Homeland Defense Journal - January 2009 - 28

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT • Crisis and Emergency Response and Recovery Issues • Mitigation and Preparedness Issues for Emergency Managers • Integrating Intelligence and Threat Analysis in Homeland Security • Public-Private Collaboration in Emergency Management • Exercise Design and Coordination Principles Of course, this is not an exhaustive list but illustrates the nature of coursework expected of collegiate-level programs, in which the caliber of education and group experiential learning is meant to exceed that of available seminars, conferences and training programs that students can readily ﬁnd elsewhere. We also know that coursework in public and media affairs, legal issues, sophisticated risk analysis and technical subjects could also be included. In the absence of established standards and benchmarks we are left without the available metrics to evaluate the various programs, and similarly, the schools are unable to evaluate current and prospective faculty members. Programs vary widely on the question of what to value more: professionals with ﬁrsthand experience, or scholars with a deep academic background. It is perhaps in this respect where the differences between the many certiﬁcation, distance and traditional educational programs, are the most pointed. The ongoing challenge will be to establish this ﬁeld as one of serious academic study, without losing its connection to the practitioners in the ﬁeld who offer an understanding leavened with more practical knowledge. Educational Challenges This poses several difﬁcult dilemmas for the United States. First, hardworking students with some experience in emergency management or homeland security scattered in many different geographic locations must avail themselves of educational programs that are convenient and close. This is a difﬁcult issue, and creating access to the best programs for all deserving students will remain a vexing problem for the foreseeable future. The geographic disparities produce other unwelcome circumstances as well. Chieﬂy, such students must complete online programs from divergent institutions without knowing whether the material or the course of instruction adequately covers the array of functional responsibilities expected of today’s emergency managers or if the program matches the quality and rigor of an on-campus program. Worse, for potential employers is the dilemma of crediting online programs against traditional on-campus programs and determining which educational experience reﬂects better preparation for the job. Divergence in education is normally a virtue, but how many different approaches to a Divergence in HAZMAT incident or a terrorist education is normally event can be tolerated? Nobody a virtue, but how many wants to come under the knife different approaches to of a surgeon who studied at an a HAZMAT incident or unaccredited university that a terrorist event can pioneered its own techniques, be tolerated? so why in our own ﬁeld should we settle for anything less than the most effective ideas and approaches to homeland security and emergency management?—and when we ﬁnd them, why aren’t they standardized? This apparent lack of standardization also registers at the level of urban emergency managers, state directors of emergency management and federal homeland security experts. These senior managers know the essential issues and tasks at the heart of emergency management and bear the daily burden of readiness for homeland security scenarios. Their views and insights should matter greatly in developing a sensible curriculum, but will they? Perhaps if academic programs began to award credit for actual experience in crisis management or emergency response, then these operational insights will ﬁnd their way into academia and the necessary reciprocity between practitioners and scholars will begin to build. What we have been considering is the absence of standards and coordination between different academic programs and their counterparts in the civil service. Since the DHS is the principle government entity focusing on emergencies and security, and since homeland security and emergency management educational programs have been created in support of its mission, we all look to DHS to take the lead on providing standards. It could begin by afﬁrming or disqualifying the inherent value of the online educational experience. In-class programs of a traditional nature, which incorporate miniexercises and are taught by expert practitioners, should either be endorsed as the ‘preferred’ educational route or receive special merit when candidates apply for positions. Online programs are either educationally viable or they are not. The next step DHS needs to take is to determine the balance that needs to be struck between allhazards preparedness and response, and counter-terrorism and law enforcement. This will most likely happen when the friction between FEMA and the rest of the department is reduced. Then, DHS and FEMA must address the question of educating tomorrow’s emergency managers for infrastructure protection, cyber security and threat analysis tasks determining whether online, on-campus or travelling seminar workshops are best. Finally, there ought to be a comprehensive study of the actual educational standards, needs and requirements for careers in homeland security and emergency management, vetted by experts and scholars alike, which can be validated against real world operational requirements. There needs to be a publicly available measurement of the comparative quality and effectiveness of these diverse programs. The present situation fails to adequately meet the professional and operational needs of our key federal, state and local government agencies, and these problems will be compounded the longer the situation continues as is. This is not likely to change without some event of upheaval or controversy, followed thereafter by a period of reform and adjustment. The federal government has moved very slowly to establish the career ﬁeld and educational requirements for those future applicants to DHS, FEMA, and related agencies where Executive Order 13434 calls for a new ‘national security/homeland security’ career track. How will we support this career track with an education appropriate to its needs? Armed with these considerations, let us begin the hard task of creating one. n Dr. Robert McCreight is an adjunct professor at The George Washington University’s Institute of Crisis, Disaster and Risk Management. 26 | Homeland Defense Journal Visit www.homelanddefensejournal.com

Homeland Defense Journal - January 2009

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Homeland Defense Journal - January 2009