a quantitative study in critical thinking skills amongst local emergency managers

A Quantitative Study in Critical Thinking Skills amongst Local Emergency Managers

FEMA Higher Education Conference

2010

2

• Emergency management environment is complex.

• Systems are often ill defined with unclear methods.

• Social and political ramifications are often intermingled.

• Social expectations for an effective and efficient emergency management.


3

The management of disasters is becoming increasinglydynamic and complex.

Population growth Increased urbanization Aging of critical infrastructure Widening socio-economic and cultural gaps


4

Disaster Risk Management

Identify and anticipate situations Determine situation severity Prioritization of issues Solve problems Make judgments


5

The shift towards proactive Disaster Risk Management, has resulted in a framework by which local emergency managers must gather, integrate, analyze, and communicate information in an effort to reduce the impacts of risk, but also prioritize resources within communities to enhance disaster management outcomes.

Department of Homeland Security, 2008


6

The evolving challenges of the 21st century environmenthas resulted in the need to ensure emergency managers are better able to meet those challenges.

Dr. Wayne Blanchard, 2008, EMI Higher Education Conference


7

Desirable competencies founded in critical thinking:

Analytical thinking; Ability to synthesize information; Ability to evaluate information; Understand the social and political context of hazards and

disasters; Think strategically; and Problem solve

Dr. Wayne Blanchard, 2008, EMI Higher Education Conference


8

“…emergency managers must be become more progressive in their thinking. [The role of Emergency Manager] can no longer be that of technician, but must evolve to that of a manager and senior policy advisor who oversees a community wide program….”

Principles of Emergency Management Workgroup


9


• Comprehensive• Coordinated• Progressive• Risk-driven• Integrated• Collaborative• Coordinated• Flexible• Professional

10

• Emergency Managers considered the ability to communicate, collaborate, and coordinate essential to building relationships and advancing the goals of emergency management.

• Britton claimed emergency managers must be able to articulate a persuasive and defendable case for disaster management.

• Emergency managers must have the skills to communicate, justify steps, and justify steps taken to manage risk.


11

• Survey of 300 Emergency Managers revealed that most of them considered themselves to be aware, knowledgeable, and alert to an unlimited number of crisis.

• Emergency Managers remembered specific details and “repeatedly referred to the fact that they knew [how to manage] through information or deduction what needed to be done” Springer, 2007, p. 10.


12

Survey of federal, state, and voluntary emergency managers to compile a profile of perceived duties and associated tasks for successful emergency management program administration revealed more than half considered conducting hazard analysis, vulnerability assessments, risk assessments, and capabilities assessments essential emergency management functions. Bryant, 2007, p. 36


13

The purpose of this study is to explore the extent to which local emergency managers have skills to critically think, assume, and

manage risk.

To what extent do local emergency managers have the skills to think

critically?

Purpose Statement / Research Question

14

Methodology

• Quantitative, non-experimental model

• Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Skills Appraisal-Form S

• Target Population, Setting, and Sample

• Data Collection

15

Methodology

Watson-Glaser assesses the following:

Inference Recognition of Assumptions Deductive Reasoning Interpretation Evaluation of Arguments

16

Findings

141 eligible participants

n = 54 (38% return rate)

• Age: 50-59 yrs

• Gender: Male

• Occupational Background Emergency Manager

• Years of Experience: 15+

• Education Level: Bachelors

17

Findings

Age Frequency Distribution

Age Range

Freq. % Valid %

25-29 1 1.9 2.1

35-39 5 9.3 10.6

40-49 14 25.9 29.8

50-59 20 37.0 42.6

60-69 7 13.0 14.9

Total 47 87.0 100.00

Missing 7 13.0

Total 54 100

18

Findings

Gender Frequency Distribution

Gender Freq. % Valid %

Male 39 72.2 81.3

Female 9 16.7 18.8

Total 48 88.9 100.00

Missing 6 11.1

Total 54 100

19

Findings

Years within OccupationFrequency Distribution

Years Freq. % Valid %

<1 y 1 1.9 2.1

1-2 2 3.7 4.2

2-4 6 11.1 12.5

4-7 7 13.0 14.6

7-10 4 7.4 8.3

10-15 3 5.6 6.3

15+ 25 46.3 52.1

Total 48 88.9 100

Missing 6 11.1

Total 54

20

Findings

Occupation <1 1-2y 2-4y 4-7y 7-10y 10-15y 15+y TotalOther 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1Fire 0 0 0 2 1 1 9 13EM 0 0 5 2 2 0 12 22

Cty. Admin 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 4Police 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2

911 Disp. 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

Pub. Safety 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2

EMS Coord 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 3

Total 1 2 6 7 4 3 25 48

Occupational Background Frequency Distribution

21

Findings

Education Level Frequency Distribution

Ed Level Freq. % Valid %

HS/GED 3 5.6 6.3

1-2 yr 9 16.7 18.8

Assoc. 6 11.1 12.5

3-4 yr. 2 3.7 4.2

Bachelors 16 29.6 33.3

Masters 12 22.2 25.0

Total 48 88.9 100.

Missing 6 11

Total 54 100

22

Findings

• 7 Emergency Management Regions

• City vs. County Programs

County • (n = 36, Mean = 28.078)

City • (n = 18, Mean = 28.00)

23

Findings

n = 8

Mean = 24.2857SD = 4.46148

n = 9

Mean = 27.00SD = 6.08276

n = 10

Mean = 29.600

SD = 4.55095

n = 4

Mean = 25.2500SD = 3.50000

n = 8

Mean = 31.2500SD = 4.52769

n = 8

Mean = 29.500

SD = 4.17475

n = 27.1250

Mean = 27.1250

SD = 3.18198

24

Findings

Means and Standard Deviations of 54 Local Emergency Managers vs. WGCTA-Form S Managers Database

* **

25

Findings

• Local EM’s more likely than the norm group to:

Misinterpret situations and issues often;

Miss opportunities to identify valuable decision making or problem-solving;

Fail to apply logic or reasoning when analyzing information; and

Draw unwarranted conclusions that are not able to be verified.

26

Findings

27

Findings

28

Findings

29

Findings

• ANOVA

Sheffe’ test Bonferroni Correction Analysis

30

Conclusion

• Cumulative and Subtests were below the mean for managers in the WGCTA-Form S database.

• A small, but positive, correlation was demonstrated with education and experience.

31

Conclusion

• Literature supported by research findings:

Local emergency managers need to improve thinking skills.

Local emergency managers should study emergency management academically.

32

Conclusion

• Recommendation for Action

Define critical thinking in emergency management.

Ensure local emergency managers have a minimum of a bachelor’s degree.

Identify strategies to strengthen critical thinking in higher education programs in emergency management.

Enhance critical thinking outcomes of non-academic emergency management education programs.

33

Future Research

• Implications for Future Research

Larger sample population with diversified geographical representation

Comparative study between critical thinking skills at the local, state, and federal levels of government

Comparative study between critical thinking skills of those with a Higher Education Degree and those who are Certified Emergency Managers

34

Future Research

Replication studies using existing or differing critical thinking assessments

Correlation of critical thinking skills with other personality, intelligence, and varied thinking skill assessments

35

Dr. Stacy L. Peerbolte, CEM, MEPUnited States Capitol Police Department

202-228-2492

[email protected]@gmail.com

http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1980586461&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientId=11150&RQT=309&VName=PQD

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



a quantitative study in critical thinking skills amongst local emergency managers

Documents

critical thinking skills

efficient emergency

goals of emergency management

role of emergency manager

management of disasters

disaster management

impacts of risk

social expectations