American military veterans funded under the GI Bill (and possibly under other VA administrated programs) can only receive funding for classes which are required for the degree. I can find lots of university websites that mention this requirement (here's a good example), but I was unable to determine where this rule comes from or why it is there. In particular, is it required by the legislation itself or just VA rules? When was the rule imposed and is there any information on why?
-
3The reason I was curious about this is that there are lots of weird side affects. For example, because GI Bill students get a semester of credit for their military service, they can easily complete their credit requirements before their major requirements and be left in a situation where it's very difficult to stay a full time student while finishing the major.– Noah SnyderCommented Nov 13, 2014 at 4:15
-
1Is it considered normal in the US to study courses which won't be credited towards your degree? That seems very strange from an Australian perspective.– sapiCommented Nov 13, 2014 at 8:15
-
@sapi: Typically American students take around 1/3 to 1/2 of their classes in their major and up to 1/4 of general education requirements. So that leaves a lot of classes which don't count towards any specific requirement other than the total number of credits. If you're in a science major with prerequisites that must be taken sequentially and you start with outside credits it would be normal to take some classes that don't contibute to any requirements.– Noah SnyderCommented Nov 13, 2014 at 12:57
-
2@sapi Here's an example of undergrad requirements. To earn my degree, I had to take a bunch of core courses. To graduate, I attended a music history class and a literature class, learned psychology, and did weight-lifting. The idea is to ensure the college isn't generating core-science people who don't know a lick of anything else. Practical? Probably not, but requirements are requirements.– CompassCommented Nov 13, 2014 at 14:50
-
Of course, this is not unique to the GI Bill. Many college scholarships and grants given for "financial need" have similar requirements. And, when students get funding to attend graduate school, that funding is often limited to courses in their program of study. For example, my first year in grad school they let us take any one course over the summer as part of our graduate assistantship - they realized that was a loophole when some people took tennis, and the next summer we could only take courses needed to graduate.– Oswald VeblenCommented Nov 30, 2014 at 23:25
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
It looks to me like it is more or less required by the legislation, although I'm not a lawyer so I may not be interpreting it right. Educational assistance is authorized for pursuing a "program of education" rather than just taking individual courses:
The Secretary shall pay to each individual entitled to educational assistance under this chapter who is pursuing an approved program of education...
A program of education is defined as:
The term “program of education” means any curriculum or any combination of unit courses or subjects pursued at an educational institution which is generally accepted as necessary to fulfill requirements for the attainment of a predetermined and identified educational, professional, or vocational objective.
Strictly speaking, this doesn't mean the classes must be required for an academic degree per se, and other sorts of credentials or licenses could count. However, it does not seem to allow taking isolated classes for their own sake, but rather just as required for the overall program.
I don't know the history or why the legislation was set up this way. I'd guess that it's because the goal is to help veterans achieve qualifications that will further their careers, not to educate them for the sake of education. One possibility is that nobody really thought hard about the issue while drafting the legislation, so it wasn't a conscious decision. Another is that it was intended to save money by avoiding paying for frivolous or unnecessary courses. A third possibility is that it was intended to help veterans by putting pressure on them to follow a set degree program (rather than squandering their benefits on isolated courses that might never fit together to complete any degree).
answered Nov 13, 2014 at 3:12
-
Thanks! I did look at the bill but struggled finding that key definition. Commented Nov 13, 2014 at 4:10
-
I have always thought that one reason such things come into being is the politics of funding. Imagine someone is one the fence about voting for the law. If you can tell them "It will only pay for veterans to get a degree to help them get a job - not to stay as a student forever", that may well sway a few votes in favor of the bill, particularly from lawmakers who are very concerned about the possibility of "wasting" money. Commented Nov 30, 2014 at 23:22
The purpose of the GI BILL program is for Veterans to get a degree or acquire a new skill for employment after active duty. Not flounder around in college for 6 years for a Bachelors degree. If there is a class you really want to take that's not a requirement you can always change your major, then change it back. There are different GI bills with different rules depending when you served in the military. I would talk to the VA or visit the VA-GI bill web site, most questions can be answered there.
-
Exactly. The GI Bill has a mission, which is roughly "Get as many veterans a college education and into specialized jobs as possible." Any superfluous classes paid for by the GI Bill are not furthering that mission -- it's essentially taking necessary class away from another veteran (due to limited funds). Commented Dec 1, 2014 at 17:52