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 4
Building on the recognition of hazards and security threats gained from the map exercise, participants are guided through policy and procedure selections. These sample selections help participants recognize that hazard and security planning is most easily and effectively done when built into the fabric of the organization and included in its policies from the beginning. (This is similar to the architectural concept of universal design and to the notion that it is easier and less costly to build in accessibility than to add on accessibility.) The workshop makes the point that effective hazard and security planning is an integral--not ancillary--part of day-to-day management, ensuring that rural, small urban, and community transit managers have a methodology to prepare and implement a systemic approach to hazards and security issues through the appropriate use of the HSP. Course Goals While the overall goal of this workshop is to provide participant learners with the knowledge and skills necessary to successfully develop and implement an HSP at their agency, a more complete goal set will assist the instructor in understanding what is to be accomplished from an instructional standpoint. A more complete goal set is focused on participant learners leaving the workshop feeling good about themselves, with the knowledge that they are part of something larger than themselves and, importantly, ready for "action"--that is, ready to implement the new ideas they have learned. Hence, a more complete goal set for participant learners is to: 1. Develop and foster a reasonable approach to hazards and security, 2. Become familiar with the terms and elements of hazards and security planning, and 3. Draft an HSP. General Instructional Approach The general instructional approach for this workshop is based on the use of different cognitive learning styles, semantic differentials, and commitment to action: o Different cognitive learning styles. Students use their eyes, ears, voices, and hands to learn the material. The students read the materials, discuss topics, take notes, and, most importantly, draw. Students draw a map of their area and are encouraged to "learn by drawing." Even using the highlighter helps some learn. The instructor should be aware of the cognitive styles of the participants, pace the discussions for active involvement, and limit the time spent lecturing. o Semantic differentials. Semantic differentials are the basis for many of the interactive discussions. Semantic differentials are used for each of the principal action areas, and students are encouraged to rate items as "easy/hard," "long term/short term," "we already do this/we need to do this," and so forth. When the students put the action areas into a conceptual semantic framework, the actions are made more approachable and are easier for the students to remember when they work on their own plan at home. 4