My Day

If you haven't seen Altschuler and Blumin's new book, The GI Bill: A New Deal for Veterans, take a look.  They took a hard look at the post-WWII law's impact on race and gender, and in an interview featured in "Inside Higher Ed" (http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/22/gibill), they don't pull any punches:

"With the passage of the [original GI} bill, the outlook for women in higher education grew dimmer. GI Janes constituted only about 2 percent of World War II military personnel. Specific provisions of the bill, moreover, put women at a disadvantage. Unlike men, women veterans did not receive a living allowance for a dependent spouse while they were in school. And the nine-year limitation on benefits fell disproportionately on women, who tended to delay their own plans in deference to those of their husbands – or to have kids. It is also the case that “the ideology of domestic containment,” which included occupational segregation, wage differentials, glass ceilings, and hiring restrictions for high status jobs, meant that the higher education benefit had a less significant socio-economic impact on women than men."    

This lesson is something for all of us to think about given that the new, post-9/11 GI Bill goes into effect in August.  UK is joining the list of Yellow Ribbon Program (http://www.gibill.va.gov/GI_BILL_Info/CH33/YRP/YRP_List.htm), but are we here at UK ready to address the needs of the veterans of today's wars?  In particular, are we ready to address the specific needs of our GI Janes - especially now that we know more about the vastness of unrecorded rapes many experienced while in uniform?

Has the University asked current veterans on our campus if their needs are being met?  See for example, the Minnesota survey on the mental and physical health of their vets (http://www.bhs.umn.edu/healthdata/report/Veterans_CSHSReport_08.pdf)

We'll be following these issues as we move forward in our retention and graduation efforts.