Mon 8 Jun 2009
Yellow Ribbon
Posted by David under Admissions at 6:25 am
Amherst participates in the Yellow Ribbon Program. Why doesn’t Williams? More background here.
The deadline for colleges to sign up as Yellow Ribbon institutions has been extended from May 15 to June 15 – and it’s a good thing, too, as many colleges are still grappling with the program’s many complexities. Numerous private colleges — large and small, internationally-known and regional, near and far from military bases — are signing up, even as others hold back.
Under the new, Post-9/11 GI Bill, and the Yellow Ribbon Program specifically, colleges can enter into dollar-for-dollar matching agreements with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to cover any outstanding tuition and fees above those covered by the base GI Bill benefit, which varies widely across the nation because it is pegged to the highest resident, undergraduate public university charges in each state. Private colleges can enter into Yellow Ribbon agreements to cover all or part of the difference between the base benefit and their charges for up to a specified number of students, but so too can public colleges enter into Yellow Ribbon agreements, to cover the balance for non-resident veterans or those enrolled in more costly graduate programs, like law or business.
Amherst also deserves kudos for its special scholarship program for veterans.
Amherst College has created a permanently endowed scholarship fund for veterans of the U.S. armed forces who are accepted by and enroll at the liberal arts school. The Veterans Scholarship Fund, as it is called, will provide enough financial aid to cover the full demonstrated need of qualified former American servicemen and servicewomen, starting in the fall of 2009.
“Amherst has a deep respect for those who choose to serve this country through the military, and we hope that this scholarship fund will open a few doors for them,” said the college’s president, Anthony W. Marx. “In addition to elevating the level of discourse among Amherst students, faculty and staff in the classroom and across campus, I am confident the real-world insights and presence of student-veterans will resonate throughout our entire community.”
“It is extremely important to show gratitude to those who have made a sacrifice to serve our country, and helping make an Amherst education accessible to such men and women will do just that,” added Trustee Richard LeFrak ’67, whose gift from the Richard and Karen LeFrak Charitable Foundation helped create the fund. “Veterans offer a completely new perspective that many of the college’s undergraduates will benefit from hearing. They will also add a whole new dimension to the diversity of the student body.”
Surely there is at least one trustee at Williams who feels the same as LeFrak . . .
In times of economic troubles, I would not expect the College to start a new scholarship, at least in the absence of a specific donation. But why not participate in the Yellow Ribbon program?
By the way, how many veterans are in the class of 2013? Probably no more than a handful, and all of those international students. When was the last time that Williams admitted a US veteran? I have never heard of one.
Print • Email| « Purple Cows of America (and beyond!) Grand Finale | Vote for the Ephs! » |
67 Responses to “Yellow Ribbon”
Leave a Reply
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post
If a comment you submitted does not show up, please email us at eph at ephblog dot com. Please note that commenters are required to use a valid email address when submitting comments.
frank uible says:
Off the top of my head I can think of three from my days – there must have been at least three or four times that many.
rory says:
while i’d like to see williams add this scholarship (thought that line about the “complexities” has me cautious), I wonder if Williams is a good place for one or two veterans, just as I’ve wondered about its locale for any student of a non-traditional age.
Williams is as close to an isolated social environment as one can get. Is that ideal for a 20 or 22 (or 25) year old freshman who has seen combat duty? Amherst’s location is a much more palatable option, i think, for such students, unless williams really either takes a sizable number (so they can support each other) or sets up proper support opportunities.
I’m ambivalent on that question…i think williams COULD be great for that, but I’m not confident that williams IS great for that situation.
hwc says:
One reason not to participate is that it requires a fundammental shift in financial aid policy, ending the era of need-based aid. Veterans would qualify for this aid package, whether they had financial need or not.
To the extent that a veteran needed aid, this program would not change his aid package, since Williams already meets full financial need. To the extent that ta veteran does not need aid, he would be getting price discounts beyond his full need. In a zero sum game, that money is ultimately coming out of Williams’ need-based aid budget.
In theory, this program soaks the taxpayer for part of the aid funding. Any benefit to the college, however, is offset by the cost the government red-tape attached to the funding.
JeffZ says:
I wouldn’t call it a “fundamental shift” because, like Tyng, this would apply to a very small handful of applicants, and no honest appraisal of Tyng could call it WHOLLY need based.
But even the yellow ribbon program requires some additional outlays from Williams, and this isn’t really the time to be doing so. In the future, sure, both of these programs sound great, but I do share Rory’s concerns that we might not be doing slightly-older combat veterans any favors by placing them in a college (and town) that has VERY few people aged 23-27, let alone combat veterans. But, if in flusher times Williams wanted to try it out on an experimental basis, I’d be all for it.
rory says:
i just think if williams does this, it better do it right, otherwise we’d be doing these service men and women a potential disservice (not trying to pun, just the best word possible). And in this one case, I’m willing to be 2nd to Amherst…having UMass there and easier access to Boston might be unsurpassable in this case.
Perhaps a joint program–so if they do want the williams experience, they can do a year or two with Williams? I think that’d be potentially cool.
David Kane says:
1) Am I safe in assuming that we all agree that Williams should not discriminate against applicants who happen to be non-old veterans? Obviously, we should let any such veterans know that Williams is in the middle of nowhere, that the average student age is around 20, and so on. But we should tell every applicant that.
I could imagine that some here think that, say, Williams should not admit students over 25 (or some age), but surely no one wants to discriminate against a 21 year old veteran.
2) Some above express concern about how well such veterans would do at Williams. Fair enough. We certainly don’t want to admit students of type X if we know that students of type X are likely to fail out or have a miserable experience. But I think your typical high IQ Marine corporal would have a good time at Williams. But, to figure this out, we first have to, you know, actually enroll one or two.
Moreover, I would take these concerns more seriously if the folks making them paid attention to other types of students. As Morty told us last year at reunion, by far the highest failure rates at Williams are for black males. If you have hypothetical concerns about the success of veterans at Williams, why not express some concerns for the empirical problems faced by black males?
3) I respect the issue of need-blind aid, and keeping in mind our standard Tyng hypocrisy. But doesn’t Amherst have exactly the same policies as we have with regard to need-based aid? If so (and if they can do Yellow Ribbon), then why can’t we? [If Amherst has different policies, could someone explain them, perhaps citing some sources?]
4) I see this as much more symbolic than anything else. First, I think that Williams gets very few (zero?) applicants from Williams-caliber (academic rating 1 or 2) applicants who happen to be US veterans. So, even if we were part of Yellow Ribbon, I don’t think many (any?) veterans would be admitted. Second, even if they were, such veterans have lived away from home long enough that parental assets would not be counted for their financial need. So, except for some personal savings, all these Ephs would get a full ride even in the absence of Yellow Ribbon. So, there is no incremental cost.
rory says:
David,
I was unclear, perhaps, but I was not worried about academic failure, but psychological health and well-being. Also, if Williams says everything and is very honest, there’s only so much that can be explained through words….a 24 year old might think they want the real college experience and not be thinking about what it’s going to be like to be 27 or 28 and still @ college in Williamstown. It’s more complicated than just telling them “hey, remember, the kids are really kids”…I’m 27 and I still can’t imiagine what my life will be like in 3 years. I can’t just trust that a 24 year old will be able to imagine that better. Nor should Williams.
I also don’t think Williams should “experiment” (my word) with one or two to see if they like it. Instead, talk to schools (like Amherst, perhaps) about how their veteran students do, what they need in support (I assume a good psychologist in case they have PTSD, preferably one who specializes in combat-related PTSD). Only then should Williams consider whether or not it can handle and create a good environment for veteran students. If it cannot, is there something else Williams could offer that would be a nice addition (a one-year program to help vets get academic experience at a top school before applying–and transferring–to their school of choice. Hampshire has a program like that for non-traditional students. A lot stay @ Hampshire, but some realize they need a different environment. Williams gets a veteran presence,those who are comfortable @ williams are invited to stay the full four years, others transfer with a year of coursework. This type of program also would let Williams accept vets who might not have the strongest traditional academic qualifications, but clearly their high school transcript isn’t the important piece of their application anymore!)
In fact, if these vets have been in combat for years, why would we judge them on their academic rating from high school? They’re not applying based on that, are they? if so, that’s horribly outdated and possibly horribly irrelevant after years in the military.
There’s also an important difference between why a black student faces excess stress @ college vs. a 25 year old veteran, but that seems so obvious to me that I can’t bother writing it out now, and I don’t want to take that bait/divert this conversation to another diversity argument here. let’s not start the week badly.
I’m not opposed at all–i just don’t want to say “let them in!” and then look back 3 years later and possibly ask: why are they having problems?
If there’s no incremental cost, then wouldn’t this just be a PR grab? And if so, isn’t it in williams’ interest to not be a PR-grabbing institution–that seems unseemly.
sophmom says:
David,
I would think that adequate counseling services, maybe even a VA rep in the area, all might be part of what is required to properly administer the program. And as is implied already, the location alone might be part of why a certain support system can’t be easily met.
Is there a list somewhere of what is required of any school administering the program?
rory says:
i can’t help it–that baiting was atrocious. Is there anyone on this blog who will claim to have spent more time than myself on how and why black males have problems in college and how to help them?
smh.
JeffZ says:
Yeah, ridiculous baiting, is that really needed DK? I think what Rory was getting at, and later clarified, (and I agreed) was obvious …
By the way, there was a slightly older military veteran in my class (I believe, I also believe he graduated a year later). I don’t know him well enough to comment on his experience, and even if I did, I wouldn’t, as I don’t like to get into that sort of thing on an individual level in any event.
sophmom says:
Really David, that was a pathetic bit of baiting.
And this whole argument strikes me as a rush to criticism of Williams, when even VA spokespersons admit the difficulty in taking on a program like this right now:
And the question of providing adequate services seems to be a big concern:
These quotes are from an article in INSIDE HIGHER ED, “On Yellow Ribbon, Shades of Gray”
I agree with the idea that if you are going to provide the program, then make sure you do it right.
wwilson says:
I’ll agree somewhat with #9 and #10, but don’t want to sidetrack this thread…
I believe – and I think most of us would agree – that in principal the College community would benefit by having a presence of U.S. veterans on campus, as their experiences would be quite distinctive and different from most other students. I know I have enjoyed playing volleyball and going to happy hour with an ex-U.S. Marine who is 15 years younger than me. I learn a lot from him.
I don’t think we can predict how happy/unhappy any individual student would be at Williams. The concerns laid out in this thread are certainly legitimate ones, but I would err on the side of trying to welcome veterans. I agree with Rory that evaluating veterans as applicants could be a little tricky, but I suspect Williams could handle it.
If it doesn’t work out for specific students, they can certainly transfer, as can any student unhappy with the College.
I would like to see Williams participate in this program.
hwc says:
Oh, there must be. The administration has promised complete transparency on all federal spending programs right on an convenient, easy-to-use website. Right?
Oh, the bill basically screws all veterans in California. The deal is that the basic GI benefits pay for tuition (but not fees) up to maximum in-state public university tuition in each state. Above that, the colleges can agree to a deal where the feds and the college split the costs 50%/50%. The program currently lists California university tuition as ZERO because costs are recorded as fees in California. Thus, there is no 100% federal GI education benefit in California. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi and the administration will work something out.
David says:
Rory writes:
Well, who can you “trust?” Right now, Williams lets in dozens of 17 year-old who have never been to the United States, who can have, at best, only a hazy notion of what life at Williams will be like. You “trust” them to “imagine” what life at Williams will be like, right? Why wouldn’t you then trust a 21 year old US veteran? I am not claiming that every veteran will end up having made the correct decision, no more than every international student, or even Exeter graduate does in choosing Williams. I just don’t see a real reason to believe that a veteran is making a bad choice, if she is making fully informed choice, a choice as fully informed as international applicants make each year.
SophMom writes:
No. Although there is no doubt some paperwork involved, there are more than enough bureaucrats already on the pay-roll at Williams to fill out the forms.
But let’s keep these issues separate. It seems like Rory (and others?) think that it is a bad idea in general (ignoring Yellow Ribbon) to admit veterans to Williams. Veterans are no more likely to need “counseling services” than your typical Choatie with an eating disorder.
Rory writes:
We admit applicants to Williams based on their demonstrated and forecast academic abilities. If you screwed up in high school, you don’t belong at Williams, even if you are a highly decorated veteran. It is true that a veteran’s high school transcript might be less relevant, but it still matters, as do SAT scores. Also, there are similar stats (standardize test scores, graduation rank in various schools) that Williams will have for veterans.
Serving in the military does not lower your IQ, so your high school grades and scores are still useful in predicting your academic performance at Williams.
Let me repeat my question from above: Should Williams admit 21 year old veterans, assuming that there high schools grades and test scores are Williams caliber?
I think that the answer is obviously Yes. Do other disagree?
rory says:
holy shit david, i’ve never seen myself so blatantly misrepresented in print before in my life (should I get used to this as an academic? hopefully not!)
with that level of bamboozling (I don’t know what else to call it), I’m having a hard time with the fundamental requirement of any discussion: assumptions of good faith.
to wit:” It seems like Rory (and others?) think that it is a bad idea in general (ignoring Yellow Ribbon) to admit veterans to Williams.”
a sampling from me:
“I’m ambivalent on that question…i think williams COULD be great for that, but I’m not confident that williams IS great for that situation.”
“I’m not opposed at all–i just don’t want to say “let them in!” and then look back 3 years later and possibly ask: why are they having problems?”
wow. i’m really just kinda shocked.
rory says:
let me ask one other question: would you judge a 45 year old applicant to a school based on his/her high school transcript and SAT scores? what’s the cut-off?
David says:
1) I don’t think Williams should admit any older students, no matter how smart they are. I am flexible what the age cut-off should be. Certainly no higher than 30 and probably no higher than 26.
2) Rory: I don’t mean to misrepresent your position. So, perhaps you could clarify it for us? Consider two white, non-athlete applicants from the same high school, both AR 2s. Assume identical credentials, but one is an 18 year-old senior and one is a 21 year-old graduate just finishing 3 years in the Marine Corps. Who do you admit?
I admit the Marine over the non-Marine because I bet that there Marine adds more diversity (of experience and outlook) than the non-Marine. Who do you admit?
I think a reasonable answer is to toss a coin, that Williams should not give preference to a veteran. Fine.
Now, make the issue harder. The Marine has slightly stronger academics. 20 points on the SAT. A slightly higher rank in the high school. Nothing large enough to provide a meaningful difference, but a difference in his favor none-the-less. Who do you admit?
To my mine, you either admit the Marine or you admit that you are more than just “ambivalent on that question.”
frank uible says:
David, you are a gawdamm, reactionary agist!
rory says:
again, david, you’re misrepresenting my point, or even the argument.
from the get-go, my stance has been clear: williams should admit veteran freshman only if it can be confident it can provide for them, especially as many (most? all?) will have fresh combat experience. Williams should market itself to veterans if it can support them. it should not do so otherwise. If Williams can support an individual, it should admit them if they are a qualified applicant.
Now, before you get all righteous about black male students, williams is supporting them about as well as any other college of similar stature. Williams should support them more.
assuming williams has the type of services said veteran needs, yes, the veteran gets this (overly simplified) hypothetical spot. If Williams cannot, its got to figure out what it can do to get to the point that williams can admit the veteran. and then williams should do that. and, at which point, being a veteran could even get preferential treatment in admissions.
only fools rush in, right?
Ronit says:
Here’s an idea for a video game – if you’re a game developer feel free to take it and run with it:
Sim College Admissions Officer
JeffZ says:
Ronit, genius. Simply genius. There is a reason every generic NYTimes article on college admissions ends up being number one most emailed … market this to the college confidential crowd, and you are rich.
JeffZ says:
Speaking of supporting the troops, this is awesome:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_en_ot/ml_tv_colbert_in_iraq
Perhaps Ephblog’s fearless founder will follow suit? DK, what say you!
Ronit says:
You’d get to choose whether you work at a liberal arts college, an ivy league, a tech school, a big football-playing State U, etc.
Just imagine the various constituencies you have to please:
athletic team coaches
faculty
campus multicultural committee
the development office
crusty alumni/donors
veterans/ROTC
Senator Chuck Grassley
Random events that could occur in-game:
discrimination/Title IX lawsuits
economic depressions
GI Bills
Payoffs include:
Top rankings in US News & Princeton Review
Being quoted in New York Times articles
You get a foreign royal to attend your school.
(can’t think of much else, really)
You’d have to organize trips to reach out to students in distant states and cities. Build awareness among college counselors. Every student you admit affects your class demographics, and every change to your class demographics pisses off existing constituencies and pressure groups, or discourages other desirable students from applying. You can’t stop being need-blind or race-blind, but you can’t go over the financial aid budget either. There are a hundred other complicated dynamics which would have to be programmed into the game.
rory says:
don’t let people choose where they work–let the admissions officer work up the ladder of schools. start at a large, anonymous, non-selective school. set policies and advertising priorities, etc and work your way to…ummm…Varhard…some super elite school in a Northeast city with far too much press and hype. Different schools have different “draws” to them.
let people choose where their sim officer went undergrad (bonus to getting a job offer there, but different “special skills” that come from going to a different school/school type) and assign points to “marketing” “reading”, etc based on how they do each year in terms of meeting certain objectives (yield percentages, etc.)
scheduling your visiting days to avoid rain, but not be too late that students already fall in love with other schools, etc.
this could be huge!
JeffZ says:
And there could be an interactive component where you can also play the game as a high school senior, obsessive parent, basketball coach, etc. …
I will be posting soon on MY big idea: real world Winter Study. Since half the country is out of work anyway, why not collectively take a month off to learn auto mechanics, origami, or beer brewing, or at least get ragingly drunk, hook up with random neighbors, and attempt to learn to ski?
sophmom says:
Brilliant idea, Ronit.
I can’t quite remember how Sims works, but can you throw over-bearing parents into the equation somehow? ;-)
Ronit says:
You could also, of course, make the admissions component part of a broader “College President” game. Sort of like Sim City or Civ IV but with campuses instead of cities.
sophmom says:
Oops, I see I cross-posted with Jeff and he beat me to the “parent component”.
Ronit says:
@rory: I know some kids who chose Billiams over Varhard.
JeffZ says:
Yeah, the college president game could work — so long as it ended with a War Games like scenario where the player realizes you CAN NOT WIN (maybe via Frank Oakley coming on screen and delivering the overused but still good — especially with Oakley’s deliver — prepare three envelopes joke).
David says:
SophMom defined and complained about thread hijacking here.
But, I guess there is nothing wrong with hijacking one of my threads. ;-)
In all seriousness, I think that threads, like this one, that veer off in unexpected directions are part of the charm of the Williams Conversation. Carry on!
And, just for the record, because this is my thread, I claim all the intellectual property rights to Sims: College Admissions.
:-)
Ronit says:
@JeffZ:
Yeah, the market for that could actually be huge.
You know what there isn’t much of a market for? Sim Grad Student, or Sim Tenure Track Job Seeker.
rory says:
@ ronit: I know…but games have to be more linear…or maybe not. college president certainly wouldn’t be as linear.
@ jeffz: you retire and select the school’s next president. you attempt to make sure they keep your pet projects. depending on how well you did, you either get the entire campus named after you (victory!) or some pitiable shack in the back (failure) or something in between. However, no matter what, that pet project of yours is gone and the end game is you, now an old man or woman walking around the campus while two students walk past you:
student 1: who’s the old dude?
student 2: i don’t know, probably some old alum looking for his old hangout spot.
student 1: he looks kinda sad.
fade to black…
sophmom says:
And I have an idea for a reality show:
Parents swap their college-kids-home-for-the-summer. The point being that all kids are more polite, and expect less, when they are guests in another home.
Ronit says:
Well, you could go the epic Civilizations route. You start off with a small free school for farm boys in the middle of nowhere… and you have to build your school through all the historical challenges (wars, depressions, major social changes, etc.) into a thriving 21st century institution.
Early game threats include plague epidemics, native raiders (if you’re in the new world), and inquisitions / burnings at the stake (if your school is one of the old European universities). Late game threats include binge drinking, Bernie Madoff, and alumni bloggers.
sophmom says:
rory says:
@ sophmom: LMAO. excellent addition
@ ronit: yes. i was thinking more the civilization system. and/or the dynasty mode for sports video game franchises.
@ earlier sophmom: the sociologist Goffman used to send students home for thanksgiving with one request: please treat your parents as though you are a guest staying at their home. Students would then report back on how their parents flipped out and threatened to pull their children out of college because they’ve changed too much (too polite and formal).
JeffZ says:
I too love the Ephblog addition. Especially because it allows for the opportunity for a special bonus level joust with a Kane avatar — you can play the role of a minority / TIP / rich alumni kid (preferably, with a parent who has allegedly cheated on their spouse), and you get a chance to — literally — knock virtual DK off his high horse …
sophmom says:
Rory:
Re: trading kids: I absolutely love having my son home, and I am mostly kidding, of course, but it has occurred to me, that in this economic climate, there might be something to the idea of a summer exchange program, whereby internships (along with room and board) might be more easily provided through the respective careers of parents. For example, what I do for a living is not a direction my son is interested in going, but it would be to another Williams student.
But, then, I would miss having my son home and that time with family is important.
Anyway, excuse the off, off-topic comment…back to the first hijack!
PTC says:
No offense Rory and Jeff, but this is nonsense. Your argument is that a person well into their 20s or even older is not equipped to handle diversity more than a teen, just because they have seen the diversity and education of service in our military? It makes no sense at all.
These men and women are very capable. If they can get into Williams on their merits, then chances are they are more than equipped to handle the social situation… they would also be able to choose a wide variety of other institutions if they did not believe Williams was right for them. Veterans are value added to any academic setting. They are value added to academic discourse. Believe it or not, Ivy league schools admit all kinds of service members.
Harvard admits multiple Veterans to the Kennedy school, every year… as does Yale, Princeton, MIT… where do you think these folks go to grad school for law, MD, Eng, etc etc etc etc… many of these people are still in service. The military pays for their education while they receive military pay in return for service obligations for rank and special programs. IT IS VERY COMMON FOLKS. Engineers go to MIT all the time. Pilots, Astronauts, Rangers, SEALs… all branches in every discipline attend our most elite universities, OFTEN.
No offense, but you guys need to get out more!
rory says:
PTC–you misunderstand. It isn’t that they aren’t capable, its that Williams isn’t capable. All the schools you listed are either in or near a city, are larger, have graduate students, and have access to far more support resources than williams.
i’m saying that williams needs to be capable to properly support them, not vice versa.
and it had absolutely nothing to do with diversity–in fact, it was the lack of diverse options for the veteran (does a 25 year old combat vet really want to hang out with 20 year old college students?) that worried me.
jeffz says:
I do think veterans would add an interesting and valuable perspective to Williams, and I never said otherwise. I am all for any added diversity of political persuasion, life experience, ethnicity, geographical origin, etc., and VWF applicants most definitely qualify and all things being equal I’d even give someone like that an edge over a more typical applicant with similar academic credentials.
But I do think it is a valid concern as to how, say, a 23 year old combat veteran frosh (or for that matter, any 23 year old) would fit in with an insular, small community where virtually every other frosh is 17/18, and where there are hardly any young, single people living off campus. The age factor, as DK even recognizes, is my primary concern in fact. If someone did a very short tour of duty and way, say, 19, I’d have a lot less concern. In all events, I still think a program like this is worth trying (as I said above) once resources are less crunched, and if there ended up being some social-mixing problems (which, come on PTC, of course is a legitimate concern), it could always be tweaked. And presumably the subset of slightly older combat vets who would want the sort of social experience offered by Williams would be very small and self-selecting to begin with, which might end up being a mitigating factor.
PTC says:
… it is not about “if” many Veterans can absolutely excel in higher education anywhere. It has already been proven that they can, and do now. It is not about “if” many veterans will become VIP later in life, it has already proven that they will, and are.
It is about competing for a very competitive demographic of students. Veterans have been known to become Doctors, Lawyers, Senators, Presidents… It is William’s loss. You are foolish not to woo this demographic.
Again… you are arguing that a 23 year old will lack some capacity, or ability, or have some “special need” beyond that of a 17 year old because they have seen combat. That they are not going to “fit in” to a place they choose. It is not a valid argument.
frank uible says:
Of course, in the late 1940s and very early 1950s Williams was chock full of combat veteran students. I have never heard that they as a group had any trouble fitting in Williams.
'10 says:
Williams actually does admit a veteran or two every year. Quite a few countries have mandatory military service, and so international students coming from those countries have usually spent a few years in the armed forces before coming to Williams (but I’d say they’re more typically 20 or 21, not 25 or 26).
PTC says:
Rory- If someone of that age and capability chooses Williams ahead of other institutions, chances are they want to be there. As this post notes… other places are wooing these students.
If you had need but had to pay to go to Williams, but got offered a free ride to go to Amherst, or Harvard… you would never consider the option. Remember, a student like that will get into many prestigious institutions, and if the only thing keeping him or her from Williams is money, that is your loss.
PTC says:
It is also important to add, that the gov matches whatever the difference between the GI Bill amount for the state is, in order to make up the difference, if the institution participates. Williams would have to pay about 7k a year for a student to get a full scholarship. If anything, it makes more sense to participate in a program like this during hard times. It’s a no brainer.
rory says:
PTC–I’ve been very clear…I worry that combat veterans need specialized psychological services. I feel very confident that that is a reasonable concern.
PTC says:
Rory- While I understand your concern, they don’t. Not more per capita than any other segment of the US population. Not all veterans have seen combat, or have mental health issues.
PTC says:
Rory- I understand your point of view, but it is not based in reality. Just so we are clear, the majority of the combat vets who need special help have tramatic injuries… the vast majority who would get into a place like Williams would most likely not need any form of special consideration.
PTSD is not that big a specialty. Traumatic events in life happen to many people. It should not be a disqualifier any more than abuse, rape, witnessing violence, or any other traumatic event that may have happend in a persons life. Treatment for PTSD can be practiced by any good general mental health practioner.
PTC says:
Also, if the “chance of that” is a disqualifier… who else is in the mix? What about someone from a particular country that has a high rate of violence? Columbia? Mexico? Which region? Chad? Which region? Afghanistan? Lebanon? Somalia?
I could easily argue that the cultural nuance and language barrier mixed with trauma would be a much greater “disqualifier”. It is a poor argument…
I am pretty sure Margie Wood (sp?) could handle a Veteran pretty easily. This is less of a specialty than someone who does not control the language or culture, but has seen similar trauma.
Again, who else do we disqualify based on “possible” background?
JG says:
PTC – Williams meets financial need. While this program would be good PR to encourage more vets to apply to Williams, to me the money isn’t a good argument. The article from Inside Higher Ed includes this quote from Princeton about why they aren’t participating:
I’d wager Williams would have a similar response b/c they don’t want to give some students disproportionately more aid than others. Now, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t in some other way come out and say they support the program or the idea behind it or maybe create some kind of Tyng-like program…people have said the Tyng fin-aid criteria is somewhat soft, though I personally haven’t seen evidence of it. If some rich alums or parents or friends of Williams wanted to set up a “soft” criteria aimed at vets, I’m sure they could do it.
For the record, I have no doubt that vets could/would/do succeed and be/are happy at Williams if they decide(d) that a small, isolated college with limited social life is/was a good fit (still can’t figure how I made that choice and at 23 doubt I would have, but it worked out!). I have no doubt that Williams would see their experience in the military as valuable leadership experience and/or some other kind of “plus” factor for admissions. I’d just like to point out that there aren’t that many kids in the country that can get into Williams these days. Most kids I knew who had the grades, scores, etc. to get into a school like Williams and were interested in military service went to academies or got ROTC scholarships at big schools. The already small pool of kids gets even smaller post-service, and then the portion of that small pool of applicants who would want to come to Williams is even smaller. That would be a special person who I think Williams would welcome and provide aid to the fullest extent of demonstrated need, regardless of this program.
JG says:
To clarify the above on re-reading, by “soft” criteria for a focused aid/scholarship program I was referring to the standards for how much aid to give to an already admitted student, not in any way to the admissions criteria.
PTC says:
JG- But the school would not have to admit students, and could offer another program if it wanted. In effect, you are giving away federal grants by not supporting the program, and discouraging veterans applications. I still don’t get it.
As far as having a policy not to admit Veterans because they will not “fit in”… guys, that is’nt legal.
rory says:
for goodness sake, PTC, please stop creating a strawman. it’s quite frustrating to be the victim of that false representation, even after you claim to understand my point of view.
For one, I’ve been repeatedly talking about combat veterans, not just veterans writ large with my concern about psych services. And I’ve not been opposed to letting them in, perhaps as early as next year, but only that williams study what it takes to successfully integrate older students with unique experiences of combat into an isolated and younger social environment. Does it take counseling support? A family center better equipped for veterans with families? I have no idea…but whatever it would take, Williams should know about beforehand, not after it becomes an issue.
The APA has said that we’re under-reporting and under-supporting military mental health needs. I don’t want williams to do that. If Williams can be confident it can support them, i’d love to see them @ williams. i think they could bring great things to the student body. I just don’t want to screw them by not being prepared for their needs as older, possibly psychologically or physically scarred individuals.
In the comparison to international students (generally a poor comparison, but fine) Williams has specific administrators in admissions who spend a large portion of their time on international admissions, i’m sure financial aid has a specialist for their unique needs, and there’s Gina Coleman who is a dean and international student advisor. Now, there are a lot more international students than potential veteran students…but clearly the institution has specific support for the one group. Shouldn’t it do right by the second group as well?
JG says:
PTC –
We’re only “giving away” federal grants if we’re willing to compromise the general aid policy of the school that seems to be pretty damn important to a lot of people. Perhaps it could be done, but I’m guessing it would be an uphill battle. More power to them if they find a way to get around the “we’re need blind.” to make this exception without making it seem like that one of the focal policies of the school is BS.
As I said, if/when Williams decides formally not to participate, the school should put out a statement in support of the program generally (b/c it is great) and emphasizing that they meet demonstrated need for veterans and anyone else. Like Princeton stated in the quote above – we don’t need a Yellow Ribbon program b/c we are among the handful of schools that already does this.
frank uible says:
Should Williams be expected to formally (or informally for that matter) state all the things which it doesn’t do and why? Some things? If some things, then who is the “czar” who determines what those things are?
PTC says:
Rory- There is no special need.
PTC says:
http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_treatmentforptsd.html
Pretty basic stuff folks. You are not going to have to stand up some major change in your mental health program if you happen to admit a veteran or two next year… on the off chance they have PTSD.
JG- Do I understand the Schools position? No “special” scholarship for veterans, even if Williams does not have to pay for most of it?
If that is the case, then would’nt the standard GI Bill actaully count against Veterans applying for aid?
Are there no scholarships designated for any other particular group?
The school Administration is giving away federal/ state grants for other special groups, in order not to compromise general aid? Is that true?
rory says:
PTC-
Columbia and Penn State seem to disagree: http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2009/04/30/veterans-seek-support-transition-college-life
all i’m saying is that a little preparation goes a long way in making sure williams is a good environment for non-traditional college age veterans. it wouldn’t take more than a month or two of heavy lifting (if that) to cull the best practices from other schools. I think it would be a good thing for williams to do.
and IF there’s no need for special services, then williams should figure out how to get its name out to more vets.
and IF there’s a need for special services, then williams should figure out how much it would cost and try to raise that money. i don’t think that’d be very hard, especially if they had a specific goal (perhaps 10 hours a week of additional psych services? there’s an outpatient facility in Pittsfield…maybe all williams needs is to cover van cost to and from the facility.
but it’s better to know that before enrolling them rather than after. and a link or two from the VA saying there aren’t many psych services needed isn’t going to convince me williams shouldn’t ask other colleges about their experiences first.
PTC says:
Rory- Columbia a Penn state do not know as much about veterans as the VA does. Columbia is openly hostile towards the military… and military programs.
Ask all you like.
rory says:
google searching has shown a variety of specific mentoring and support group programs at a variety of schools, from U Texas to Columbia (they turned down the funding request that article mentions psych services asking for to help the veterans. and there’s a VA practically down the street from columbia). One particularly interesting (and recurring) idea is that one area that student veterans need prep/support for is that they may have difficulties with students openly hostile to their decision to serve in the military.
i’d hope that wouldn’t be much of a concern anymore, especially at williams, but you never know.
frank uible says:
If they’re hostile, punch ‘em in the nose.
JG says:
PTC – GI benefits don’t count “against” a vet as far as I know. The school looks at the total available funds to the student. For a vet with GI benefits, that goes into the equation just like having $5,000 left to you by your grandma or something. The school will then meet your financial need over and above that amount. While participating in Yellow Ribbon would seem to save the school a little bit of money, it would mean altering a policy that they seem pretty wedded to. As far as the school’s position on Yellow Ribbon, I’m hypothesizing/extrapolating based on other schools. I have no idea if the school has decided one way or the other on it.
To my knowledge, the school doesn’t have any special scholarships/financial aid targeted to particular groups of incoming students. The only named/directed aid or award I know (for frosh) is Tyng. They give out roughly 8 each year, and so far as I know they go to students that Williams is trying to woo to the school who need a lot of aid and are a big admissions “get” in some fashion. It seems lately that 1-2 have gone to Questbridge kids but otherwise I don’t know of anywhere the winners are listed. Of the few Tyngs I can think of specifically from my era at Williams, two were white females, one a white male, and another an African American male. Varied interests from sciences to polisci. Doesn’t seem that it was targeted at any particular grouping.
PTC says:
Frank- Exactly.
It appears to me that alum is apprehensive about the welfare and dynamic of the purple bubble. This is more about “regular students” being affected/ impacted by another student who is a little older, perhaps a little more conservative… fear of others outside the norm entering into a well controlled academic atmosphere. It has more to do with a worry about how it may impact the current (I would say limited) demographic that goes to Williams, rather than concern for outsiders coming in. I am trying to convince everyone that their fears are not founded in reality… but that does not appear to be working.
kthomas says:
PTC: quick moment from a meeting with two Vietnam vets earlier today, talking about infights in corporate boardrooms:
“I told my mom– this is not so bad. I’m not being shot at. My feet are not rotting off in the middle of a swamp. Life seems pretty good. I can deal with this.”
Yesterday– well this is Nashville. You’d have to go out of your way to not see the guys in uniforms and combat fatigues; to miss, the people in the room who are missing limbs,
Larry George says:
As I read this, both Williams and Amherst seem to be on the Yellow Ribbon program list.
http://www.gibill.va.gov/GI_BILL_Info/CH33/YRP/states/ma.htm