An Administrator’s Toolkit to Engaging the Disengaged: A Case Study of Discovering Veteran and System-Impacted Student Commonality

Introduction:

The following case study highlights an example of a student affairs engagement initiative between administrators and students from both veteran and system impacted spaces to discuss how university administrators can help build better on-campus cultures of support for varying student populations. Through the practice of bringing two different but common groups together in conversation, we hoped to discover a glimpse into how administrators can better support both the students within these groups and the students that otherwise would not engage with these communities, even though they may identify with them. We believe that continuing this engagement practice of hearing resonant experiences toward discovering commonalities might inform the possibility of building out better, concrete resources for engaged and disengaged students.

The Listening Session:

In December, 2024, CVTI partnered with Columbia's Center for Justice and the student groups The Military Veterans of Columbia University and the CU System Impacted Students to facilitate a conversation that set out to accomplish the following outcomes:

• Discover commonalities of experience
• Gather stigmas and stereotypes associated with both groups
• Highlight challenging areas that may be addressed by student collaboration
• Foster collaboration between the System Impacted and Student Veteran groups
• Furnish a brief essay that reflects on the initiative
• Publish a case study and quick application tool for other administrators seeking to work with these groups

Participants:

• 1 Center for Veteran Transition and Integration Facilitator (David Keefe)
• 4 current undergraduate system-impacted students and alumni
• 3 current undergraduate student veterans
• 1 current graduate student veteran
• 1 CVTI assistant
• 2 Center for Justice Administrators

• 2 Guest Moderators

   

What we learned:

Commonalities:

From this roundtable and the few conversations we had with participants prior to the event, it was clear that there are many self-expressed commonalities between these two groups of students. Because the scope of our conversation was limited to student affairs resources, the commonalities brought to the table were primarily within the scope of the difficulties of transition - students that are trying to acclimate from one culture to another. This transition yields common experiences of:

• Imposter feelings from an internal perspective (not supposed to be here…)
• Not belonging due to external forces (called out, left out, typecasted, etc.)
• Code-switching (suppressing identity, apologizing for experience, etc.)

Some other common experiences that came to the surface were shared life experiences, such as:

• navigating trauma
• being a parent
• having to deal with court issues while attending school
• facing biases and stigmas on campus
• navigating a complex university, etc.

Additionally, some of the terminology used by individuals within each group was similar, most notably how they both referred to others outside of being identified as veteran or system-impacted as “civilians.” Overall it was unanimous that these two different groups feel they can thrive in having uncomfortable conversations, navigating difficult situations, and adapting to the world around them.

They all agreed they have much to offer society.

Two areas that struck us as important commonalities to flag are:

1. How each group navigates trust/distrust in systems, in communities, in the general public (civilians), in staff and faculty, etc; and
2. how each group is caught in a system of attending a non-traditional school within a traditional university.

Trust and Distrust:

It was universal among participants that there is a lot of trust in the School of General Studies and how it provides both access and opportunity for non-traditional students to meet other non-traditional students along the same academic and social path. (This supports the importance of peer mentoring and networking resources.) It was said multiple times, “I found my place at General Studies.”

Non-traditional and Traditional Schools:

Many participants brought up the importance of how a non-traditional structure is the support they need to help with transitioning from one culture to another, however, it comes with the challenges of constantly being compared and contrasted with a traditional structure. Additionally, non-traditional schools are not fully integrated into traditional school systems, such as the full core curricula, committees, policies, and more, which add to other pressures for students.

Constraints:

The question of “what does not work?” was brought up, which prompted the critique of how:

• A non-traditional school may not provide enough time for all transitioning students to complete a degree.
• They were not able to holistically pursue academic goals and personal wellbeing at the same time.
• Friction caused by some staff, admin, and faculty affects student wellbeing. 

*These may lead to a false sense of hope for some students.

Opportunities:

Something that resonated across the conversation was the opportunity to think radically about how to better support these students. The roundtable felt new, fresh, and energetic. There was an overall desire to continue these roundtable discussions to foster new ideas and ways to collaborate. One idea was to advocate for more admin and faculty training around the nuanced challenges of system impacted and veteran student transition.

One student went on to say, “this content should be human centered, rooted in narrative, and relay more student experiences.”

Eventually, this can systematically change how staff and faculty think more broadly about a universal grace that should be given to all students within the philosophical parameters that everyone is a student with challenges.

What came together at the end was a galvanization from the student leaders within these groups to “just do the work,” to make change and build more access and opportunity for them and any other marginalized subset within their larger groups.

Quick Application for Administrators & Staff:

The following tool equips university administrators, faculty, and student leaders with strategies for facilitating dialogue and collaboration between student veterans, system-impacted students, and other marginalized non-traditional groups. It is grounded in lived experience and narratives.

Conclusion

Veterans and system-impacted students, like many non-traditional students, defy binary narratives of victimhood and heroism. They are learners, leaders, and connectors who thrive when given space to share their stories. This case study does not ask us to fix them. It invites us to learn with them, at the edge, in transition, through practice.

References

• Frank, A. W. (2013). The Wounded Storyteller: Body, Illness, and Ethics. University of Chicago Press.

• Keefe, David. (2025) From the Edges: Common Ground and Collective Transition between Veteran and System-impacted Students at Columbia University. Medium/Linked In Article

• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

• Senghor, S. (2013). Writing My Wrongs: Life, Death, and Redemption in an American Prison. Convergent Books.

• Turner, V. (1969). The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Aldine Publishing.