but also we need to make sure that those institutions are
accredited and are of value and make sure that they do provide
the marine or whatever servicemember the value of education
that they are looking for.
But we do have a couple of examples where we have shown
that it is not of value and we have taken action to prevent
them from conducting business on installations.
Mr. Jones. Good.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Snyder. Thank you.
Aren't there about 7,000 schools that participate somehow
in the tuition assistance program? I mean, it would be a very
difficult challenge to expect you all to somehow analyze all
the coursework. And I am sure the departments vary from within
the same school. And I think you all are having to grapple with
a societal issue here on this topic, but you have a special
niche.
I want to ask about the 90/10 rule, which I didn't really
know much about. I thought the 90/10 rule had to do with how
much a local government had to put up after a tornado to get
FEMA cleanup moneys, but this is a different 90/10 rule.
But I think it was while Mr. Jones and I have been in
Congress, at some point we said that, okay, let's at least say
that these for-profit schools have to have at least 10 percent
of their students actually pay their own money. The quality is
so good there is at least 10 percent of the student body that
is paying their own money. And so up to 90 percent could be
title IV Federal dollars.
But here is where you all come in: military tuition
assistance doesn't count in the 90 percent. It counts in the 10
percent. So--I will make this up--theoretically, there could be
a school out there that has, you know, 89 percent of its
students getting title IV moneys through Stafford loans or Pell
Grants and 11 percent tuition assistance, so they would be 100
percent federally funded, because your students count in the
private side of things.
Now, that is concerning. That is concerning because then
you would have a school that every taxpayer in America is
paying into, and yet they may not have any or just very, very
few students that actually have looked at the quality and think
it is worth me putting up my own money for.
And I don't know how we grapple with that. I guess--I don't
know if that is an oversight or what, but it seems like if the
90/10 rule means anything--and maybe it doesn't; it is kind of
a roundabout way of getting at quality, I think--but if it
means anything, then it just doesn't make any sense to me why
federal military tuition assistance isn't counted as part of
the 90 percent.
Do you all have any comments on that? Is that something
that you all are familiar with?
It got real quiet here.
Secretary Gordon. I am not real familiar with it, but it
needs to be taken a look at, yeah.
Dr. Snyder. And, frankly, that is not your responsibility.
I mean, these are issues we are dealing with that are really
not the job of the Secretary of Defense to sort out or, you
know, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, but they are issues
that you all are involved in.
And that may be one of the reasons why you are seeing such
predatory--some predatory behavior out there or what you
describe, Mr. Larsen, as very aggressive techniques. It may be
that, you know, some schools need to keep these numbers up,
otherwise their balance is thrown off under the 90/10 rule.
The issue came back, Mr. Larsen, when we were talking about
loans versus tuition assistance, and we all know--we are
talking about the tuition assistance program. I remember, this
was in my olden days, right after I got out of the Marine
Corps. And I had dropped out of college after two years to join
the Marine Corps. And while I didn't smoke, somehow I ended up
with a matchbook with an offering for a heavy-equipment
operator school. Sadly, I probably got it in a bar. But anyway,
I ended up with this matchbook, and I called them up. And I
thought, ``I could drive a Road Bear.''
And so, this guy calls me back right away. He gets a hold
of me, and he is going to meet with me. Well, we ended up
meeting, like, in the parking lot right out of a motel room. I
think he was from out of town somewhere, and had come down
there. There was a--it looked like a girlfriend with him. I
think they thought this was going to be a big killing.
And you talk about aggressive sales techniques, I mean, he
was just saying, ``You know, you can always change your mind.
It is not going to cost you anything.'' He used the phrase
``Uncle Sugar'' several times. ``Uncle Sugar, no problem''--
well, I didn't sign up for it. But later on I realized that--
and this was the GI Bill--that I only had, I think, at that
time, like, two opportunities to change my program. Well, if I
had signed up for that and dropped out, that would have been
one. So if I had decided to change my mind and not be a medical
student--I mean, it was taking away an option, and yet it was
like it was a free ride.
But I would have had no skin in the game. That is the
difference--that is one of the differences here. I could have
signed up for anything. Your tuition assistance to students,
you know, whether it is $250 or $50, they have no skin in the
game. And I don't think they should. But that does put more
responsibility on you all to monitor the quality. I mean,
nobody is--I suspect you don't get many complaints of people
coming back and saying, ``I was really hoping I would study
more,'' you know, ``I was really hoping I would have to stay up
later at night and do my homework because of the rigor of the
tests that were coming up.''
Secretary Gordon. Uh-huh.
Dr. Snyder. I suspect most people don't come to you and
say, ``We were lacking rigor.''
Secretary Gordon. Well, Mr. Chairman, they actually do have
skin in the game. We provide them the money for tuition, but
they must provide all the support in terms of computers, books.
So they do get skin in the game through the fact that we do
have a tuition piece but they have to provide the other support
system, basically, to take the course.
Dr. Snyder. Well----
Secretary Stamilio. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would like to
offer a comment with regard to that.
The Army has a program that focuses on credentialing and
licensing, a program much like what you discussed off the
matchbook cover. And the focus on this is for the soldier who
is probably not going to pursue a bachelor's or a master's
degree but needs a professional certification, perhaps as a
heavy-equipment operator, perhaps as some other certificate
program.
And through the Army Education Center, the soldier can come
in, get the appropriate counseling, get the appropriate credit
for the training that he or she already has toward this
particular certification, and then links the soldier with the
appropriate institutions that are fully accredited, that have
the same kinds of controls as the rest of the tuition
assistance program.
So it is not, ``Write us a check for $5,000, and we will
send your certificate later.'' It provides for credit-hour
checks and balances, that the education counselor can check
progress, but also provides for the appropriate credit for the
training that the soldier has received, with the ultimate goal
for the institution, the educational institution, to fill in
the gaps with that required training that will allow the
soldier to get the certificate that he or she deserves.
So we have a program in place that works that--the
management controls are in place so that--so it is pretty
effective, in terms of both outcome and investment.
Dr. Snyder. One comment, and it will go to Mr. Wittman.
Mr. Gordon, in response to your thoughts about books, as
you know, there is no requirement that the schools charge for
books. And, as you probably know, some for-profit schools waive
book fees----
Secretary Gordon. Yes, I do.
Dr. Snyder. Yeah, so--in the spirit of completeness.
Mr. Wittman.
Mr. Wittman. Just one overall question. I know as these
for-profit universities obviously expand into meeting this
need, I think the concern is that there is a diversity of
opportunities there, and if the not-profit, publicly supported
institutions begin to wane in their activity in supporting our
men and women pursuing degrees, if that opportunity wanes, my
concern is, where does that leave us in the future? Does that
actually create less access because it is getting focused into
a smaller number of universities and institutions?
So I just was wondering if any of you all have a comment
about how do you make sure, going into the future, that we
still have the variety of opportunities, including a very
robust opportunity within our public institutions for our men
and women in uniform to pursue degrees there.
Mr. Gordon.
Secretary Gordon. Thanks, Congressman Wittman.
I think, you know, as I had mentioned earlier, this is a
new day, with real opportunities, potentially, online with our
society writ large. So, as long as that demand, I suspect, is
out there, we will continue to see the expansion of those sorts
of opportunities.
And I really think the key is ensuring, you know, of those
sorts of academic institutions that are available, that our
servicemembers have access to the ones that provide them that
valued education.
You know, we have been talking a lot, I think, about almost
silos of, you know, online versus brick-and-mortar, but a
number of institutions have both, so that our servicemembers
can combine an online and a brick-and-mortar education, as
well. They can actually go to some classrooms. We have some
downrange education centers, as well, that are both brick-and-
mortar and online.
So I think we are seeing these trends. I suspect that they
will continue. I think the key for us, though, is ensuring that
quality education.
Mr. Wittman. Mr. Larsen.
Mr. Larsen. Sir, if I could offer, in the Marine Corps,
from 2005 to 2009, the for-profit enrollment has increased from
about 6,500 to about--almost to 11,000. So it hasn't quite
doubled, but it has significantly increased.
The not-for-profit population has remained constant at
about 5,600, 5,700. And the traditional public universities
have decreased, actually, from about 10,000 to about 8,000.
So there has been a marked increase in for-profit in the
Marine Corps in the last five years, and the others have
remained somewhat constant.
Mr. Lutterloh. Representative Wittman, from a Navy
perspective, the for-profit schools certainly have increased,
distance learning has increased, but our not-for-profit
institutions have also increased.
And I would say that, across the board, distance learning
in all three segments, whether it be for-profit, not-for-
profit, and public, distance learning continues to increase as
a segment of those populations. So we are seeing distance
learning on the rise across the board.
And it is not just for-profit schools that are increasing.
Not-for-profit schools, as a percentage of our population, is
also increasing. It is the public that has had a little bit of
a decrease. And it is only marginal. Depending on how long you
look at that, you see that data going up and down.
And we are looking at the top 50 institutions, which
comprise about 85 percent or so of our tuition assistance
expenditures. When we look at the rest of the schools, most of
those are public institutions, down below there. And when you
add those in, I think the numbers might be a little bit more
normalized.
Secretary Stamilio. Mr. Wittman, if I may--thank you. Our
trends are really pretty consistent with what my colleague in
the Navy said.
I guess, if I understood your question correctly, the real
thought is, strategically or societally, where does the nation
plan to be with regard to our mix of for-profit, non-profit,
and private institutions? And, clearly, the investment that the
federal government makes through the tuition assistance program
is a component of that, but we are just less than 1 percent of
the overall population.
And so, I believe that a big, important question of this
is, obviously, the quality that we monitor very carefully
through our accreditation process, but then the overall
societal acceptability of institutions is really one that is at
issue here.
We certainly want soldiers to have the appropriate
opportunities to pursue whatever educational goals that they
have, but, as you and Mr. Jones have stated, it is critical
that all of that work and all of that investment translates to
a credential that is acceptable by society and by the private
sector.
I am not sure how the Services can attack that, other than
to absolutely stay tuned, absolutely be vigilant with regard to
our pursuit of quality controls, but also to make sure that we
are, within all of those parameters, providing soldiers
opportunities so that they can pursue the educational goals
that they are looking for.
Thank you.
Mr. Sitterly. Thank you for the question, Mr. Wittman.
We are so proud of the Community College of the Air Force.
And it gives us that diversity of thought, that diversity of
education that you mentioned.
The Community College of the Air Force is, in fact, the
largest community college in the Air Force: as I mentioned
earlier, 1.6 million credit-hours per year. If an airman goes
to an aircraft-maintenance technical training, those
instructors there are all certified. They have CCAF--or 90
percent of them have CCAF degrees; the other 10 percent are
working on them. And so they get a certain number of hours for
that.
If you go to the NCO Leadership School, that is accredited.
If you go to any other enlisted training--I think we have 104,
now, various facilities around the world that are accredited
through the Community College of the Air Force. So 75 percent
of the requirements to get an associate degree can be done
directly through the Community College of the Air Force.
So I am confident that we will continue to have that
diversity in education in the Air Force for many years to come.
They were just recently recertified, reaccredited, and I think
we have nine years until we do it again.
Mr. Wittman. Thank you, gentlemen.
I think the challenge for all of you all is making sure
that folks across the Service branches develop a greater
understanding of the academic rigor throughout all of these
opportunities so they can make a choice and then they
understand the investment that they make, not only in the
dollars they receive through the GI Bill but also their own
personal investment in time, and what that is going to result
in. So I think that is the challenge, going forward, is making
sure that they understand the differences between those
institutions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Dr. Snyder. Thank you.
As I think some of you know, this issue of what you all
have been discussing here for some time now, the issue of how
do you measure quality when it is not--it is going to be
difficult for you all to do that with 7,000 schools out there,
unless there are really some big problems.
But, as you all may know, I think there has been some for-
profit schools that have bought small, financially distressed
community colleges that have regional accreditation, and then
they use that as the tail to wag the dog. And they are now
regionally accredited, and then they can offer these courses,
saying they are a regionally accredited school.
I don't think that is what people hoped would happen by
getting regional accreditation. I think we hoped that the
quality would be going up, not just somebody found a shrewd
opportunity to buy a school that was probably going under or
was about to go under. But it does make it a challenge for you
all.
It also seems to me--I am struck a bit by--we have spent a
year or so longer than we actually planned on looking at
professional military education. And we looked at it in a lot
of different ways. And Chairman Skelton was very repetitive in
his use of the word ``rigor.'' That we do not see PME--if we
see PME as ticket-punching, we are in trouble as a military.
That we actually think that this stuff, with a good PME course,
good professional military education, it will help the
individual, help our military education.
It seems like sometimes the tone here is about getting that
degree, getting that associate degree, getting that credential.
Well, we actually, I think--ultimately, the credential only
means something if there is an education that goes along with
it, and a quality education and one that helps you all in the
military, helps us be safer.
And in our discussion about professional military
education, we had this discussion: Do we think there is an
advantage to coming to the National Defense University and the
Army War College and spending 10 months there and having a
seminar group that meets for several hours a day, you know,
several days a week? And I think the conclusion is, yes, we
think there is value in that.
And so I think we shouldn't be so--perhaps so quick to say,
``Boy, these young kids are computer-oriented. It is great that
they can sit at home and crank these things out on a, you know,
20-hour caffeinated weekend,'' when they don't get the
experience of what we--I think we are, as a military, saying we
really value. We are putting a lot of money in these seminar
classes, so we have a little bit of a conflict, I think. It
gets back to this issue of how do you determine quality when it
should be more than just ticket-punching, that the academic
rigor needs to be there.
Mr. Stamilio, I think you captured this whole issue in your
written statement where you said, ``Since the Army complies
with DOD tuition assistance policy and authorizes tuition
assistance for all regionally and nationally accredited
schools, we are''--and this is an understatement--``we are
somewhat limited in our oversight of the non-SOC member schools
and their delivery of quality educational programs to
soldiers.''
I think that gets at it. I acknowledge it is not your
responsibility, but you have been very clear, you don't
discriminate amongst schools, and that may be a problem.
Mr. Sitterly, you may be familiar with what is going on at
the Little Rock Air Force Base in Jacksonville, Arkansas, but
several years ago--well, the whole issue came about after
September 11th. They have a very robust educational program on-
base, with both national for-profit schools and then Arkansas
State University and some others. But when September 11th
occurred and the base was shut down, it really interfered with
faculty--this happened at bases all over the country.
The community responded by passing a bond issue, after
discussion with the leadership of the base, and taxed
themselves and raised $5 million, which they put in a bank
account, to build the facility there in partnership with the
Air Force, to build it outside the perimeter, on Federal
property land, on Air Force base land, but outside the
perimeter, so it could be accessible both to community people,
community students, community faculty, but also air base
personnel.
It took a bit to convince the Air Force how to accept the
check for $5 million, but we were finally able to do that, I
think partly through the congressional insert process. And that
building is about done.
So there is a heck of an investment in these facilities, a
heck of an investment of the community of Jacksonville in these
facilities. And I think, ultimately, when we see a college, we
want good things to happen there. We want it to be a rigorous
academic environment that will help young people and not-so-
young people and help our military. And, you know, when you see
that kind of very obvious investment of both local and federal
dollars, like in this facility at Jacksonville, that really
does put some responsibilities on you all to sort out this
quality thing.
And I don't want to pick on the for-profits; I think there
are some good for-profit schools out there. But it is an issue
that has flared up over the last several years. It is not going
to go away, and you all are inheriting some of those issues.
And for whatever reasons, I think it is very important that our
military personnel not somehow get a false sense of security
about their credential or a sense that all schools are equal
because they are all accredited. Well, that is not--we all know
that is not true. They are not all equal, and nobody here is
saying that.
But I think there are some ongoing issues for the military
to sort out. I won't be here to help you sort them out, but I
am sure you are going to do just fine.
Anything further, Mr. Wittman?
Mr. Wittman. No. Thank you.
Dr. Snyder. Let me give you an open invitation. If you all
have any additional statements that you would like to be
included as part of the record, feel free to respond to this
question.
And I think you all are going to get me the numbers on
counseling and where you see the numbers of counselors and
counseling services having gone up in the last several years
and where you see it going in the future.
We are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 9:32 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
?
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
September 22, 2010
=======================================================================
?
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
September 22, 2010
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2592.043
?
=======================================================================
WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING
THE HEARING
September 22, 2010
=======================================================================
RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. JONES
Secretary Gordon. The American Council on Education (ACE) has
conducted 60 Military Installation Voluntary Education Reviews (MIVERs)
on behalf of the Department of Defense during the past five years. A
MIVER visit evaluates at least three colleges/universities at each
military site and often involves multiple installations located in
close proximity. No colleges/universities have been delisted as a
result of these reviews.
The purpose of the MIVER is to: 1) assess the quality of selected
on-base voluntary education programs; and 2) assist in improving the
programs by providing recommendations to institutions, installations,
and the military Services. The five principle program areas that the
MIVER assesses are mission statement and command support, program
management and leadership, student services, resources, and voluntary
education program plan. These principles were developed with the intent
of establishing and maintaining servicemember access to higher
education programs on military installations that are equivalent to
programs on traditional campuses. More specifically, the principles are
intended to:
help define the parameters of excellence in voluntary
higher education programs on military installations;
stimulate dialogue on how to strengthen and improve the
quality of these programs and services; and
ensure that these programs continue to evolve as part of
the mainstream of adult and higher education.
When a MIVER is conducted, the review team provides findings and
recommendations to the college/university and the installation
commander. Historically, the institutions are generally receptive to
findings and take the required measures to address program issues that
would otherwise lead the program to be considered for ``delisting.''
Findings address such areas as adequacy of office space, key staff
vacancies, disparities in resources, and inadequate library resources,
connectivity and/or customer support. The Department of Education is
responsible for curriculum accreditation; therefore, curriculum is not
assessed during MIVERs.
The current MIVER contract will end on December 31, 2010. DOD is in
the process of soliciting for a new third-party review that will begin
in 2011. The new review expands the scope of the MIVER to include all
institutions participating in the Department of Defense (DOD) Tuition
Assistance Program and not just those institutions operating on a
military base. [See page 15.]
?
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
September 22, 2010
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY DR. SNYDER
Dr. Snyder. What counseling support is provided to servicemembers?
What are the qualifications of educational counselors? To what extent
have the number of counselors on military installations been reduced
over the past five years? If so, why? Is counseling being replaced by
Web-based services or other methods?
Secretary Gordon. DOD provides counseling support and information
on educational topics such as:
Schools and admissions requirements
School curriculum
Accreditation and transferability of courses and credits
Non-traditional credit for college courses through
testing, such as: the College-Level Examination Program or CLEP tests;
the Prometric DSST Exams (formally known as the Defense Activity for
Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES) Subject Standardized Tests);
and the American Council on Education (ACE) Military credit
recommendations
School tuition costs and financial assistance to include
military tuition assistance (TA), loans, and grants
Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Benefits: GI BILL and
Post-9/11 GI BILL
Counseling and education technicians provide support at Services'
Education Centers on military installations. Counseling support is also
provided to servicemembers via the Services' Web portals and call
centers.
Counselors have at least a bachelor's degree with appropriate
standard education requirements* and a counseling practicum. Grade
levels range from General Schedule (GS)-9 through GS-12 for counselors
and education technicians range from GS 7-9.
DOD policy prescribes that educational counseling shall be provided
to servicemembers, but does not specify the method. The Services each
manage their manpower and implement the DOD policy on counseling
services. The Services' reductions in manpower and methods of
delivering counseling services are attached.
Dr. Snyder. Does DOD have a system in place to alert military
installation education center directors about any Department of
Education or other government reviews, investigations, or regulatory
actions pending that pertain to institutions of higher education? What
about if accrediting organizations place schools on probation?
Secretary Gordon. No, DOD does not have a formal notification
system to alert education centers about federal reviews,
investigations, or regulatory actions pending that pertain to
institutions of higher education. However, DOD has a contract with the
American Association of State Colleges and Universities and the
American Association of Community Colleges for the Servicemembers
Opportunity College (SOC). SOC advocates for and communicates the needs
of the military community with the higher education community. SOC is a
consortium of more than 1,900 colleges and universities that provide
educational opportunities for servicemembers around the world. SOC
monitors these schools, which could include their accreditation status,
and serves as the DOD liaison to resolve concerns and share program
information to strengthen education relationships with DOD. If a school
loses their accreditation status, they will also lose their SOC
membership. When this occurs, SOC notifies OSD, the Services, and the
Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES). The
Services inform the installations so they can make adjustments to their
tuition assistance management system. DANTES informs the installations
through their monthly newsletter, the DANTES Information Bulletin.
Dr. Snyder. Can you please describe how the proposed Military
Voluntary Education Review (MVER) process will be implemented? How many
reviews do you plan to conduct each year? When will reviews begin? How
will installations and colleges be selected? How frequently will
installations and colleges be reviewed? What criteria will be used in
reviewing the quality of distance learning programs?
Secretary Gordon. The process will be implemented in a manner
similar to the current process of Military Installation Voluntary
Education Review (MIVER). MIVER is a contracted program, conducted by
the American Council on Education (ACE) since 1991. The Defense
Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES) manages the
contract for DOD. The current contract expires December 2010 and a new
Military Voluntary Education Review (MVER) contract will be obtained
through the DOD acquisition process and awarded during Fiscal Year
2011.
As per the current MIVER process the new MVER will assess the
quality of voluntary education programs received by the servicemembers
using tuition assistance and assist in the improvement of voluntary
education programs through appropriate recommendations to institutions.
However, the new review process will be expanded to three types of
reviews: an installation with multiple institutions on the base;
distance learning institutions; and off-base traditional institutions.
Sites and schools will be nominated by the Services and provided to the
contractor. Currently there is an on-going competitive solicitation for
the new third-party review. Due to contract sensitivity and non-release
of the Request for Proposal, details of the process to include
frequency of reviews, type of review and specific criteria cannot be
disclosed.
Dr. Snyder. A key component of the Department's proposed policy
change for the Voluntary Education Program is to require institutions
that receive tuition assistance to agree to certain commitments and
sign a formal memorandum of understanding (MOU) with DOD. The
Department has indicated that allegations of not following the
agreements in an MOU will be submitted and handled through the Defense
Activity for Non-traditional Education Support (DANTES) and
Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC) organizations. How will the
Department and Services identify potential ``allegations'' of not
following the agreements in MOUs? What procedures and mechanisms will
the Department and the Services implement to monitor adherence to MOUs?
Secretary Gordon. The Department and the Services will identify
potential ``allegations'' of not following the agreements in the MOUs
through two methods. The non-compliance relating to the MOU could be
disclosed during the new review process, the Military Voluntary
Education Review (MVER) or reported by a servicemember to an
educational official at the installation Education Office. For example,
if a servicemember makes an allegation to a guidance counselor or the
education services specialist at the education center on a military
base, the government employee would assist the servicemember in first
resolving the issue with the school. If the counselor cannot resolve
the issue, it would be brought to the attention of the Education
Services Officer (ESO). The ESO would contact the school or the
accrediting agency. If need be, the ESO would raise the issue to their
higher headquarters and Servicemembers Opportunity College (SOC).
All MOU non-compliance issues will be further investigated and
handled as described below. The following steps will be taken if a
potential allegation is made against an institution with a signed MOU
with DOD that is on the published list of institutions in good standing
participating in the Military Tuition Assistance (TA) program.
a) The installation and/or Service will confirm violations or
complaints and attempt to resolve. If a resolution cannot be reached,
the issue will be elevated to the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD), Voluntary Education Office.
b) OSD will contact an appropriate authority within the institution
to attempt to rectify the situation.
c) If agreement between the offending institution and OSD can be
resolved and the alleged violation is corrected, the matter is recorded
and filed for record.
d) If resolution cannot be achieved or violations appear major in
scope, then OSD will request the Servicemembers Opportunity College
(SOC) to assist.
e) OSD will request SOC to send a letter addressed to the
institution's president or chief executive officer with detailed
information regarding the alleged violation or violations and request
that the institution investigate the situation and respond to the SOC
regarding ways to resolve the allegation.
f) If the violation or violations appear major in scope, the SOC
may consult with the institution's accrediting agency and receive that
agency's advice on appropriate resolution of the offending situation.
g) A reasonable response time will be specified with an alleged
offending institution to allow for sufficient investigation and
resolution of the situation.
h) If satisfactory resolution can be achieved, correspondence
involving the situation will be filed with the SOC with a copy sent to
OSD.
i) If attempts to resolve a violation, as outlined above, have
failed and the member institution remains in violation, OSD will take
action to terminate the MOU with the institution.
Termination of an institutional MOU will result in its being
removed from the ``list'' of institutions in good standing and placed
on a ``delist''. Notification will go to the Services and
installations. Delisted schools will not be allowed to participate in
the tuition assistance program.
Dr. Snyder. What plans, if any, do you have to begin collecting
data and monitoring servicemembers' enrollment in for-profit schools?
Secretary Gordon. Currently, DOD does not have plans to collect
data and monitor servicemembers' enrollment in for-profit schools. All
institutions are treated equally; Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD) does not identify schools as state-supported (public),
independent (non-profit) or proprietary (for-profit). Currently, the
Services are analyzing the list of colleges that are authorized tuition
assistance for our servicemembers to identify the type of school.
All servicemember participation, course enrollments, and course
completions are monitored by the OSD and the Services. The Voluntary
Education Management Information System (VEMIS) electronically
consolidates servicemember participation into one annual report. The
VEMIS report rolls up Service-specific data on items such as: number of
participants, number of enrollments, number of completions, types of
degrees, certifications, foreign languages, personnel data, and related
costs associated with providing education opportunities on
installations worldwide. The system also includes tailored queries and
reports using either current or historical VEMIS data to monitor the
tuition assistance.
Dr. Snyder. Data provided by the Army and Navy suggest that
completion rates are lower for distance learning courses. Are
completion rates lower for distance learning courses? Why is this? Are
you seeing any decrease in completion rates over the past several
years?
Secretary Gordon. Yes, completion rates are lower for distance
learning courses. Our military students face very different challenges
than civilian counterparts enrolled in postsecondary courses.
Interruptions such as the military mission, deployments, and transfers
make course completions very difficult. There is increased
participation in distance learning courses and online education
programs. DOD recognizes the importance of successful completion rates.
The Army and the Navy completion rates for the distance learning
courses are attached.
Dr. Snyder. Should the Department of Defense and the Services do
more to monitor the recruiting practices of colleges that target
servicemembers? If so, what steps will you take to increase monitoring
efforts?
Secretary Gordon. Currently, the monitoring of college recruitment
practices is done at every level in the Department of Defense (DOD):
the installation education center, education officers, installation
base commanders, the Services, and the Office of the Secretary of
Defense.
As it stands now, the only schools that are invited onto the base
(i.e. to conduct education fairs or to counsel their current students),
or have memorandums of understanding with the base commander to operate
on the base, are permitted to market their programs on base. If
aggressive recruiting practices occur on a military base, the commander
of the installation may ban the institution or recruiter from the base.
In addition, DOD will then request the servicemembers Opportunity
College (SOC) provide the institution the ``Military Student Bill of
Rights'' containing the standards of good practice for educational
recruitment and enrollment of servicemembers.
Dr. Snyder. What is the impact, if any, of Joint basing on
installation education centers?
Secretary Gordon. There is no impact of Joint basing on
installation education centers. This is due to the fact that Voluntary
Education funding is not a base operating supply (BOS) funded function
nor is it considered a community service. Consequently, education
centers are not included in the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
2005 Joint Base implementation.
Dr. Snyder. To what extent, if any, are servicemembers taking out
education loans or using their own funds to pay for college education
expenses? Do you have a means of checking on this?
Secretary Gordon. Currently, there is no tracking mechanism in the
case that servicemembers take out education loans or use their own
funds to pay for college education expenses. DOD policy sets uniform
tuition assistance levels and periodically reviews these levels to
ensure the assistance provides ample tuition, limiting the need for
servicemembers to have to pay for their off-duty education with their
own funds.
Under the current uniform Tuition Assistance (TA) policy, which
commenced in Fiscal Year 2003, all servicemember participants may
receive up to $4,500 of assistance per fiscal year with an individual
course cost cap of $250 per semester hour.
Dr. Snyder. Are complaints about higher education institutions
tracked and shared across the Services and education centers?
Secretary Gordon. Yes, they are tracked and shared across the
Service and the education centers. We have three approaches in handling
the allegations:
Contacting the school and/or accrediting agency for
resolution and requesting the school/agency provide a formal response
to the allegations and corrective actions taken.
Providing Servicemembers Opportunity College (SOC) with
documentation and requesting they contact the institution for
resolution. All investigations are recorded in the SOC Quarterly
Report. A copy of the report is sent to OSD and the Services.
Presenting the allegations to the Department of
Education.
Depending on the nature of the complaint or allegation, the
following parties could be involved in resolving the issue:
Guidance counselor: If a servicemember complains and/or
makes an allegation to a guidance counselor or education officer on a
military base the government employee assists the servicemember in
resolving the issues with the schools. Depending on the allegation the
counselor may contact the school, registrar, and/or accounting office
of the school for the student. If the counselor cannot resolve the
issue it would be brought to the attention of the Education Service
Officer.
Education Service Officer (ESO): The ESO communicates
with the school and/or accrediting agency. If need be, the ESO raises
the issue to their higher headquarters and Servicemembers Opportunity
College (SOC).
Installation commander: The commander has the authority
to deny access to the base and control marketing initiatives. All
institutions operating on a base must be invited (i.e. for an education
fair) or have an MOU with the base. If aggressive marketing allegations
towards a school are founded the commander will demand immediate
removal from the base.
SOC advocates for and communicates the needs of the military
community with the higher education community. SOC ensures institutions
are responsive to the special needs of the servicemembers; assists the
higher education community to understand the requirements of the
military; and serves as the DOD liaison with institutions to resolve
concerns and share program information to strengthen education
relationships with DOD. School allegations brought to the attention of
SOC are investigated and resolved.
Dr. Snyder. What counseling support is provided to servicemembers?
What are the qualifications of educational counselors? To what extent
have the number of counselors on military installations been reduced
over the past five years? If so, why? Is counseling being replaced by
Web-based services or other methods?
Secretary Stamilio. Counselors are responsible for assisting
soldiers to establish their long- and short-range educational goals.
Once goals have been established and documented, and the soldier and
ACES counselor agree on the appropriate programs and services needed to
attain those goals, follow-on counseling is provided as necessary or as
requested by the soldier. Tuition Assistance (TA) is authorized for
courses offered by institutions that are accredited by regional or
national accrediting agencies recognized by the Department of
Education. Counseling information is provided via several means: face-
to-face, virtually through the GoArmyEd Web portal, telephonic, and
email. Army counselors attempt to meet the counseling and information
needs of soldiers through any and all means possible. Electronic
communication is an effective tool in keeping soldiers informed and up-
to-date on benefits, services and their individual progress.
Counselors are Department of the Army civilians in the GS-1740
career field, with a minimum educational requirement of a BA/BS Degree
in counseling or a degree with a curriculum containing 24 semester
hours of adult education courses. A practicum in counseling is required
or a two-year Department of the Army approved intern program. Most
careerists in the series have earned a master's degree.
As a result of significant budgetary constraints that led to major
staffing cuts within Army Education centers worldwide, starting in
2005, Army decided to centralize a number of administrative functions
and operations (e.g., tuition assistance) as well as leverage
technology and the efficiencies that could be gained thereby. The goal
has been to create a more modern and holistic approach to providing
counseling and educational support services; one that enhances
soldiers' access to educational tools and information resources that
are available 24/7/365. Since 2005, 233 counseling and other staff/
support positions have been eliminated in installation Army Education
Centers. Currently there are 269 authorized Department of Army Civilian
Employee Education Center staff (counselors, education specialists,
education officers and administrative assistants), supported by
approximately 390 contractors, working in Army's 116 Army Education
Centers around the world. Counseling is not being replaced by
technology and Web-based services in Army Education Centers; rather
counseling is supported by these tools to help ensure access for all
soldiers regardless of location of assignment or time of day. The need
for education counseling is more important than ever as soldiers are
faced with a tremendous amount of online and other detailed and
confusing advertising information regarding educational opportunities.
Senior Army leaders and subject matter experts are currently analyzing
data and resources in detail, with the express purpose of coming up
with a comprehensive solution for ``right-sizing'' the counseling
staffs for all Army Education Centers.
Dr. Snyder. Does DOD have a system in place to alert military
installation education center directors about any Department of
Education or other government reviews, investigations, or regulatory
actions pending that pertain to institutions of higher education? What
about if accrediting organizations place schools on probation?
Secretary Stamilio. The Army, through its GoArmyEd portal, has
established an interface with the U.S. Department of Education to
receive a data feed of school information called the Postsecondary
Education Participants System (PEPS). Contained in the PEPS data are
the institution's accrediting agency and an indicator as to whether the
school's accreditation is still active. The U.S. Department of
Education updates the PEPS data weekly.
The Army closely monitors the accreditation status of any
institution that has been placed on probation by its accrediting
agency. Additionally, if the school is a member of Servicemembers
Opportunity Colleges (SOC), Army would request that SOC conduct an
inquiry as to the reasons for the school's probationary status in order
to ensure that no potential harm would come to soldiers and/or to
prevent any violations of tuition assistance policies and procedures.
Should the institution lose its accreditation, the school would be
immediately deactivated and removed from the GoArmyEd portal. Once
removed, soldiers would no longer be able to access information about
the school through the GoArmyEd portal nor would they be able to
receive tuition assistance funds in order to attend any deactivated
school.
Dr. Snyder. Can you please describe how the proposed Military
Voluntary Education Review (MVER) process will be implemented? How many
reviews do you plan to conduct each year? When will reviews begin? How
will installations and colleges be selected? How frequently will
installations and colleges be reviewed? What criteria will be used in
reviewing the quality of distance learning programs?
Secretary Stamilio. The current process, Military Installation
Voluntary Education Review (MIVER), is a contracted program, conducted
by the American Council on Education since 1991. The Defense Activity
for Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES) manages the contract for
DOD. The current contract expires December 2010. A new Military
Voluntary Review contract will be obtained through the DOD Acquisition
process and awarded during Fiscal Year 2011.
We expect the function of the new Military Voluntary Education
Review (MVER) to be similar to the MIVER function. However, since DOD
is currently going through the acquisition process, details of the new
review are not finalized. The new process will assess the quality of
voluntary education programs received by the servicemembers using
tuition assistance and assist in the improvement of voluntary education
programs through appropriate recommendations to institutions. There
will be three types of reviews: installation with multiple institutions
operating on the base; distance learning; and off-base traditional
institutions. Sites and schools will be nominated by the Services and
provided to the contractor.
The number of MVERs to be conducted annually will be based upon
available funding.
Dr. Snyder. A key component of the Department's proposed policy
change for the Voluntary Education Program is to require institutions
that receive tuition assistance to agree to certain commitments and
sign a formal memorandum of understanding (MOU) with DOD. The
Department has indicated that allegations of not following the
agreements in an MOU will be submitted and handled through the Defense
Activity for Non-traditional Education Support (DANTES) and
Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC) organizations. How will the
Department and Services identify potential ``allegations'' of not
following the agreements in MOUs? What procedures and mechanisms will
the Department and the Services implement to monitor adherence to MOUs?
Secretary Stamilio. Feedback provided by soldiers and Education
Center personnel will be the primary means for identifying allegations.
The following steps will be taken if an allegation is made against an
institution that has a signed MOU with DOD:
1. Installation and/or Service will investigate and confirm
violations/complaints and attempt to resolve. If resolution cannot be
resolved at this level, the issue will be elevated to Office of the
Secretary of Defense (OSD), Voluntary Education Office.
2. OSD will consult with Office of General Counsel for advice and
contact an appropriate authority within the institution and attempt to
rectify the situation.
3. If agreement between the offending institution and OSD can be
resolved, and the alleged violation corrected, the matter is documented
for record.
4. If resolution cannot be achieved or violations appear to be
major in scope, then OSD will request Servicemembers Opportunity
College (SOC) to assist.
5. OSD will request that SOC send a letter that is addressed to the
institution's president or chief executive officer with detailed
information regarding the alleged violation or violations and request
that the institution investigate the situation and respond to SOC
regarding ways to resolve the allegation.
6. If the violation or violations appear to be major in scope, the
SOC may consult with the institution's accrediting agency and receive
that agency's advice on appropriate resolution of the offending
situation.
7. A reasonable response time will be specified with an alleged
offending institution to allow for sufficient investigation and
resolution of the situation.
8. If satisfactory resolution can be achieved, correspondence
involving the situation will be filed with the SOC with a copy sent to
OSD.
9. If the attempts, as outlined above, fail to bring about a
satisfactory resolution to the alleged violation(s), and if the member
institution continues to remain in violation, OSD will take action to
terminate the institution's MOU after consulting with OGC.
10. Termination of an institutional MOU will result in the school
being removed from the ``list'' of institutions in ``good standing.''
This institution will then be placed on the ``de-listed'' notification
report that will be promptly distributed to the Services and
installations. De-listed schools will not be allowed to participate in
the Tuition Assistance program.
Dr. Snyder. What plans, if any, do you have to begin collecting
data and monitoring servicemembers' enrollment in for-profit schools?
Secretary Stamilio. Currently, the Army monitors soldiers'
participation, course enrollments, and course completions through the
GoArmyEd portal. This automated system has the functionality to provide
enrollment, expenditures, and completion rates by school. In FY 2011,
Army will begin to regularly monitor these categories of data in order
to identify trends and patterns that pertain to for profit, non-profit,
classroom based as well as distance learning schools. Trends and
patterns will then be analyzed and the results of these analyses will
be incorporated in our ongoing program improvement plans.
Dr. Snyder. Data provided by the Army and Navy suggest that
completion rates are lower for distance learning courses. Are
completion rates lower for distance learning courses? Why is this? Are
you seeing any decrease in completion rates over the past several
years?
Secretary Stamilio. The completion rates for distance learning are
slightly lower for distance learning courses when compared to
traditional classroom-based courses. During FY07-09, the completion
rate for distance learning courses was 86%, compared to the 89% for
traditional courses during the same time period.
The reason for a lower completion rate can be attributed to the
fact that distance learning courses require a more disciplined student
to be successful. Individual student factors may include the lack of
academic preparedness, student support not readily available, and the
student's learning style may not be conducive for distance learning
courses. Other factors may include interruptions such as the military
mission, deployments, transfers, or family obligations which make
course completions very difficult. During the last ten years, the
Army's operational tempo has increased and soldiers have been deployed
multiple times.
The completion rates for distance learning have remained steady
during FY07-09 (FY07--87%, FY08--85%, FY09--86%).
Dr. Snyder. Should the Department of Defense and the Services do
more to monitor the recruiting practices of colleges that target
servicemembers? If so, what steps will you take to increase monitoring
efforts?
Secretary Stamilio. The monitoring of institutions is worked
diligently throughout the Army, especially in the installation
education centers through Guidance Counselors, Education Services
Officers, other education center personnel, and the Installation
Commanders. Feedback from soldiers regarding potential overly
aggressive/marketing efforts by a school would also be followed up.
There are occasional instances where institutions may exceed their
bounds in marketing and recruiting. It is made clear that institutions
may only market and recruit for their programs by invitation of the
Installation Commander. An overly aggressive institution may make
offers to Education Services Officers (ESO) in exchange for use of
education center space to market their program and recruit soldiers and
Family Members. In those instances, ESOs must decline any requests by
these institutions to access their education centers for the purpose of
marketing/recruiting. The institutions may however, by invitation of
the ESO, leave approved informational brochures, flyers, pamphlets, and
even school applications in the education center. Identified
questionable marketing practices committed by online institutions will
be reported up through the Education Center chain of command to Army
and DOD Headquarters. SOC will be asked for assistance in instances in
which the offending school is a SOC member.
Dr. Snyder. What is the impact, if any, of Joint basing on
installation education centers?
Secretary Stamilio. No impact. Voluntary Education remains service
based because it was not considered a common installation management
function. The Army and each of the other Services maintain
responsibility for support and management of their own respective
education centers on Joint bases.
Dr. Snyder. To what extent, if any, are servicemembers taking out
education loans or using their own funds to pay for college education
expenses? Do you have a means of checking on this?
Secretary Stamilio. The Army does not track whether soldiers take
out education loans or use their own funds to pay for tuition. The Army
does, however, review the Uniform Tuition Assistance (TA) Policy
periodically to ensure that the assistance provided is sufficient so
that the majority of servicemembers do not have to pay for their off-
duty education out of their own pocket.
Under the current uniform Tuition Assistance (TA) policy all
soldiers may receive up to $4,500 of TA per fiscal year; individual
course costs have a $250 per semester hour cap.
In 2009, an all-Service task force led by OSD reviewed the cost of
attending school and the tuition assistance policy. The outcome of the
review revealed that:
80% of all students were attending schools that charged
at or under the semester hour cap. The other 20% of the servicemembers
have other options (including combining TA and GI Bill and/or Pell
Grants); they select the institution they attend. There are ample
institutions offering similar degree programs at institutions that are
within the cap.
The $250 per semester hour cap covers the cost of almost
all undergraduate tuition expenses.
Dr. Snyder. Are complaints about higher education institutions
tracked and shared across the Services and education centers?
Secretary Stamilio. Servicemembers Opportunity College (SOC)
ensures that institutions are responsive to the special needs of the
servicemembers; assists the higher education community to understand
the requirements of the military; and serves as the Army/DOD liaison
with institutions to resolve concerns and share program information to
strengthen education relationships with the Army/DOD. School
allegations brought to the attention of SOC are investigated and
resolved. All investigations are recorded in the SOC Quarterly Report.
A copy of the report is sent to the OSD and the Services.
Dr. Snyder. What counseling support is provided to servicemembers?
What are the qualifications of educational counselors? To what extent
have the number of counselors on military installations been reduced
over the past five years? If so, why? Is counseling being replaced by
Web-based services or other methods?
Mr. Lutterloh. Navy College Offices provide face-to-face counseling
support and information to sailors on 36 major Navy installations.
Counselors, classified in the federal civilian General Schedule 1740
series, a professional series for education administration and
counseling, provide information on which programs meet sailors'
educational goals, cost and time to complete degree requirements and
transferability of course and program credits to higher level degree
programs. In FY2009, 217,000 counseling sessions were recorded by Navy
College Counselors. They processed 125,000 Tuition Assistance (TA)
requests for 57,400 sailors. Navy's Virtual Education Center (VEC),
established in July 2010, conducts virtual counseling sessions,
processes all Web-based TA applications, updates Sailor/Marine American
Council on Education Registry Transcripts (SMART), authenticates
degrees and communicates general information.
Our approach to counseling services has changed, but the importance
we place on counseling has not. Our Navy College Office and VEC
counselors remain the single most valuable asset to the Navy College
Program. Between FY 2005 and 2009, the number of Voluntary Education
(VOLED) counselors on installations ranged between 167 in FY05 and 179
in FY09. On the average, two-thirds of counseling support was provided
by contract counselors. However, in FY 2010, Navy took a holistic
approach in transforming our voluntary education program that
eliminated contractors, increasing federal employees to support
counseling and testing requirements, and leveraged technology to
enhance sailor access to educational support tools and information.
This resulted in a net reduction of 57 counselors. Overall, the
capability to support sailors was enhanced. One key feature of our
transformation was opening a state-of-the-art VEC. This allowed Navy to
centralize support functions, such as processing TA and updating SMART,
authenticating college transcripts for military personnel and providing
additional time for counseling at the installation level. The VEC is
staffed by 8 counselors and 18 education technicians who provide easy
access to a one-stop-shopping for virtual counseling and educational
information and currently operates 15 hours/day (0600-2100) to
accommodate the different time zones around the world.
Dr. Snyder. Does DOD have a system in place to alert military
installation education center directors about any Department of
Education or other government reviews, investigations, or regulatory
actions pending that pertain to institutions of higher education? What
about if accrediting organizations place schools on probation?
Mr. Lutterloh. Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC), a
consortium of approximately 1900 colleges and universities, monitors
its member academic institutions. When allegations are levied against
an institution, or if an institution loses its accreditation, the
Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Military Services are
notified. The Services meet regularly with SOC to address such issues
and SOC submits a quarterly report detailing any actions they have
taken with regard to academic institutions. This information is shared
through the chain of command.
DOD also sponsors a quarterly Inter-Service Working Group in which
the Services share pertinent information on a variety of issues. If
there are academic institutions not adhering to the rules, the Services
discuss the matter to determine whether the concerns are DOD-wide or
limited to a single Service or location. Prior to authorizing Tuition
Assistance (TA), Virtual Education Center (VEC) and Navy College Office
(NCO) staffs routinely check the Department of Education Web site to
verify the accreditation status of academic institutions. SOC or Navy's
Center for Personal and Professional Development (CPPD) Distance
Learning program manager notify the VEC/NCO of an institution's loss of
accreditation for MOU/on-based schools or Navy Distance Learning
Partners. Once loss of accreditation is confirmed, the school is not
permitted to receive TA or conduct classes on the installation.
Dr. Snyder. Can you please describe how the proposed Military
Voluntary Education Review (MVER) process will be implemented? How many
reviews do you plan to conduct each year? When will reviews begin? How
will installations and colleges be selected? How frequently will
installations and colleges be reviewed? What criteria will be used in
reviewing the quality of distance learning programs?
Mr. Lutterloh. The proposed Military Voluntary Education Review
(MVER), like the current Military Installation Voluntary Education
Review (MIVER), is a contracted program. However, since the MVER
statement of work has not yet been finalized, I am currently unable to
share specific detail on the criteria for reviews. The MVER contract
start date is planned for January 2012, and Navy, as the DANTES DOD
Executive Agent, will fund the reviews, with the number of reviews
dependent upon funding availability. Three types of reviews will be
conducted: on-base, off-base, and distance learning programs. On-base
MVERs will be Service specific with the individual Service identifying
installations selected for review. Off-base and distance learning
reviews will be conducted on a DOD-wide basis, with institutions
selected by a DOD Inter-Service Working Group.
Dr. Snyder. A key component of the Department's proposed policy
change for the Voluntary Education Program is to require institutions
that receive tuition assistance to agree to certain commitments and
sign a formal memorandum of understanding (MOU) with DOD. The
Department has indicated that allegations of not following the
agreements in an MOU will be submitted and handled through the Defense
Activity for Non-traditional Education Support (DANTES) and
Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC) organizations. How will the
Department and Services identify potential ``allegations'' of not
following the agreements in MOUs? What procedures and mechanisms will
the Department and the Services implement to monitor adherence to MOUs?
Mr. Lutterloh. Navy receives formal announcements from Department
of Education (DOE), DANTES, SOC, and other accrediting boards.
Additionally, adherence is monitored at the execution level by the Navy
College Offices. Institutions that do not comply with the MOUs are
either asked to leave the base or no longer remain part of the Navy
College Program Distance Learning Partnership.
Dr. Snyder. What plans, if any, do you have to begin collecting
data and monitoring servicemembers' enrollment in for-profit schools?
Mr. Lutterloh. Navy already tracks education data through the Navy
College Management Information System (NCMIS). It is a management tool
that provides a complete history of courses funded through Tuition
Assistance (TA). This includes grades and degrees earned, completion
rates, rank/rate, pay grade, academic institution(s) attended, type of
course (distance learning or traditional), level of degree (AS/BS/MS/
PHD), expenditures, credits earned and approved education plans. NCMIS
has the functionality to provide these same performance measures for
public, non-profit and for-profit institutions. Navy is currently
analyzing the list of colleges that are authorized TA for our sailors
to identify the type of school (public, non-profit, or for-profit).
Once this list is complete, NCMIS will be updated. Targeted completion
date is Jan 2011.
Navy is actively engaged in the review of VOLED performance
indicators. Costs, participation and enrollment are assessed monthly.
Course completion rates are reviewed semiannually. Academic
institutional data is presented annually at a variety of forums to
include the Council of Colleges and Military Educators (CCME)
conference, Academic Council on Military Education (ACME) at the state
levels and to DOD as a component of the annual voluntary education
report. Academic institutional data is also available to the colleges
upon request. Trends are investigated for possible lessons learned or
improvements.
Dr. Snyder. Data provided by the Army and Navy suggest that
completion rates are lower for distance learning courses. Are
completion rates lower for distance learning courses? Why is this? Are
you seeing any decrease in completion rates over the past several
years?
Mr. Lutterloh. The completion rate for instructor-led courses is
higher than for distance learning. In FY09, enlisted sailors took
48,875 undergraduate courses with 43,478 completions recorded. During
the same time frame, enlisted sailors took 93,685 distance learning
courses with 75,011 completions recorded.
Studies of non-completion rates for courses taken on board ship
indicated a variety of causes. Results showed that not all courses
should be delivered via distance learning, not all professors are
effective at teaching distance learning and some sailors were not
disciplined enough to take distance learning courses. For example,
highly technical subjects that required the sailor to have a strong
background in the material had the highest non-completion rate. Junior
sailors were more likely to be unsuccessful than senior sailors. Junior
sailors, new to shipboard life, are challenged with acclimation and
qualifications for their role on the ship. To help increase the
likelihood of success, Navy implemented a new policy that restricts
sailors who are within the first year of their first permanent duty
station from participating in Navy-funded TA courses. Navy also
implemented a distance learning screening tool designed to indicate
those sailors who are self-disciplined and have good time management
skills.
Because of the increased participation in distance learning
courses, Navy continues to pay particular attention to the course
completion rates and will implement policy and guidelines as needed to
improve every sailors' chance for success.
Dr. Snyder. Should the Department of Defense and the Services do
more to monitor the recruiting practices of colleges that target
servicemembers? If so, what steps will you take to increase monitoring
efforts?
Mr. Lutterloh. We do not believe that additional monitoring steps
are required at this time. Current procedures for monitoring recruiting
practices for programs offered on Navy installations are considered
adequate. We will, however, continue to monitor recruiting practices
closely through feedback from the Navy College Office and sailors.
Dr. Snyder. What is the impact, if any, of Joint basing on
installation education centers?
Mr. Lutterloh. We have not observed any impact on installation
education centers as a result of Joint basing.
Dr. Snyder. To what extent, if any, are servicemembers taking out
education loans or using their own funds to pay for college education
expenses? Do you have a means of checking on this?
Mr. Lutterloh. Navy does not track how sailors pay for expenses
above what Navy Tuition Assistance payments cover. Sailors that elect
to take graduate degrees and undergraduate courses that exceed the DOD
cap of $250 per credit hour are responsible for payment that exceeds
Tuition Assistance thresholds. Additionally, sailors electing to exceed
the 16 semester hour cap established by the Navy are responsible for
any additional tuition costs. Sailors who voluntarily choose to attend
these programs or exceed the funded TA cap, seek additional funding in
a variety of ways to include GI Bill, Pell Grants, personal loans and
personal resources.
Dr. Snyder. Are complaints about higher education institutions
tracked and shared across the Services and education centers?
Mr. Lutterloh. The Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC)
organization does provide a quarterly report to the Services if any
allegations are addressed at the SOC level. However, complaints are not
tracked or shared formally between DOD and the Services.
Dr. Snyder. Do the other Services have an official transcript
service like the Army's American Council on Education Registry
Transcript Service (AARTS)?
Mr. Lutterloh. Navy has the Sailor/Marine American Council on
Education Registry Transcript (SMART) that supports all the sea
Services (Navy, USMC and US Coast Guard). SMART is an automated system
that documents successfully completed training, grades for completed
college courses, scores on academic exams such as College Level
Examination Program (CLEP) and Defense Activity for Non-Traditional
Education Support (DANTES) and American Council on Education (ACE)
recommended credits for successfully completed military training. SMART
is the Navy's official transcript and bears ACE's official seal. SMART
is available online and can be accessed by the active duty, SELRES or
veteran. servicemembers and veterans may request an official transcript
be provided to academic institutions through our Virtual Education
Center at no cost to the member or the veteran.
Dr. Snyder. What counseling support is provided to servicemembers?
What are the qualifications of educational counselors? To what extent
have the number of counselors on military installations been reduced
over the past five years? If so, why? Is counseling being replaced by
Web-based services or other methods?
Mr. Sitterly. Counseling is provided at every Air Force Base (AFB)
in the world. Qualifications for counselors meet the Office of
Personnel Management standard for 1740 series positions--a minimum
bachelor's degree and 24 semester hours of credit in education/
psychology courses within that degree or beyond. The number of
counselors at AFBs has remained relatively stable over the last five
years. Air Force is not replacing counseling with computer tools;
however, those tools are assisting with information dissemination. Web-
based tools are used for general information purposes. Counseling is
used to assist airmen with college and degree decisions.
Dr. Snyder. Does DOD have a system in place to alert military
installation education center directors about any Department of
Education or other government reviews, investigations, or regulatory
actions pending that pertain to institutions of higher education? What
about if accrediting organizations place schools on probation?
Mr. Sitterly. As far as Air Force knows, there is no specific DOD
system in place for this kind of alert.
Dr. Snyder. Can you please describe how the proposed Military
Voluntary Education Review (MVER) process will be implemented? How many
reviews do you plan to conduct each year? When will reviews begin? How
will installations and colleges be selected? How frequently will
installations and colleges be reviewed? What criteria will be used in
reviewing the quality of distance learning programs?
Mr. Sitterly. The AF does not have this information. Suggest this
question be directed to the DOD office of Continuing Education
Programs, OUSD (P&R) Military Community and Family Policy, that is
working the next contract proposal.
Dr. Snyder. A key component of the Department's proposed policy
change for the Voluntary Education Program is to require institutions
that receive tuition assistance to agree to certain commitments and
sign a formal memorandum of understanding (MOU) with DOD. The
Department has indicated that allegations of not following the
agreements in an MOU will be submitted and handled through the Defense
Activity for Non-traditional Education Support (DANTES) and
Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC) organizations. How will the
Department and Services identify potential ``allegations'' of not
following the agreements in MOUs? What procedures and mechanisms will
the Department and the Services implement to monitor adherence to MOUs?
Mr. Sitterly. This will be a DOD-wide MOU after DODI 1322.25,
Voluntary Education Program, is published. Since it is still in the
coordination stage there could be changes made to the existing draft
that will impact the way this could be monitored. Air Force believes
the best way to handle this is for the Services and DOD to sit down and
work out a standard process for all the Services to follow after it is
finalized.
Dr. Snyder. What plans, if any, do you have to begin collecting
data and monitoring servicemembers' enrollment in for-profit schools?
Mr. Sitterly. Air Force (AF) has never had a need to identify
schools in this manner. We have begun this identification (ID) process
and are loading additional data fields in the online system as we work
with schools. Any changes like this for the nearly 3,000 civilian
schools AF has contact with, takes time to implement. When all schools
have an ID loaded into the computer system (estimate one fiscal year),
then data can be pulled by this new ID field.
Dr. Snyder. Data provided by the Army and Navy suggest that
completion rates are lower for distance learning courses. Are
completion rates lower for distance learning courses? Why is this? Are
you seeing any decrease in completion rates over the past several
years?
Mr. Sitterly. Air Force has noted a minimal difference in course
completions dependent on course delivery methods: 92% for traditional;
89% for distance learning. Completion rates for college courses in the
AF has traditionally been high no matter the delivery system - 90% or
above over the last five years.
Dr. Snyder. Should the Department of Defense and the Services do
more to monitor the recruiting practices of colleges that target
servicemembers? If so, what steps will you take to increase monitoring
efforts?
Mr. Sitterly. Most recruiting takes place off-base, online or
through other methods not within the sight or control of the Services.
All on-base recruiting falls under the requirements of DODI 1344.07_AFI
36-2702, Personal Commercial Solicitation on Air Force Installations
(the Air Force's published implementation and supplementation of the
DODI 1344.07, Personal Commercial Solicitation on DOD Installations).
This Air Force publication provides notice of the Department of Defense
and Air Force controls regarding on-base solicitation and includes
request, approval, evaluation and complaint processes. The publication
will be provided to all schools using the Servicemembers Opportunities
College (SOC) communication network, and we will offer to provide
clarification upon request.
Dr. Snyder. What is the impact, if any, of Joint basing on
installation education centers?
Mr. Sitterly. Air Force is not aware of any impacts at this time.
Dr. Snyder. To what extent, if any, are servicemembers taking out
education loans or using their own funds to pay for college education
expenses? Do you have a means of checking on this?
Mr. Sitterly. The Air Force has no current means of determining
whether airmen are using education loans and/or their own funds to pay
for education expenses.
Dr. Snyder. Are complaints about higher education institutions
tracked and shared across the Services and education centers?
Mr. Sitterly. There is no formal process for this.
Dr. Snyder. Do the other Services have an official transcript
service like the Army's American Council on Education Registry
Transcript Service (AARTS)?
Mr. Sitterly. The Air Force has an official transcript service
within the Community College of the Air Force (CCAF). CCAF transcripts
enlisted training, evaluated for college credit by the Southern
Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) that applies toward CCAF
degrees. This service is at no cost to airmen.
Dr. Snyder. What counseling support is provided to servicemembers?
What are the qualifications of educational counselors? To what extent
have the number of counselors on military installations been reduced
over the past five years? If so, why? Is counseling being replaced by
Web-based services or other methods?
Mr. Larsen. Corps Education Center counselors provide information
about college education opportunities to servicemembers during in-
person counseling sessions and briefs. Counseling sessions contain
additional information about the tuition assistance program, the
process involved, and the types of schools that can receive assistance
funding. All Education Service Officers (ESOs) have a Bachelor's
Degree, eighty-one percent have a Masters degree, and six percent have
a Ph.D. Three percent of Education Service Specialists (ESSs) have
their Associate's Degree, ninety-seven percent have a Bachelor's
Degree, and fifty-six percent have a Master's Degree. The Marine Corps
counseling resources have not been reduced in recent years. The Marine
Corps has no plans to replace counseling with Web-based services or
other methods.
Dr. Snyder. Does DOD have a system in place to alert military
installation education center directors about any Department of
Education or other government reviews, investigations, or regulatory
actions pending that pertain to institutions of higher education? What
about if accrediting organizations place schools on probation?
Mr. Larsen. OSD will answer this question.
Dr. Snyder. Can you please describe how the proposed Military
Voluntary Education Review (MVER) process will be implemented? How many
reviews do you plan to conduct each year? When will reviews begin? How
will installations and colleges be selected? How frequently will
installations and colleges be reviewed? What criteria will be used in
reviewing the quality of distance learning programs?
Mr. Larsen. OSD will answer this question.
Dr. Snyder. A key component of the Department's proposed policy
change for the Voluntary Education Program is to require institutions
that receive tuition assistance to agree to certain commitments and
sign a formal memorandum of understanding (MOU) with DOD. The
Department has indicated that allegations of not following the
agreements in an MOU will be submitted and handled through the Defense
Activity for Non-traditional Education Support (DANTES) and
Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC) organizations. How will the
Department and Services identify potential ``allegations'' of not
following the agreements in MOUs? What procedures and mechanisms will
the Department and the Services implement to monitor adherence to MOUs?
Mr. Larsen. OSD will answer this question.
Dr. Snyder. What plans, if any, do you have to begin collecting
data and monitoring servicemembers' enrollment in for-profit schools?
Mr. Larsen. Marine Corps currently collects data on servicemembers'
participation, enrollments, and course completions. We do not
specifically identify institutions of higher learning as for-profit,
non-profit, or state supported.
Dr. Snyder. Data provided by the Army and Navy suggest that
completion rates are lower for distance learning courses. Are
completion rates lower for distance learning courses? Why is this? Are
you seeing any decrease in completion rates over the past several
years?
Mr. Larsen. The Marine Corps has not seen a decrease in completion
rates for distance learning courses over the past several years.
Dr. Snyder. Should the Department of Defense and the Services do
more to monitor the recruiting practices of colleges that target
servicemembers? If so, what steps will you take to increase monitoring
efforts?
Mr. Larsen. The Marine Corps monitors colleges' recruiting
practices by requiring all educational institutions that come on to the
base to meet with the Education Service Officers (ESOs) and establish
an agreement prior to contacting potential students. The installation
commander has primacy over any incidents of aggressive marketing.
Actions to address this issue include referring the issue to the
command's Inspector General and/or restricting an educational
institution's access to the installation and marines.
Dr. Snyder. What is the impact, if any, of Joint basing on
installation education centers?
Mr. Larsen. There has not been an impact on the Marine Corps since
we do not participate in any Joint basing of installation education
centers.
Dr. Snyder. To what extent, if any, are servicemembers taking out
education loans or using their own funds to pay for college education
expenses? Do you have a means of checking on this?
Mr. Larsen. Using personal loans or personal funds for education
expenses is not tracked by the Marine Corps since it is considered to
be a personal matter. However, the USMC will continue to make our
servicemembers aware of our Tuition Assistance Program (TA).
Dr. Snyder. Are complaints about higher education institutions
tracked and shared across the Services and education centers?
Mr. Larsen. OSD will answer this question.
Dr. Snyder. Do the other Services have an official transcript
service like the Army's American Council on Education Registry
Transcript Service (AARTS)?
Mr. Larsen. The Marine Corps and the Navy developed the Sailor and
Marine American Council on Education Registry Transcript (SMART) to
document military education and experience.
SMART records recommend college credit for military occupational
skills, formal military schools, Marine Corps Institute courses,
Defense Language Proficiency Tests, DANTES Standardized Subject Tests,
and College Level Examination Program examinations. Validated by the
American Council on Education, SMART may be submitted directly to a
college or university for recommended college credits.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
