The Bush School has provided me multiple opportunities to analyze, synthesize, think critically, solve problems, and make decisions. A number of graduate courses at the Bush School required us to review the literature and provide thoughtful policy recommendations, synthesizing information from a variety of sources, measuring the information’s validity, and incorporating it as required in a concise format.
Takeaways
I have had the opportunity to complete course projects or work projects that required me to apply critical thinking that resulted in the following:
Writing a policy paper that recommends improving how state agencies receive, review, and approve UAV permits by performing a gap analysis
Analyzing research findings to allow the facts to inform me to draw conclusions that may contradict once-held personal beliefs
Analyzing how effectively nonprofit marketing efforts work by determining if their application screening process is effective
Designing realistic full-scale exercises that simulate disaster environments in which participants must adjust their responses, resulting in better-prepared, specialized search and rescue teams
Gap Analysis Leads to Improved Permit Procedures
The Public Policy and Formation course (PSAA 611) required me to identify the gaps that existed within a current policy and regulatory environment in order to recommend how a state agency could improve a current regulation. I chose to develop a policy recommendation that addressed the regulation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) within the State of Texas and recommended the designation of a state agency with oversight authority. The policy recommendation was titled: Sensible State Regulations for the Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (link to paper).
I was able to identify the gaps that existed within the current policy and regulatory environment and to develop a recommendation for appointing a state agency with the responsibility to receive, review and approve UAV permits within Texas. I utilized what I knew of the legislation and the associated federal guidelines and requirements and was able to synthesize all of the related findings in the current literature and to include federal and state regulations. From there, I developed a recommendation that considered government requirements, understood the immediacy of emergency deployment of drones in a disaster, and took into account other legal reasons in which UAV operators would have a need to deploy such technology. This policy recommendation balanced the needs of controlling the airspace within Texas with the public and private demands for information that UAVs can provide.
Changing My Views After Researching a Topic
A second policy recommendation in the PSAA 611 course required me to stretch outside of my normal areas of expertise into a realm of public policy in which I generally did not take an interest. I was assigned to a group project of six students, where we were to write an eight-page policy recommendation on the recommended adoption or rejection of a particular policy issue currently debated. Our policy recommendation was The Case for Legalizing Medical Marijuana in Texas. This particular critical thinking project provided me an opportunity to expand my horizons both academically, and challenged my approach to public policy recommendations. My initial reaction to the assignment was to be against the legalization of marijuana due to my previous career in the U.S. Navy as a police officer. I have never used illegal drugs and most of my adult life has been working in public service with either security clearances or carrying a weapon, both conditions that required frequent random drug tests. I had also seen firsthand the effects of illegal drug usage and I was opposed to the use of marijuana in any form, considering it was designated by the federal government as a Schedule I drug (with no legitimate purposes). Setting my personal convictions aside, I proceeded to work with my fellow students over the course of the semester and convinced myself to approach the research with the detachment of a policy analyst and let the facts speak for themselves.
I quickly realized that my previously held negative views about the dangers of marijuana as a recreational drug had to be distanced from the legitimate medical benefits that medical marijuana provided to those suffering with specific debilitating illnesses. I soon found that graduate school was teaching me how to redevelop long-held beliefs and biases after I was able to critically analyze the information and research we gathered over the entire semester. In the case of this research paper, we found that our research has proven that use of medical marijuana can improve the life quality of patients with chronic and terminal illness. As of 2014, twenty states and Washington, D.C., had passed legislation decriminalizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. In an eight-page paper, we were able to articulate, cite and support our recommendation that the Texas Legislature legalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Contrary to my initial understanding of the subject matter, I found after careful reflection that research clearly demonstrates that marijuana has medicinal value and can help in the treatment of a number of chronic conditions and terminal illnesses ranging from anxiety to anorexia. This particular project provided me an opportunity to be a part of a research team that required us to develop a logically organized and clearly written policy recommendation paper in a collaborative environment.
Analyzing the Effectiveness of a Nonprofit’s Marketing
The Program Evaluation course (PSAA 630) taught me that researching and evaluating the effectiveness of public management programs requires careful considerations. Analyzing how effectively a nonprofit’s marketing efforts and screen process are working, I chose to develop an evaluation plan for one of my favorite local charities, Habitat for Humanity. This choice allowed me to research one of my volunteer activities and also to brief the All Faith’s Ecumenical Build Committee on which I serve with my wife. I felt it was very important to apply concepts of validity and reliability to the analysis I conducted on Habitat for Humanity. For this reason, the convenience sampling plan was selected due to the fact that I was trying to determine if the review and selection process for potential families was successful. By looking at currently accepted applicants, previously rejected applicants, and families from the same neighborhoods, I was hoping to be able to analyze if the Habitat selection process was valid and effective. A final reason for selecting the convenience sampling was cost and time, both of which would be saved by focusing the survey instruments on a developed group of respondents that fit within a certain set of criteria, such as earning below a median income. Even though Habitat for Humanity was one of my favorite charities, I had to ensure that my personal feelings did not cloud my program evaluation considerations; it was important that my evaluation attempted to negate the effects of bias regarding the organization. With that particular type of evaluation, there was going to be potential threats to validity. For the purposes of this evaluation, then, I decided to use the experimental design model of pre-test/post-test control group design. The experiment design surveyed the target populations within the Bryan/College Station area to determine if marketing efforts were effective in explaining the eligibility requirements of the Habitat House program. This particular paper allowed me to determine if an effective evaluation strategy was allowing the nonprofit to measure its success in carrying out its mission. By analyzing the success of the nonprofit's marketing efforts and by understanding if its application screening process is effective, I was able to determine that Habitat for Humanity was making progress towards meeting its mission to the community.
Designing Specialized CBRNE Full-Scale Exercises
A final critical thinking and problem-solving skill that I have developed over the years is to work closely with military and urban search and rescue teams to develop for them a multi-day chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive (CBRNE) full-scale exercise at Disaster City. The process of designing and delivering a CBRNE exercise requires me to synthesize the training requirements of the team, understand its operational capabilities, draw upon the appropriate DHS National Planning Scenarios, and, finally, to understand the need to adjust full-scale exercises to meet changing priorities and developments on the ground once the exercise begins. The complex series of inter-related exercise phases must be layered in such as way so as to keep all of the functional position areas of the team busy at the same time. A normal team has the following functional areas: command, logistics, operations, medical, communication and detection. Each of these functional areas must be kept busy with tasks to perform and training objectives to meet that are complimentary and interdependent. Most of the exercise tasks must also be performed in a particular order, requiring the development of multiple points of intersection. The process of creating the exercise is a complex and daunting task, one that I enjoy tremendously. The development and execution of these full-scale exercises has increased my ability to analyze very complex operational problems comprised of multiple variables at different levels of management. The development of these exercises has also taught me how to require redundancy in the planning and execution system.