The Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps each provide tuition assistance (a "kicker") in addition to what you earn through the Montgomery GI Bill. Each service controls the amount of extra money it provides. The Army fund increases the amount of support to as much as $70,000, the Navy fund increases the amount of support to as much as $50,000 and the Marine Corps fund increases the amount of support to as much as $30,000. College Funds are awarded on a competitive basis according to academic merit (i.e., scoring in the top half of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery). To qualify one must also agree to serve six years.
One difficult matter in the relation between military and society is control and transparency. In some countries, limited information on military operations and budgeting is accessible for the public. However transparency in the military sector is crucial to fight corruption. This showed the Government Defence Anti-corruption Index Transparency International UK published in 2013.
Military law introduces offences not recognised by civilian courts, such as absence without leave (AWOL), desertion, political acts, malingering, behaving disrespectfully, and disobedience (see, for example, Offences against military law in the United Kingdom). Penalties range from a summary reprimand to imprisonment for several years following a court martial. Certain fundamental rights are also restricted or suspended, including the freedom of association (e.g. union organizing) and freedom of speech (speaking to the media). Military personnel in some countries have a right of conscientious objection if they believe an order is immoral or unlawful, or cannot in good conscience carry it out.
The IRT model underlying ASVAB scoring is the three-parameter logistic (3PL) model. The 3PL model represents the probability that an examinee at a given level of ability will respond correctly to an individual item with given characteristics. Specifically, the item characteristics represented in the 3PL model are difficulty, discrimination (i.e., how well the item discriminates among examinees of differing levels of ability), and guessing (i.e., the likelihood that a very low ability examinee would respond correctly simply by guessing).