In a previous article, I wrote about the emerging discipline, Veteran Studies. In that article I illustrated how Veteran Studies and the Veteran Studies Association help to bridge the divide between communities that continue to face obstacles working together, the veteran community and the higher education community. My last article highlighted the Veteran Critical Theory (VCT) framework offered by Drs. Glenn A. Phillips and Yvonne S. Lincoln in 2017. This framework provides insight into how higher education can analyze structures and systems that affect veterans. Phillips and Lincoln stated the goals of VCT are "to question the status quo, make an immediate impact on the experiences of student veterans and understand the issues facing student veterans from the veterans' perspective." Policy and procedure, they add, are shaped as analysis, VCT challenges higher education institutions to develop programs and research that can help "better understand, respect, and serve student veterans." VCT provides methods of evaluation to consider how existing university policies or research practices marginalize veterans.

Discouraging Substantive Dialogue

Phillips and Lincoln provide eleven tenets of VCT that challenge prevailing institutional perspectives about veterans. Among these tenets, they assert veterans "cannot be essentialized." Generalized conclusions, assumptions, policies, or programs reflect institutional and systemic lethargy more than engagement. Two examples come to mind from my experiences as a veteran and a student. In one example, during my undergraduate studies as a history major in California, I was enrolled in a class on foreign policy. The institution I attended was located near a large military base in Southern California. The instructor invited a Marine Corps Colonel to the class to speak about his experiences being deployed to Iraq but, before he arrived, she spent considerable time informing the class that she would not tolerate what she felt would be disrespectful questions or comments about the conduct of the war or the justification provided for the invasion. In short, she threatened the students from engaging in substantive dialogue about military perspectives on policy implementation. When the Colonel arrived to provide and give his briefing to the class, he was astounded there were few, if any, questions. This instructor contributed to the assumption that military members and veterans are somehow unable to engage in substantive conversations or opposing perspectives; something that contributes to gulf of trust between the veteran community and higher education.

Marginalizing and Constraining Veteran Narratives

In another example, much of what is analyzed about many research topics marginalizes veteran narratives and counter-stories. My research area is patriotism in America; a topic that I found to be culturally charged. Philips and Lincoln do not focus their framework on race or Black veterans especially. Nonetheless, I found their framework useful for its grounding within other critical theories that confront cultural, historical, and ideological systems that constrain identity. When I began my research, it was surprising to me that existing scholarship does not analyze the intersection of race, veteran identity, and patriotism. Complex, cultural frameworks such as patriotism are influenced by positionality. Essentializing communities of people with generalized assumptions limits the depth and breadth of scholarship on many topics. Veterans, for example, have not been centered in any study or scholarly discourse on patriotism in over 40 years of scholarship on the topic.

Effectiveness of Veteran Facing Campus Organizations

Phillips' and Lincoln's framework is important but is only the beginning of what is needed in higher education. Zhou et al. (2022) used VCT in a study illustrating gaps in understanding about veteran needs and the support networks that exist among social media communities of veterans. I recently attended a meeting in which the question was raised about how effectively veteran facing campus organizations and entities were coordinating. For example, there are associations for veteran service officers, program administrators, certifying officials, in addition to veteran service organizations. Some veteran facing roles on campuses are collateral duties for an already overworked and, perhaps, even underpaid staff member. In other examples, veteran oriented campus organizations are ancillary to the larger campus culture. Sometimes they are effectively approaching entropy regarding understanding and addressing the needs of veteran-scholars on their campuses.

More Work To Be Done

VCT is an important lens but, as with other critical theory frameworks, challenging institutions to shift perspectives remains a critical problem. Critical theories are a way to understand the experiences of individuals living under a series of structures and work towards their emancipation. From considering veteran narratives and perspectives within scholarly discourse, breaking down and challenging assumptions about veterans, to more effective coordination among veteran facing entities within the campus community, higher education has made strides but there is more that can and should be done. Marginalization is being considered part of something while also not being part of that same thing. Veteran narratives and counter-stories are important parts of scholarly discourse but also illustrate how many research topics need reframing so that campus organizations can better understand the needs of veteran-scholars.

Article Topics

Military Friendly Institutions Research on Student Veterans Serving Military in HigherEd Veterans Academic Success Women Veterans Working as a Veteran in HigherEd Workplace Inclusion

Republish this article for free. We want to make it easier for you to share knowledge and creativity, and encourage you to reuse our articles under a Creative Commons license.