Scholars in Camo: Resiliency

By Phil Callahan and Michael Marks

This Veterans Curriculum is purposefully designed to increase the likelihood of retention and graduation of learners in college settings by establishing an academic and social framework, which is intended to improve concentration, memory, problem solving, and learning, while minimizing social isolation. Specific focus is to provide veterans, emerging from potentially traumatic military experience, with academic transition skills, critical thinking, and coping skills that foster resiliency, the ability to bounce back from adversity, and minimize stigmatization of traditional psychological interventions. The curriculum is composed of three content areas, resiliency, learning-teaching, and leadership which emerged as a result of best practices research, surveys and interactions with veterans regarding the ideal curriculum for veterans reentering the civilian and academic world.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Phil Callahan
• Release date: Aug 2, 2018
• ISBN: 9780463341056

Phil Callahan

Philip Callahan, Ph.D., EMTP is currently an Emeritus Professor at the University of Arizona.He has served on government and community committees focusing on the research,development and evaluation of resilience-oriented education addressing first responders andcombat veterans and in leadership and academic positions at he University of Arizona toinclude Arizona Health Sciences Center, Assoc Professor Ed Psychology, Assoc ProfessorVeterans Education and as a firefighter and paramedic in southern Arizona. He was a2013 JEMS 10 recipient.

Book preview

The Veterans Curriculum is purposefully designed to increase the likelihood of retention and graduation of learners in college settings by establishing an academic and social framework, which is intended to improve concentration, memory, problem solving, and learning, while minimizing social isolation. Specific focus is to provide veterans, emerging from potentially traumatic military experience, with academic transition skills, critical thinking, and coping skills that foster resiliency, the ability to bounce back from adversity, and minimize stigmatization of traditional psychological interventions. The curriculum is composed of three content areas, resiliency, learning-teaching, and leadership which emerged as a result of best practices research, surveys and interactions with veterans regarding the ideal curriculum for veterans reentering the civilian and academic world.

Curriculum

Each of the three content areas, resiliency, learning-teaching, and leadership, can function as a distinct and separate course equating to three credit hours. But, the overall design is intended to function as a block of three courses whereby the resiliency course occurs first, followed by the learning-teaching, and finally the leadership course. Separating each course by about thirty minutes allows the learners to socialize, summarize, and prepare for the next class. A cohort-based social framework is encouraged for all of the courses whereby, the entire class is composed of veterans.

Why this curriculum? Isolation, powerlessness, boredom, ambiguity and danger have been clearly identified as stressors in a deployment zone (Bartone, Adler & Vaitkus, 1998). These same elements persist in the form of stress-induced thoughts and behaviors after deployment. The cohort-based social framework, encouraged in this course, provides an integrative support system that reduces hyper-arousal and makes use of veteranism to facilitate the transition from military to civilian life (Walsh, Katz & Sechrest, 2002). Such interventions do not pathologize veteran’s re-adjustment, but instead focus on reintegration, resiliency, and educational practice in academic settings (Friedman, Resick & Keane, 2007). Resiliency characteristics can be taught effectively in a classroom setting (Liftom, Seay & Bushko, 2000), and the development of appropriate resiliency attitudes can facilitate college adjustment (Mathis & Lecci, 1999) and lead to an increase in retention and GPA (Maddi, Khoshaba, Jensen, Carter & Llui, 2002). Measures of resiliency have been found be to good predictors of retention (Lifton, Seay & Bushko, 2000). Research in resiliency training has further demonstrated that successful readjustment diminishes the risk of the development of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (Bartone, 1999). Moreover, resiliency characteristics and the development of an adequate support system can be protective factors in preventing PTSD (King, King, Fairbank, Keane & Adams, 1998).

The goal of the resiliency course is to understand, assess, plan, and apply resiliency practices that manage stress in a manner that fosters academic, personal, and professional development. The course provides a background in resiliency research to foster the knowledge and strategies that enhance personal and professional resilience. Specific focus is on research-based resiliency methods, assessment, and the physical, psychological, and social systems of resiliency. The expectation is that one will maintain a comprehensive journal and provide written commentary and to participate in discussions on resiliency research.

The learning-teaching course is a twist on the typical academic preparation-type courses in that this course looks at learning through the eyes of an educator. As such, individuals will explore and practice the design and implementation of learning in a manner that allows for understanding of instructional design and teaching practices, and self-exploration of one’s own learning style and how to maximize learning success. The goal of the learning-teaching course is to research and apply theories and practices known to promote academic success in learning and teaching related to instructional presentation. This course introduces applied methods and research addressing practical and theoretical learning principles. In addition to assisting participants acquire and develop knowledge and strategies that enhance academic and personal development, the course is intended to broaden awareness to diversity in learning and instruction. Particular focus will be placed on the effective instructional design and presentation and evaluation methods in teaching. The expectation is that one will apply principles from the course by developing and documenting methods that improve personal learning performance and by producing a technology-based presentation.

The goal of the leadership course is to provide an introduction to the effects of knowledge, behavior, social influence, and decision-making related to leadership. This course introduces a broad range of readings addressing practical and theoretical leadership principles. Individuals will be expected to critically examine readings and associated videos/movies. The expectation is that one will apply principles from the course to a field project where emphasis will be placed on enhancement of self-awareness and leadership capabilities through the documented development and assessment of the field project.

Method

This text is designed to be used as both a personal journal and as a teaching tool. As a journal, activities are arranged to permit you to develop a process for personal reflection. As a teaching and learning tool, the text is formatted in much the same manner an educator would design instruction such that each section or session occurs over about one to two hours. Thus, each of the thirty sessions is presented in an applied lesson plan format to typically include the objectives to be covered, the relevancy of the topic, any prior learning that should be reviewed, a pre-test for personal reflection, learning activities related to new materials, a follow-up reflective activity, and a toolbox of resources or new learning-tools you can now apply. These tools become the chunks of learning that can be used as a resource when dealing with situations requiring a particular resiliency, learning, or leadership tactic. Consider creating a electronic or physical toolbox of 3x5 inch index cards with the tool name and an in-your-own-words definition on each card. These cards can serve as a quick source of information when reviewing or searching for an academic or lifestyle solution. The lesson plan format is purposefully used to establish a behavior of what to expect when participating in a learning setting as either a learner or instructor.

A traditional journaling approach versus that of a setting where papers are passed-in in either a real or virtual (electronic) manner poses logistical issues that should be considered at the outset of this course. In particular, such tools as blogging lend themselves to a journaling approach and certainly can be used. Additionally, the 200-400 word commentaries that appear frequently in this course allow for opportunities to interact at a mentor-mentee or at a facilitator level , but only if these commentaries are shared rather than as appearing as static elements in the journal. Hence, opportunities either through a traditional submission of paper or through some electronic means needs to recognized and agreed upon. The environment will probably determine your methods.

If you intend to use this text to teach or facilitate a class, you will find that each session can be delivered over about one hour and fifteen minutes. And, the follow-up reflection exercise should not require more than about one hour per session. This equates to a three-credit course. Because a learner-centered mentor-mentee approach is the preferred model for teaching and learning, the materials are intended for use by both facilitator and learner using a reflective technique to encourage personal journaling. The idea of reflection and problem solving is further encouraged through the use of Think-Aloud Pair Problem Solving (TAPPS) (Barkley, Cross, & Major, 2005; Lochhead and Whimby, 1987). Two individuals can perform TAPPS, whereby one individual orally presents an idea and the other listens and offers feedback regarding the clarity and thoroughness of the idea. TAPPS aids in the development of analytical reasoning skills and encourages social interaction that allows rehearsing of an idea and producing deeper understanding.

A departure from traditional instructor/student relationships, Learner Centered Education (LCE), fostered in this course, re-orients the instructional process by placing the learner at the center of the process (Weimer, 2002). This learner-centric approach encourages learning settings that actively engage each learner regardless of individual differences. Veterans returning to college face challenges, and those who are committed to providing instruction to these warriors must dare to face these challenges with them, as well as their own. The old adage that a noisy classroom is a good classroom could not be truer for a classroom of veterans. The eagerness to engage in discussion can be both energizing and draining. But, engagement through critical thinking assumes human arguments require evaluation if they are to be respected and thus, focuses on a set of skills that enable an individual to apply rational criteria to the reasoning of speakers or writers. This instruction, supportive of critical thinking, typically uses frequent questions, developmental tension, fascination with the contingency of conclusions, and active learning (Browne & Freeman, 2000). Given the LCE setting, additional structure can be exercised in the form of a sergeant of the class. The sergeant serves as an intermediary in the class and as a unifying element outside to ensure consistency and dependability of class’s studies. Our experience has been after the first month of classes, this role is no longer necessary, as the cohort will begin to monitor itself naturally.

When knowledge is too tightly bound to context, transfer to different contexts is reduced (Bjork & Richardson-Klavhen, 1989; Carraher, 1986; Eich, 1985; Lave, 1988; Mestre, 2002; Saxe, 1989). Thus, key concepts, identified as both session specific and whole-task objectives, are purposefully incorporated into this instruction so that the learner explores the key concepts underlying the knowledge being presented, and is capable of applying those concepts in multiple contexts. This instruction encourages transfer of learning through the sharing of knowledge and skills both between and within the themes of resiliency, learning, and leadership. Why leadership? Leadership has been emphasized as an essential component of baccalaureate education, but is often addressed late in the educational experience. Attention is now being given to early introduction of leadership skills with promising results (Burbach, Matkin & Fritz, 2004; Palmer, 2005).

Content

An Instructional Systems Design (ISD) (Dick, Carey & Carey, 2004) approach has been purposefully used to assist in the development of the courses to facilitate outcomes measurement. Because this design approach is commonly implemented in military training it therefore is familiar to the target audience. Further, a whole task approach (Merrienboer, Kirschner, and Kester, 2003) is used to integrate objectives to foster a more holistic look at the entire learning concept as the individual’s learning progresses. This might be envisioned as a cognitive apprenticeship whereby each class session contributes, in an authentic manner, to the overall understanding of the concept. By example, reference the following table (Table 1) where the whole task objective is followed by each associated session’s objectives. Hence, the learning occurs in the more traditional contextual sequential vertical manner, but also horizontally across sessions providing a repetitive and unified concept. The whole task approach provides a holistic look at the entire process and intended outcomes.

Table 1

Whole Task Objectives and Session Objectives for the Themes of Resiliency, Learning, and Leadership.

References

Barkley, E., Cross, K. P., & Howell Major, C. (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: Ahandbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bartone, P. T. (1999). Hardiness protects against war-related stress in army reserve forces. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 51(2), 72-82.

Bartone, P. T, Adler, A. B, & Vaitkus, M. A. (1998). Dimensions of psychological stress in peacekeeping operations. Military Medicine, 163, 587-93.

Bjork, R. A., & Richardson-Klavhen. (1989). On the puzzling relationship between environment context and human memory. In C. Izawa (Ed.), Current issues incognitive processes: The Tulane Flowerree symposium on cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Browne, M.N. & Freeman, K. (2000). Distinguishing features of critical thinking classrooms. Teaching in Higher Education. 5(3), 301-309.

Burbach, M. E., Matkin, G. S., & Fritz, S. M. (2004). Teaching critical thinking in an introductory leadership course utilizing active learning strategies: A confirmatory study. College Student Journal, 38(3), 482.

Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. (2004). The Systematic Design of Instruction (6th Edition). Allyn & Bacon.

Eich, E. (1985). Context, memory, and integrated item/context imagery.

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,

11,764-770.

Friedman, M. J., Resick, P. A., & Keane, T. M. (2007). Key questions and an agenda for future research. In Friedman, M. J., Keane, T. M., & Resick, P. A. (Eds.), Handbook of PTSD: Science and Practice. New York: Guilford Press.

King, L. A., King, D. W., Fairbank, J. A., Keane, T. M., & Adams, G. A. (1998). Resiliency-recovery factors in post-traumatic stress disorder among female and male veterans: Hardiness, post war support, and additional stressful life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74(2), 420-34.

Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lifton, D. E., Seay, S. & Bushko, A. (2000). Can student hardiness serve as an indicator of likelihood of graduation? Baseline results from a longitudinal study. Academic Quarterly Exchange, 2, 73-81.

Lochhead, J., and Whimby, A. (1987). Teaching analytic reasoning through Think-Aloud Pair Problem Solving. In J. E. Stice (ed.), Developing critical thinking and problem-solving abilities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 30. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Maddi, S. R., Khoshaba, D. M., Jensen, K., Carter, E. & Llui, J. (2002). Hardiness Training with High-Risk College Students. NACADA Journal. 22(1), 45-55.

Mathis, M. & Lecci, L. (1999). Hardiness and college adjustment: Identifying students in need of services. Journal of College Student Development. 40(3), 305-309.

Palmer, S. P. (2005) Teaching leadership skills through evidence using a mentoring triad. New Models in Nursing Education. 16th International Nursing Research Congress. Hawaii, Hawaii.

Saxe, G. B. (1989). Transfer of learning across cultural practices. Cognition and Instruction. 6, pp. 325-330.

Van Merrienboer, J. G., Kirschner, P. A. & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the Load Off a Learner's Mind: Instructional Design for Complex Learning. Educational Psychologist, 38:1, 5 -13.

Waysman, M., Schwarzwald, J., & Solomon, Z. (2001). Hardiness: An examination of its relationship with positive and negative long-term changes following trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress. 14(3), 531-548.

Walsh, M. E., Katz, M. A.,& Sechrest, L. (2002). Unpacking cultural factors in adaptation to type 2 diabetes mellitus. Med Care. 40(1), 1129-1139.

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner centered teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Resiliency Overview

The goal of the resiliency course is to understand, assess, plan, and apply resiliency practices that manage stress in a manner that fosters academic, personal, and professional development. The course provides a background in resiliency research to foster the knowledge and strategies that enhance personal and professional resilience. Specific focus is on research-based resiliency methods, assessment, and the physical, psychological, and social systems of resiliency. The expectation is that you will maintain a comprehensive journal and provide written commentary and to participate in discussions on resiliency research.

Research has clearly demonstrated that those who have learned these skills