Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 15
Current and Proposed Educational Programs in Homeland Security CURRENT PROGRAMS A sampling of current educational programs in homeland security is given in Appendix E. This list was generated by an Internet search of the words "education" (plus "master's," "Ph.D.," "certificate," "university," etc.) and "homeland security." It is a survey only and makes no distinc- tion on the basis of curriculum, permanence, date of implementation, size, or other potential filtering parameters. In accordance with the charge to the committee, this listing does not include research programs or first re- sponder training programs. Yet the breadth of offerings is evident. There are certificates, continu- ing education modules, master's, and professional master's degrees being offered. There are traditional classroom experiences and on-line learning programs. There are opportunities in every geographic region in the continental United States and in institutions of widely varying size and mission (community colleges, four-year undergraduate institutions, doc- torate granting institutions). The content ranges from efforts rooted in technical prevention to workforce skills development to social under- standing. Many programs have capitalized on the existing strengths of the parent institution, repackaging existing coursework in innovative ways, germinating new courses from established research thrusts, or gath- ering existing faculty into new research centers that not only follow new research pursuits but also spin off new academic offerings. Perhaps the most natural transition to "homeland security" course- work has occurred in existing national security studies programs, where 15
OCR for page 16
16 FRAMEWORKS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN HOMELAND SECURITY the overall curriculum was simply updated post-9/11 to include more homeland security content within each course and a smattering of new course offerings. A classic example of this phenomenon is the 25-year-old Security Studies program at Georgetown University, which had to change neither name, nor administrative structure, nor building, nor graduation requirements, nor degree titles to incorporate the study of homeland se- curity into the fabric of its educational program. Yet, since academic strengths differ widely among institutions, and since homeland security is an extremely broad topic, there is seemingly no end to the variation among programs that have developed since 9/11. Indeed this proliferation occasioned the committee's present charge to begin the process of systematizing and organizing data on the diversity of educational offerings according to some coherent scheme. PROPOSED FRAMEWORKS Given the breadth encompassed by the term homeland security as defined earlier, it is appropriate that there be a wide range of educational experiences available. This view argues strongly against the creation of an all-definitive, all-encompassing "Homeland Security University," or the development of independent academic tracks for "homeland security spe- cialists." That is not to say that academic content in homeland security is completely formless. An important observation and potential organizing principle is that nearly all aspects of homeland security gravitate toward the issue of complex threats and how to manage them. This was the over- riding theme in the workshop presentations. The core literature that contributes expertise to understanding and managing these threats, derived from workshop presentations, consists of the following: 1. Risk management and analysis (intended to provide educational back- ground in managing responsible resource allocation in proportion to threat probability, estimated threat magnitude, and the likelihood of ame- lioration through corrective action). 2. Systems integration and management (intended to facilitate an under- standing of ways of forging cooperative mechanisms among the variety of agencies addressing aspects of homeland security). 3. Social, cultural, psychological, political, historical, and operational dy- namics of threats (the study, from social, natural science, and humanities perspectives of the issues related to the roots of terrorism, its dynamic, its evolution, and its application).
OCR for page 17
17 CURRENT AND PROPOSED EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS 4. Legal, political, and ethical issues in threat response (intended to pro- vide an understanding of the psychological reactions that drive decision making in crisis, and an expanded view of the consequences on institu- tions, structures, ethnic relations, individual freedoms--and even secu- rity itself--of decision trade-offs made under crisis in the past). 5. Decision-making tools and processes for the management and resolution of complex problems (may include exposure to such technical tools as data networks and data mining, but may also include nontechnical approaches such as forecasting/future studies and scenario planning). In addition to the core material, there may be threat-specific curricu- lar enhancements that derive from, and are taught within, the context of the major discipline of the student--e.g., sensors, target hardening, crowd control, public health, demographics, emergency planning. These will vary tremendously by major, but can easily be combined with the core elements to provide a competency in homeland security from the vantage point of a specific discipline or disciplines. According to the points listed above, workshop participants acknowl- edged that homeland security is not a discipline--at least not yet and not in the traditional sense. Instead, it is an area to which many academic specialties can be applied, but one that requires a certain core knowledge in order for the application to occur intelligently. The core is therefore recommended for anyone planning a career in the myriad of federal, state, and local agencies, nonprofit organizations, and even for-profit service providers engaged in homeland security work. Given the consideration above, the definition of homeland security, and the lessons learned from area studies, the committee proposes the following educational opportu- nities as being well suited to the provision of homeland security content- specific knowledge to students. AT THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE LEVEL: EXPOSURE TO THE CORE Community college representatives pointed out that in addition to their well-known roles in providing first responder training, community skills development, and serving as a forum for public debate, community colleges can introduce students to some elements of the core curriculum described above. This will then prepare students for a more in-depth spe- cialization at a four-year institution. Though community college students are 23 percent less likely to earn a four-year degree than those who begin their careers in four-year institutions, they comprise approximately one-
OCR for page 18
18 FRAMEWORKS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN HOMELAND SECURITY third of the college-going public.1,2 Community college students are there- fore a nonnegligible component of the U.S. education system. Many community colleges are already on the path to offering some of the core elements described in the previous section. For example, the Corinthian Colleges, which were represented at the workshop, offer an associate degree in homeland security, which captures elements three and four in their "domestic and international terrorism" offerings and their "business and ethics for security specialists" offerings, respectively. The relevance of the five listed core elements to homeland security can be seen from the fact that some community colleges have intuitively absorbed them, though not necessarily in the form of a formal curriculum leading to an associate degree. For example, Bucks County Community College, the Community College of Philadelphia, Camden County Col- lege, Delaware County Community College, and Drexel University have collaborated to provide courses that cover all the core elements listed, but the course format is that of one-day continuing education modules, de- signed for a target audience of first responders.3 Core element number four--legal, political, and ethical issues in threat response--was surprisingly prominent in community college curricula. It had, however, received added visibility in the community college sector from two summits convened by the Community College National Center for Community Engagement. The latest summit, held in February 2004, emphasized the role of community colleges in dealing with the conse- quences and aftermath of homeland security measures, not only through preparative coursework initiatives--teaching students about the trade- offs and consequences to be expected--but also by hosting public debates and discussions within communities and by initiating active volunteer outreach programs.4 1Ray L. Christie and Philo Hutcheson, 1993, "Net Effects of Institutional Type on Bacca- laureate Degree Attainment of Traditional Students," Community College Review (Fall). Com- munity college students are only 10% less likely to earn a baccalaureate than students at four-year institutions if data are controlled for demographic variables such as high school GPA, socioeconomic status, on-campus employment, cognitive test scores, immediate, full- time college entry after high school, institutional control (public vs. private), ethnicity, gen- der, and intent to pursue a bachelor's degree. 2National Center for Education Statistics, 1997, Access to Postsecondary Education for the 1992 High School Graduates, http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/access/98105-7.asp. 3http://oldwww.bucks.edu/lifelong_learning/homeland.html. 4Patricia Gunder, 2004, "Homeland Security and Civic Engagement: A Report of the Sec- ond Annual Summit." Available at www.league.org/league/projects/homeland_security/files/ Homeland%20Security%20White%20Paper.pdf.
OCR for page 19
19 CURRENT AND PROPOSED EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AT THE UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL: ACCESS TO ALL CORE COURSES AND SOME ENRICHMENT EXPERIENCES Not a single workshop participant, or any of the committee members, voiced support for an undergraduate degree program focused specifically on homeland security. As an area of study, it was deemed too immature and too broad. Several participants and committee members noted that given the enormous content variety in programs with such labels, it is unlikely that employers will even understand what any given "homeland security degree" represents. Moreover, such programs may give students a false impression that some professional consensus does exist about what actually constitutes knowledge of homeland security. Therefore, it is not recommended that a bachelor's degree in homeland security per se be offered. However, it is recommended that the core coursework identified above be available to undergraduate students and that they receive some recognition (e.g., a minor, concentration, or certificate) for completing it while working toward their major degree. The preliminary Web survey of existing undergraduate programs (Appendix E) did not reveal any that appear to incorporate all five core elements in the context of an undergraduate minor, concentration, or cer- tificate. Thus, attempting to offer the recommended core elements may be more difficult for undergraduate institutions than for community colleges, which generally had several--if not all--of the elements already in-house. A particular difficulty in undergraduate instruction appears to be a lack of qualified instructors for the "core." Workshop participants who teach key courses (e.g., "history of terrorism," which falls under core com- ponent number three) state that they can accommodate only a small frac- tion of the students who wish to enroll. Typically, those outside the professor's home department are denied access. For an institution to pro- vide instruction relevant to homeland security at the undergraduate level, the necessary coursework must be available to all prospective majors in all fields. Beyond accessibility to the core coursework, there are additional edu- cational experiences appropriate for undergraduates. The general consen- sus in the breakout sessions was that coursework emphasizing global and multicultural issues is appropriate. While terrorist acts themselves are not limited to foreign perpetrators, the substantial geographic isolation of the United States tends to diminish students' daily access to foreign points of view. In addition to multicultural exposure, corporate, government, or non- profit internships that give students exposure to the practice of homeland security were also strongly encouraged. Finally, given the complex, multidisciplinary nature of the threats that ultimately must be addressed
OCR for page 20
20 FRAMEWORKS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN HOMELAND SECURITY in homeland security, it is strongly recommended that students partici- pate in a capstone course. Here, they would work for an extended period of time (one course, spread over a semester or year) on a practical project in a multidisciplinary team environment. One participant described, as an example, the East-West Center, located in Hawaii, which allows stu- dents to interact with an international student body and learn firsthand how to collaborate and cooperate as well as appreciate other cultures. This kind of experience will prepare students for the many multidisciplinary teams on which they will have to serve in the course of their careers and ensure that the field of focus on homeland security does not become too inwardly focused. The committee notes that many of the extra experiences that it recom- mends for undergraduates--exposure to global issues, working on multidisciplinary teams, and an emphasis on complex problem solving-- are foundational not only for homeland security but for twenty-first cen- tury work and life. The suggestions made here resonate highly with rec- ommendations made by many educational bodies with regard to an appropriate curriculum for the next century, for example, the Accredita- tion Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) 2000 accreditation guidelines and the National Academy of Engineering's report The Engi- neer of 2020.5,6 AT THE GRADUATE LEVEL (CERTIFICATES, MASTER'S, AND PROFESSIONAL MASTER'S): CORE PLUS SPECIALIZATION Currently the Department of Homeland Security is providing com- petitive fellowships to 50 students per year in universities around the country to pursue graduate degrees in multiple fields of science, engi- neering, and the humanities.7 Workshops are available in the summer to introduce students to careers in the homeland security area.8 This seems to be an appropriate way of supporting doctoral work toward DHS objec- tives. However, consistent with earlier National Academies work on fed- eral programs, the DHS fellowship program, along with the Homeland Security Centers of Excellence, should be assessed on a periodic basis to 5http://www.abet.org/criteria.html. 6National Academy of Engineering, 2004, The Engineer of 2020, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. 7Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate's Homeland Se- curity Fellowship Program for Students and Universities, http://www.orau.gov/dhsed/ default.htm. 8Ibid.
OCR for page 21
21 CURRENT AND PROPOSED EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS establish goals and determine whether the programs are meeting those goals.9 With respect to the fellowships program, such an evaluation might examine whether an alternative fellowship or traineeship program, such as the National Science Foundation's (NSF's) Integrative Graduate Edu- cation and Research Traineeship (IGERT) program, might more nearly meet the department's educational objectives at the doctoral level. To the extent that an academic core for homeland security studies can be developed at the graduate level, it would be most appropriate that this material be formulated into a certificate program that could be available to graduate students enrolled in degree programs at the master's or Ph.D. levels. Such postbaccalaureate certificate programs are among the fastest- growing areas of higher education.10 They are highly specific, typically geared toward the needs of employers, and usually accomplished within four or five courses. An example is the Certificate of Homeland Security offered by the University of Denver in concert with its master's degree in global studies (see Appendix E). The certificate program was designed for midcareer professionals, thoroughly treats core elements three and four, and touches on the other three core elements. The Homeland Security Certificate offered by the National Graduate School (see Appendix E) is another example, encompassing four of the five core elements, and touch- ing only lightly on core element four. As the area of academic inquiry develops and workforce needs become more clearly defined, additional professional master's programs in aspects of homeland security studies will naturally develop to complement existing master's programs such as those listed in Appendix E. AT THE EXECUTIVE LEVEL: EXECUTIVE TRAINING At the executive level, the need is not just for multidisciplinary, multisectoral, multinational information access but also for managing, communicating, and coordinating multidisciplinary, multisectoral, mul- tinational teams. The task is enormous and requires a shared strategic 9COSEPUP (Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy), 1999, Evaluating Fed- eral Research Programs: Research and the Government Performance and Results Act, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. 10Wayne Patterson, 2001, "Ensuring the Quality of Certificate Programs," Continuing Higher Education Review, Fall:112-127.
OCR for page 22
22 FRAMEWORKS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN HOMELAND SECURITY vision, a common culture, a mutually understood language, and an ex- tensive network of professional contacts across many boundaries. The most logical way to provide these capabilities is through shared execu- tive training. Identified as one of the key areas for training by participants at a breakout session, executive training can create a common culture across upper management for handling homeland security issues, regardless of the location or institution represented by that management. For the indi- vidual, executive training can provide strategic skills, transfer lessons learned from other executives, upgrade resource management capabili- ties, and, of course, generate useful personal contacts. As a starting point, executive training courses could further the evolution of the 22 original agencies comprising the Department of Homeland Security into a cohe- sive organization. It can then bring together senior DHS management with their counterparts in other government agencies and the private sector to generate a shared vision, communication strategy, and team functional- ity. Finally, training with executives in other nations may well provide the critical personal linkages needed to confront individual threats as they arise. Jim Keagle and Steve Duncan of the National Defense University (NDU) pointed out that the six-week "CAPSTONE" course offered by NDU was structured to accomplish these goals for senior military person- nel across the armed forces, and a similar structure could be envisioned for satisfying the executive education needs across the federal/state/lo- cal agencies and institutions currently responsible for homeland security.
Representative terms from entire chapter: