Model for Use in Homeland Security, Research Paper Example

Abstract

The functions conducted by Homeland Security often require quick assessment and quicker decision-making and because of these requirements, critical thinking skills are imperative for those who perform these functions and fill the roles holding so much responsibility in Homeland Security. Because the responsibilities of those employed by Homeland Security are so filled with liability for the American people in terms of lives and property it is necessary that a model be developed to guide the decision-making processes of these individuals. Toward this end this work will examine the ‘Elements of Thought’ of Paul and Elder (2005) as well as the book entitled “Asking the Right Questions” written by Browne and Keeley. This work will discuss how that critical thinking model could be used in support of homeland security, using one historical event that might have been prevented or mitigated by using this model

Critical Thinking Model for Use in Homeland Security

The functions conducted by Homeland Security often require quick assessment and quicker decision-making and because of these requirements, critical thinking skills are imperative for those who perform these functions and fill the roles holding so much responsibility in Homeland Security. Because the responsibilities of those employed by Homeland Security are so filled with liability for the American people in terms of lives and property it is necessary that a model be developed to guide the decision-making processes of these individuals. Toward this end this work will examine the ‘Elements of Thought’ of Paul and Elder (2005) as well as the book entitled “Asking the Right Questions” written by Browne and Keeley. This work will discuss how that critical thinking model could be used in support of homeland security, using one historical event that might have been prevented or mitigated by using this model.

Historical Event

In March of 2010, it was reported that there was a protest occurring in Gainesville, Florida due to an international graduate student from Ghana who had been shot in the face by University of Florida policeman. The incident happened due to a neighbor’s call to the police station because the individual, Adu-Brempong was heard screaming due to stress associated with his studies. The campus police are reported to have “stormed his apartment, tasered him three times and then shot him in the face with an assault rifle. (Hamil, 2010) The injured man was hospitalized and was reported in critical condition due to having lost his tongue and jaw. It is reported that “the police action took less than 30 seconds” and stated is “incredibly, the University of Florida police charged him with a felony for ‘resisting arrest with violence’. (Hamil, 2010)

Why is Critical Thinking So Important?

The work of Gerras (2008) entitled “Thinking Critically About Critical Thinking: A Fundamental Guide for Strategic Leaders” states that one of the primary “impediments to the robust understanding and use of critical thinking both inside and outside the military, centers on a lack of a common definition.” (p. 2) The fact is that “no one discipline owns the construct”. (Gerras, 2008, p. 2) The work of Gerras provides a model that is useful in informing the military community of a way to look at critical thinking and toward this end critical experts Paul and Elder are examined who state as follows:

“A well-cultivated critical thinker raises vital questions and problems, gathers and assesses relevant information, and can effectively interpret it; comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards; thinks open-mindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems. (Paul and Elder, 2001)[1]

The work of Paul and Elder provides a description of “several egocentric tendencies that are relatively common in military culture. Egocentric memory is a natural tendency to forget information that does not support our line of thinking.  Egocentric myopia refers to thinking within an overly narrow point of view.  Egocentric righteousness describes a tendency to feel superior based on the belief that one has actually figured out how the world works.  Egocentric blindness is the natural tendency not to notice facts and evidence that contradict what we believe or value.” (Gerras, 2008, p. 2)

The individual who is a critical thinker needs to be aware of their personal egocentric tendencies when information is being presented to them and as well need to empathize with other points of view when they are relevant and as well need to apply critical thinking reasoning to the assessment. Stated as another component to Paul and Elder’s critical thinking model is that of assumptions which is a familiar concept to military officers. An assumption is stated to be “something which is taken for granted”. (Gerras, 2008, p. 3) However, an assumption is stated to be a little different from that used to provide boundaries in the decision-making process of the military. Gerras states that as critical thinkers, military officers need to be aware “of the beliefs we hold to be true that have formed from what we have previously learned and no longer question.” (2008, p. 2) Gerras states that assumptions are held about “fat people, late people, blond women and barking dogs. There are sometimes referred to as mental models or schemas.” (Gerras, 2008, p. 3) These assumptions serve to affect the course of action chosen by the commander in operations.

Stated in the work of Gerras is another component of Paul and Elder’s critical thinking model and specifically the component identified as ‘inferences’. Gerras states that critical thinkers “need to be skilled at making sound inferences and at identifying when they are others are making inferences.” (Gerras, 2008, p .3) An inference is defined by Gerras as “a step of the mind, or an intellectual leap, but which one concludes that something is true in light of something else being true, or seeming to be true.” (Gerras, 2008, p. 3) The assumption as stated is something ‘we take for granted‘ while an inference is “an intellectual act in which we conclude somet6hing based on a perception as to how the facts and evidence of a situation fit together.” (Gerras, 2008, p. 4) Paul and Elder note that critical thinkers attempt to become experts at making inferences that are sound. Inferences are affected by the point of view and assumptions that the individual brings to the issue.

The model of Paul and Elder (2005) separates “all thinking” into “eight distinguishable, related and necessary steps” which are referred to as the ‘elements of thought’, some of which have already been related. The following illustration shows the model of Paul and Elder (2005) who argue that critical thinking “involves the ability to raise vital questions and problems; to gather and assess relevant information; to use abstract ideas to interpret information effectively; to come to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria or standards; and to think open-mindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing their assumptions, implications and practical consequences.” (cited in Kiltz, 2009)

The elements of this model that have not yet been related include those of: (1) question at issue; (2) information; (3) implications and consequences; (4) purpose of thinking; and (5) concepts. (Kiltz, 2009) Kiltz (2009) states that Paul and Elder (2005) additionally argue that successful thinkers “move more or less sequentially through a standard process of identifying problems, making reasonable assumptions about the nature of the problems, discerning criteria according to which information about the problems can be deemed relevant and well understood, making inferences from the pertinent data and organizing these inferences into concepts that will help in coming up with a workable solution.”(Kiltz, 2009)

Paul and Elder (2005) use the ‘elements of thought’ in creating a checklist that guides the individual in the analytical thinking process. The checklist is stated as follows:

All reasoning has a purpose.

• State your purpose clearly .
• Distinguish your purposes from related purposes
• Check periodically to be sure you are still on target.
• Choose significant and realistic purposes.

All reasoning is an attempt to settle some question, figure something out, or solve some problem.

• State the question at issues clearly and precisely .
• Express the question in several ways to clarify its meaning and scope
• Break the question into subquestions.
• Distinguish questions that have definitive answers from those that are a matter of opinion and from those that require consideration of multiple viewpoints.

All reasoning is based on data, information and evidence.

• Restrict your claims to those supported by the data you have.
• Search for information that opposes your position and information that supports it.
• Make sure that all information used is clear, accurate and relevant to the question at issue; and
• Make sure you have gathered sufficient information.

All reasoning contains inferences or interpretations by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data.

• Infer only what the evidence implies.
• Check inferences for their consistency with each other.
• Identify assumptions that lead you to your inferences.

All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas.

• Identify key concepts and explain them clearly.
• Consider alternative concepts or alternative definitions of concepts.
• Make sure you are using concepts with care and precision.

All reasoning is based on assumptions (beliefs you take for granted).

• Clearly identify your assumptions and determine whether they are justifiable.
• Consider how your assumptions are shaping your point of view.

All reasoning is done from some point of view.

• Identify your point of view.
• Seek other points of view and identify their strengths and weaknesses.
• Strive to be fair-minded in evaluating all points of view.

All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences.

• Trace the implications and consequences that follow from your reasoning.
• Search for negative as well as positive implications. (Elder and Paul, 2005 as cited in Kiltz, 2009)

Asking the Right Questions to Make the Right Decisions

Asking the right questions is also critical to effective decision-making and this is noted in the work of Browne and Keeley who state that the ability to find answers that are definite is dependent upon the type of question that is being asked. While questions about the physical world can be answered very definitely , it is important to understand that questions concerning the behavior of humans is different because the answers are quite simply not much more than “intelligent guesses about why or when certain behaviors will occur.” (p. 20) Brown and Keeley also state that when questions are asked “a person’s reasoning is often not obvious…important elements are often missing” therefore the individual needs “critical reading and listening skills to help you determine what makes sense and distinguish this clear thinking from the slopping thinking that characterizes much of what” will be encountered. Questions that are stated in Browne and Keeley’s work that should be asked include those as follows:

• What are the issues and the conclusions?
• What are the reasons?
• Which words or phrases are ambiguous?
• What are the value conflicts and assumptions?
• What are the descriptive assumptions?
• Are there any fallacies in the reasoning?
• How good is the evidence?
• Are there rival causes?
• Are the statistics deceptive?
• What significant information is omitted? and
• What reasonable conclusions are possible?” (Browne and Keeley, 2010, p.13)

These questions make it possible for the individual to not only gain information but as well to assess their own thinking processes along with the inferences and assumptions that color their own thinking in order to arrive at the best possible and most accurate answer available. Indicators or clues stated in the work of Browne and Keeley (2005) include those as follows:

What is the issue

Look for indicator words. These are words that inform one that a conclusion may follow and include words such as:

• Consequently
• Hence
• Points
• Thus
• It follows that
• Indicates or suggests that
• Therefore; and
• Other such words and phrases.

1. Look in likely locations
2. Remember what a conclusion is not
3. Check the context of the communication and the author’s background
4. Ask the question ‘and therefore’. (Browne and Keeley, 2010)

Summary and Conclusion

Had the police at the University of Florida slowed down on their action and asked the right questions the outcome would have likely been much different. The individual who was tasered and shot was described in the report of Hamil (2010) as a gentle person and there was a great deal of disbelief expressed by the individual’s fellow classmates that the individual would have ever committed any violence. Obviously, the neighbors who called the police knew the reason for the young man’s screaming as stated in the report to be due to stress over testing and grades. Why did the University of Florida police not understand this. It would appear that the University of Florida police officers had, upon seeing that the individual was not American, jumped to conclusions that this individual was a violent individual. It also appears that these assumptions and inferences made by the University of Florida policeman had been formulated upon the basis of their own personal and individual perceptions rather than being something that was assumed and inferred upon the basis of fact or evidence of the same. It is precisely this situation that Homeland Security should be required and should desire to avoid in the course of fulfilling their responsibilities and duties. Toward this end, it is the conclusion of this study that a model developed upon the principles of Paul and Elder (2005) and in coordination with the principles stated in “Asking the Right Questions” (Browne and Keeley, 2010) should be developed for Homeland Security operations and functions because this type of model would well serve to mitigate such occurrences as that of the University of Florida police department and as well should serve to reduce other types of errors on the part of Homeland Security as well.

References

Kiltz, Linda (2009) Developing Critical Thinking Skills in homeland Security and Emergency Management Courses. Emergency Management Vol. 6, Issue 1. Article 36. Retrieved from: http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?context=http://www.bepress.com/jhsem&article=1558&date=&mt=MTI4NzE4ODYwNg%3D%3D&access_ok_form=Continue

Browne, M.N. and Keeley, S.M. (2010) Asking the Right Questions. 9^th Ed. Prentice Hall. Retrieved from: http://content.yudu.com/Library/A18lwz/BrowneKeeleyAskingth/resources/index.htm?referrerUrl=http://www.yudu.com/item/details/61785/Browne-Keeley—Asking-the-Right-Questions–A-Guide-to-Critical-Thinking–8th-Ed.pdf

Gerras, Stephen J. (2008) Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking: A Fundamental Guide for Strategic Leaders. Aug 2008. Retrieved from:http://www.google.com/search?q=he+Elements+of+Thought+The+Elder+and+Paul+model+of+critical+thinking+and+The+book,+Asking+the+Right+Questions&hl=en&client=gmail&rls=gm&ei=0b-4TPj9FcL6lwfG5Zm1DQ&start=10&sa=N

Hamil, Jared (2010 Gainesville Students Protest Police Shooting.  Justice for Kofi!. Fight Back! News. 17 Mar 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.fightbacknews.org/2010/3/17/gainesville-students-protest-police-shooting

[1] Richard Paul and Linda Elder, Critical Thinking, Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2001),