**Federal Emergency Management Agency**

**U.S. Fire Administration/National Fire Academy**

**Fire and Emergency Services Higher Education Conference**

**June 1-3, 2000**

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

Table of Contents 3

Welcoming Remarks 5

Keynote Speaker 7

U.S. Fire Administrator\'s Remarks 9

Panel Discussions 11

Higher Education for the Fire and Emergency Services:

What Needs to be Done and How can Academic Fire Programs Help? 11

Partnership Between Training and Higher Education:

What Needs to be Done? 15

Are We Ready for Distance Learning? 19

Presentations 21

NIST Fire Research: A Resource for Distance Learning 21

Emergency Management Institute Higher Education Project 23

International Fire Service Accreditation Congress 25

Academic Fire Programs Survey Findings 27

NFA\'s New Leadership Development Program 29

FESHE Steering Committee 31

Sample Model Curriculum Requirements 33

Program Evaluation: Getting Meaningful Feedback on Your Degree

Program\'s Effectiveness 35

Distance Education: A Plan for the Future of Teaching and Learning 37

Higher Education Web Site 39

Plenary Report: Developing a Model Science Degree Curriculum 41

FESHE 2001 43

Appendices 45

**WELCOMING REMARKS**

Ed Kaplan, Education Specialist, National Fire Academy (NFA), welcomed
the group and provided opening remarks.

\"On behalf of FEMA Director James Lee Witt and U.S. Fire Administration
Chief Operating Officer Ken Burris, welcome to the second Fire and
Emergency Services Higher Education Conference. My name is Ed Kaplan,
manager of higher education programs at the National Fire Academy.

\"The first outcome we seek is to provide a stimulus for collaboration
between the academic fire programs and national and State fire service
leaders.

\"More specifically, we asked leaders from major fire service
organizations to participate in a panel discussion about where they see
higher education for the fire and emergency services going in the future
and how the academic fire programs can help. Think of this as a national
focus group opportunity for fire science coordinators as you hear from
these leaders what their constituencies may need from your programs.

\"We also asked directors of State fire service training to participate
in a panel discussion about promoting partnerships between those who
deliver training and those who deliver higher education to the fire
service. They will share with you their various partnership models they
developed with the 2- and 4-year schools and what steps they took to
achieve them. We\'ll probe issues of competition between the two
entities and the leadership role State fire training can play in
fostering collaboration among and between the academic fire programs.

\"Frankly, the Academy alone cannot make this collaboration happen. For
our leadership to be effective, the leaders of our major constituencies,
all of you in this room, must build the momentum for change at the
national, State and local levels. In short, we need **lots** of leaders
at all levels, not just here in Emmitsburg.

\"The second outcome for the conference is to provide valuable
information you can use to improve the quality of your educational
programs. We have some excellent presentations planned for you in the
areas of distance learning, on-line resources available from the
government, and program evaluation.

\"The final outcome we hope for is the development of a national model
fire science curriculum, an elusive goal in our world if there ever was
one.

\"Achieving these outcomes here and then distributing a conference
report afterwards just doesn\'t cut it when you need active leadership
now. To help sustain the momentum spawning from this conference and to
best communicate the issues to those who could not attend, we are
videotaping the first day\'s events to broadcast later on EENET, FEMA\'s
satellite television network.

\"We will also make videotapes of today\'s proceedings available for
purchase. For those who were unable to attend this conference, this is a
way to learn what went on here. Likewise, the national and State leaders
on today\'s panels can also provide the tapes to their members or
executive boards to enlist their support for this effort.

\"I want to close my remarks with what I see is the most important
outcome of all for this conference. For all the grand alliances and
strategic partnerships we hope to build at this conference... For all
the knowledge we could possibly impart to you through presentations...
And, for all the work we put into the development of a model fire
science curriculum, in the end it\'s about one thing: the needs of your
students...the men and women who enroll into your degree programs,
training programs, and certification programs. The ones whose knowledge,
skills, and abilities the American public counts on to effectively
respond to every emergency large and small, from chimney fires to
natural disasters.

\"As you know, no two emergencies are alike. Today\'s fire departments
face challenges, problems, and realities unthinkable 30 years ago. The
increasing magnitude and complexity of fire conflagrations, natural
disasters, hazardous materials, counter-terrorism, and legal liabilities
require skills that training alone can no longer provide.

\"Training teaches you how to do things, but not always what to do in
every situation or circumstance. Higher education, though, provides you
with the critical thinking and problem-solving skills necessary to make
the sound decisions and correct choices for those situations not learned
in training or on the job.

\"I want to read to you a quote from an editorial that appeared in the
Washington Post by Michele Myers, President of Sarah Lawrence College.
She said that:

\"\'More than ever, we need to teach our students to learn how to learn,
to sort and evaluate information, to make judgments about evidence and
sources. They must learn how to separate the important from the trivial
and, most important, they must learn to think analytically and
creatively, to have ideas, to write and speak intelligently about ideas,
and to know how to go from ideas to actions. It is not enough for our
students to know; rather, they should know what to know and have the
capacity to imagine.\'

\"With that said, I ask that we try to keep our eye on the ball and as
we debate, as we discuss, as we inform, and as we network throughout
this conference, please, let us remember that it\'s not about us. It
really isn\'t. It\'s about the student.\"

ed.kaplan@fema.gov

**KEYNOTE SPEAKER**

National Fire Academy (NFA) Deputy Superintendent Kirby Kiefer
introduced the keynote speaker, NFA Superintendent Dr. Denis Onieal.

Dr. Onieal began by asking, \"How many of you can answer a high school
student\'s question, \'How do I become a doctor, an engineer, a
lawyer?\' How many of you can answer the question, \'How do I become a
fire chief?\'\"

He went on to share that he became a firefighter in 1971 and started
studying fire science in 1972. Since that time, there has always been a
lot of talk about \"professionalizing\" the fire service. In a lot of
ways, the fire service has. There have been tremendous improvements in
equipment, communications, strategies, and tactics. There has been
steady progress in understanding and appreciating the governmental and
political environments in which the fire service lives. And there have
been exponential increases in the kinds and types of services we
provide.

There are hundreds of examples, but education and training are the sole
reasons for why these \"changes for the better\" occurred.

Dr. Onieal introduced the largest challenge. It won\'t require money; as
a matter of fact, money would complicate things and build impediments.
The idea will reduce, and may eliminate, the need to spend money on
student recruitment. It may also reduce the amount of time spent on
recruitment as well.

It does require two things: an understanding of where we all need to go
next, and a way we can get there.

The fire service needs a model curriculum.

The fire service does not have a nationally recognized and reciprocal
system to acquire professional knowledge.

Dr. Onieal posed the following rhetorical questions:

\"What if, just for a few minutes, you pictured yourself as a
participant in the writing of the Declaration of Independence (Jefferson
and Hancock), or the Yalta Conference (Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin),
the Irish Peace Talks (Ahearn, Adams, McGovern), or the Middle East
Accords (Carter, Rabin, Arafat)? How do you think those people felt the
day they started? Do you think, when they started, that they realized
what the outcome would be? That they were starting something bigger than
all of themselves put together? What if, just for this weekend, you
imagined yourself as the group that started something big, something
bigger than all of us in this room put together? What if this weekend,
you all got your brains and good looks together and we started this walk
together?\"

This group needs to start right now, this morning, on the fire
service\'s next adventure: developing a model curriculum. We need to
develop a model system of cooperation between higher education and State
fire training systems that would formalize what already exists in some
places. For example, college credit award for training taken, training
certification for education taken, and it must operate at the local and
State level where colleges and State training systems will retain all
control.

This is our opportunity for the year. What we do this weekend will
formulate the very first steps in the walk to change the fire and
emergency services from an occupation to a true profession. By your
presence here, you are at the beginning.

Dr. Onieal closed by asking attendees to take this walk with them. If
this happens, there\'s no stopping us. He stated, \"If we complete this
task, we\'ll be able to answer the question, \'How do I become a fire
chief?\'\"

denis.onieal@fema.gov

**U.S. FIRE ADMINISTRATOR\'S REMARKS**

U.S. Fire Administrator Carrye B. Brown welcomed the group and offered
her support to FESHE. She outlined what the Federal government\'s role
is in this process. This includes support for this FESHE conference and
developing courses that are nationally recognized and reciprocal.

Her travels around the Nation have given her the opportunity to be a
fire safety advocate. She has found that the fire and rescue community
cannot protect the Nation alone\--we need to educate the public to be
more safety conscious and address the needs of high-risk populations.

She highlighted the importance of prevention and mitigation in any fire
and emergency services training. Also, fire and emergency service
departments need to be connected to the community they serve.

Mrs. Brown shared that the USFA is developing courses that address the
needs of adult learners. She also announced that USFA has developed a
grants program that recognizes the \"best of the best\" fire safety
programs across the country.

carrye.brown@fema.gov

**PANEL DISCUSSION**

**Higher Education for the Fire and Emergency Services: **

**What Needs to be Done and How Can Academic Fire Programs Help?**

**Note:** Videotapes of this panel will be available for sale. Please
check http://www.usfa.fema.gov/nfa/tr_high.htm for release date.

**Moderators**

Ed Kaplan, National Fire Academy

Larry Collins, Eastern Kentucky University

# Panel Members

Robert Cumberland, National Volunteer Fire Council

Steve Edwards, North American Fire Training Directors

Eileen Graham, Women in the Fire Service

Peter Hodge, *Fire Engineering*, Fire Department Instructors Conference
(Pennwell Publishing)

Ron Kanterman, NFA Alumni Association

Donald Oliver, Society of Executive Fire Officers

The panel began by sharing various experiences and insights regarding
higher education for the fire and emergency services. Topics included
changes in this area over the past 30 years, highlighting education
requirements, experience, changes in managerial and supervisory
approaches, and unique challenges. The panel addressed the fact that,
today, the bar has been raised in these areas. This higher level of
learning will better serve fire and emergency service managers as their
interface with local and State governments continues to grow.

As an example of the changing fire service, a panel member shared his
experience working with several generations within a fire department,
highlighting the changing culture of the fire service as it relates to
generational changes.

Another area affecting higher education is the increased outreach to
young people in high schools, providing early momentum for them to
enroll in Bachelor and Masters Degree programs.

Some areas that have not changed over the past 30 years include the
basic fundamentals (i.e., response issues). These basics need to remain
a key focus as we move forward in the fire service. We can increase our
tools to best meet these basic needs.

A question posed to the panel concerned higher education as a
certification requirement. In response, panel members shared that right
now this may not happen, simply because many individuals requiring these
standards (i.e., fire chiefs) do not have degrees themselves. However,
as time progresses and education increases across the board, bachelor\'s
and master\'s degrees will be required for chief officer positions. The
panel also discussed the need to develop recruiting and promotional
programs to address individuals with college education who enter the
fire service (i.e., issues regarding single-point entry).

The educational system faces unique challenges to meet the wide range of
needs for volunteer and career fire service personnel. Key competency
areas needed for both include higher math, writing, negotiation, and
critical thinking skills. Volunteers are uniquely challenged with
juggling work, home, and their fire service involvement, in addition to
pursuing higher education opportunities.

The panel acknowledged the critical need for a national certification
system for fire and emergency service personnel. Currently, a
firefighter-paramedic in one State who chooses to move to another State
may be forced to re-certify and re-train because no current national
recognition system exists for training and certification. In light of
the changing economic environment and the increased higher levels of
education of fire and emergency services personnel, this issue becomes
even more critical.

We also need to acknowledge that just because an individual has a
college degree does not necessarily mean he/she is interested in
becoming a chief officer. That person may be perfectly happy as a
firefighter. We need to focus on the fact that a higher education
teaches a person how to learn and fosters life-long learning.

Distance education is a critical tool in providing higher education
opportunities for the fire service. Key tools include satellite courses,
the Internet, and NFA\'s Degrees at a Distance Program. Also, changes in
fire science degree programs (i.e., prerequisites) and delivery modes
(i.e., evening and weekend programs) further enable individuals to
pursue a higher education while working. All of these areas are changing
and growing rapidly and will play a key role in meeting the educational
needs of fire and emergency services personnel.

The fire service leader of tomorrow needs leadership skills to deal with
the many changing facets of the fire and emergency services, from
technical skills to humanities to political savvy. These curricula areas
need to be developed. The industry also needs to create the connection
between education and employment opportunities in order to provide the
catalyst for developing these programs and increasing interest in these
curricula. A panel member pointed out that law enforcement training
includes extensive psychology and sociology training, areas much needed
in the fire service. Fire and emergency services personnel need to be
able to reach out to and understand the communities they serve.

There is a need to develop model education curricula and programs.
Future educational systems will need to address higher education (i.e.,
degrees), as well as specific job tracks. Other key needs include
funding in the forms of scholarships and grants\--making professional
development as important as apparatus and equipment.

An attendee asked the question \"what can we as a fire service do to
reach children ages 4 to 18 to best prepare them (i.e., life skills,
etc.) for entry into the fire service rather than wait until they are in
high school or college?\" Suggestions from panel members included fire
training and education camps for young people, the Boy Scouts\' Fire
Explorers, children\'s villages, and informational fairs. Perhaps the
best way is just by being the example, such as the department\'s
presence in the community and through public education programs. In
addition, many fire service personnel are active in their communities in
non-fire service roles (i.e., athletic team coaches, volunteer
organizations, etc.). Many of the critical educational needs must be met
by local school systems, which is a larger issue.

The panel discussed higher education and how changes will affect the
current and future fire service. One panel member suggested that we look
at the fire and emergency services and determine what services they can
provide, especially as it relates to the setting of standards
(individual versus department, etc.).

An attendee encouraged the conference to take a more progressive
approach to partnership with local educational systems (from elementary
to college), to include access to training. Partner with local community
colleges to make opportunities available. Ask local educational systems
to fulfill their role as community development programs. The attendee
asked, \"Are you ready to partner?\" A panel member responded that the
fire service may not be ready for that, but the local community colleges
have the means to meet our needs: education, research, and community
service. The panel member acknowledged that the fire service needs to
ask for more assistance from the local community colleges.

An attendee encouraged partnership with human resource departments and
associations.

He also suggested incorporating interns and research projects, as well
as conducting a job task analysis for chief officer positions.

In closing, panel members remarked on things that colleges should
continue doing, stop doing, and start doing.

**PANEL DISCUSSION**

**Partnership Between Training and Higher Education: **

**What Needs to be Done?**

**Note:** Videotapes of this panel will be available for sale. Please
check http://www.usfa.fema.gov/nfa/tr_high.htm for release date.

**Moderators**

Ed Kaplan, National Fire Academy

Terry Spoor, Utah Fire and Rescue Academy

# Panel Members

Art Cota, California (also representing TRADE)

Steve Edwards, Maryland

Jeff Long, Idaho

Randall Novak, Oklahoma

Dr. Denis Onieal, National Fire Academy

Walter Robinson, New York

The panel consisted of State training directors. Each member gave a
brief synopsis of his State training\'s relationship with local 2- and
4-year colleges.

The panel discussed a life-long learning plan that may incorporate
courses and training that students already have. For example,
establishing programs to assist students in meeting requirements for
degrees using credits they already have without having to take
additional courses they don\'t need. While the panel members
acknowledged that sometimes the requirements just don\'t match up (i.e.,
certification versus college credits), they acknowledged that this is a
critical need for the fire service. Further work is needed at all levels
for a uniform approach and system to address this issue. Panel members
also shared the need to augment their State training office\'s role in
advising students regarding higher education and career development.

Discussion moved to viewing the fire and emergency services as a
profession. In the past, professionals (i.e., doctors, lawyers, etc.)
were trained through apprenticeship programs. Over time, these areas
moved into professional training and education. The fire service is not
the first profession to face the challenges of transitioning from an
apprenticeship type of career into a nationally recognized professional
establishment.

Prompted by an attendee\'s question, the panel discussed fire service
training that only meets the minimum standards. If offered two courses
of varying length that basically meet their needs, students will
invariably choose the shorter of the two courses. It seems as though the
fire service is competing with itself to offer short training courses
that meet minimum needs and yet push for higher education. However,
panel members agreed that competition is not always a bad thing. It
makes us continually improve what we do and how we do it.

A panel member also stated that we should keep in mind the purpose we
are doing all of this. It is not just to meet certification needs or to
get a degree. It is so the fire service can best meet the needs of our
customers.

An attendee addressed the need to bridge the gap for students, by
creating bridge programs between non-transferable fire science Associate
Degree programs to upper level 4-year degree college programs. The
supply is there (i.e., educational programs); what\'s needed is the
demand.

The panel also discussed the need to transfer \"terminal\" associate
degrees to the junior/senior academic education programs. Many colleges
have mechanisms in place to handle this kind of issue. A key step may be
in counseling students. Many colleges and educational institutions also
take a holistic approach to a student\'s background, to include life
experience, and apply that background to credit equivalency.

NFA\'s Training Resources and Data Exchange (TRADE) may be an excellent
resource to help further fire service training and education
initiatives. Local community colleges could become involved with TRADE
by attending regional meetings.

When asked if the State training directors are best serving NFA\'s needs
or if the system could be expanded to include 2- and 4-year colleges,
Dr. Onieal shared that he continually seeks ways to unify the fire
service. Lack of unity in the fires service has been our biggest
downfall. To go outside existing systems and try to create new systems
only hurts what we\'re trying to do. The fire service needs unity. What
we are trying to do is marry the State higher education systems with the
State fire training systems to accomplish our mutual goals.

Panel members further discussed reciprocity issues and terminal degree
programs, as well as the development of national programs to better
address the \"big picture.\" Advising students can greatly help in this
area. Discussion centered on the many options to address this issue.

The panel also discussed how to better define educational programs for
the fire service. Programs can develop core curricula that will transfer
from one level to the next, and establish reciprocal agreements among
the schools and career field. Students would develop educational plans
in conjunction with advising.

Discussion focused on a model curriculum and what path to follow. Dr.
Onieal encouraged the group that it has the freedom to establish the
programs and set the standards of higher education for the fire and
emergency services. Supply and demand will play a part in the need for
higher education. This change is occurring in the fire service today.

Panel members cited NFA\'s Executive Fire Officer Program (EFOP) classes
and their possible role in meeting the higher education needs of the
fire and emergency services.

In closing, the panel members shared what the fire service training
programs should continue to do, stop doing, or start doing. Answers
included funding, encouragement, building upon existing systems, and
working with local colleges and TRADE. A panel member suggested that the
model curriculum include basic core courses, established in terms of
topics or general areas. Again, academic and career advising was
reiterated as a key concern.

Ed Kaplan shared that America Burning Recommissioned called for a model
fire service curriculum, and that the time is now.

**PANEL DISCUSSION**

**Are We Ready for Distance Learning?**

# Moderator

Joanne Hildebrand, University of Maryland University College

# Panel Members

Barbara Kaplan, University of Maryland University College

Thomas Sturtevant, Texas A&M

Tom Thompson, University of Maryland University College

There are several relevant areas: administrative support issues, program
evaluation, student evaluation, technology, student retention issues,
and student training to take distant education courses.

The panel discussed issues related to administrative costs, including
hidden costs. Additionally, to have a good distance learning experience,
colleges have to limit enrollment to allow for more interaction.

Distance learning works well with the human biology of learning. Having
the student interact in the learning environment using distance learning
technology fosters learning.

An attendee asked about the dropout rate for distance learning courses.
In many cases, the dropout rate for distance learning courses is higher
than for resident courses. This is seen mostly in passive distance
learning environments. A more aggressive, interactive environment helps
avoid this. Also, interactive learning environments would best meet the
needs of the fire and emergency services personnel. Use of video in the
interactive technology will greatly enhance the distance learning
experience.

Another challenge posed by distance learning is the training of faculty
and their approach to course development and instructional design.
Teaching at a distance involves a change in perception. Teaching on line
is uniquely different than in the classroom. It demands a matching of
pedagogy and technology.

An attendee asked what needs to be addressed when using distance
learning. Distance education is different\--you cannot convert a
classroom environment into a distance learning environment. You need to
develop ways to best meet your objective. Distance learning involves
more instructor preparation. An instructor who teaches in a distance
learning environment may become a better classroom teacher.

The panel discussed quality control. One way a college can maintain
quality control is to use the cluster method\--having students meet on
the first and last days, as well as in the middle of the course.
However, this would not be feasible for universities that have students
world-wide.

In some cases, students without definite deadlines have a hard time
meeting class requirements. A way to address this issue is to establish
key requirements (i.e., purchasing hard copy books for the course,
specific deadlines, clear expectations, etc.). Students do need more
structure, with some flexibility, in distance learning environments.

Distance learning also does not replace the physical classroom
experience. Sometimes external factors dictate the tools that are used
to develop distance education courses.

The panel addressed a question on how distance education fits into the
volunteer and career fire service environment. Distance education can
provide educational opportunities for personnel that will help them
advance and improve their professional development. Distance education
also provides for more significant networking opportunities.

Options in addition to courses may be modules or small information
packets, \"just enough information just in time\" (JEIJIT). State
agencies can use that technology to meet training needs.

FEMA\'s Web site hosts an online discussion on this topic.

hildebrand@chesapeake.net

**PRESENTATION**

**NIST Fire Research: A Resource for Distance Learning**

Dr. Nelson Bryner, Department of Commerce,

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Mr. Bryner is a chemical engineer with the National Institute of
Standards and Technology\'s (NIST) Building and Fire Research Lab that
operates with a budget of about \$30 million. He provided background
information on the lab and its research capabilities. He also shared
information on fire research and resources that may be valuable to the
fire and emergency services as they look to develop distance learning
programs.

He encouraged attendees to visit their Web site which has numerous
links, models, publications, and other valuable resources. They have
been using the models to recreate actual fires as part of their
research.

NIST\'s fire program is divided into two divisions: fire science and
fire safety and engineering.

FIREDOC is a search engine available on their Web site that allows you
to search for publications and articles. The articles include
publications by well-known magazines, as well as publications and
reports of lesser known sources.
(http://fire.nist.gov/fire/runfiredoc_a.html)

Last year they conducted 3,000 burn tests. Reports from these tests and
other experiments are available. Mr. Bryner showed a short video
highlighting several burn tests. The results of these tests are
available to the fire service. NIST has also developed several fire
models developed from actual fires. He elaborated on the Fire Dynamics
Simulator.

nelson.bryner@nist.gov

**PRESENTATION**

**Emergency Management Institute Higher Education Project**

Steve Sharro, Acting Superintendent, Emergency Management Institute

Mr. Sharro gave a PowerPoint presentation on FEMA\'s Emergency
Management Institute\'s (EMI) Higher Education Project. One of the goals
of EMI is to encourage and support the inclusion of emergency
management-related education in colleges and universities across the
Unites States. EMI believes that in the future more emergency managers
should come to the job with college degrees in emergency management. EMI
would like to see an emergency management-related degree program in
every State by 2001.

EMI has undertaken several projects, which promote college-based
emergency management education. EMI has been working with a variety of
colleges and universities to develop a prototype bachelor degree
curriculum consisting of classroom-based, upper division level courses.
To date, there are 10 completed courses and 10 currently under
development. A prototype curriculum for associate degrees in emergency
management also has been developed based on existing EMI training
courses.

When the project began in 1995, the University of North Texas, Thomas
Edison State College, and the Rochester Institute of Technology were the
only schools offering degrees in emergency management. Today there are
currently 23 Certificate Programs, 12 Associate Degree programs, 11
Bachelor Degree programs, 15 Master Degree programs, and 5 Doctoral
programs across the United States. In addition, there are 20 colleges
and universities investigating or proposing the development of an
emergency management program.

EMI has also developed an Associate Degree Emergency Management Program
prototype curriculum based on existing EMI training courses. EMI has
developed a CD-ROM of course materials to serve as samples and
prototypes for 4-year schools.

To download prototype courses or to view information on college programs
and how to contact each school, visit EMI\'s Higher Education Project
Web site at www.fema.gov/emi/edu/higher.htm.

EMI has an independent study program with courses designed for both the
general public and allied professionals. Courses consist of lessons,
practice exercises, and a final exam. Courses are paper-based and will
also become available on the Internet. Certificates are provided upon
successful completion and academic credits are available.

He entertained questions from the audience and made available
FEMA/EMI\'s Prototype Associate\'s Degree Courses on CD-ROM, as well as
handouts of his presentation.

During the question and answer period EMI staff shared their experiences
with articulation between 2-year (especially terminal) and 4-year
degrees in emergency management. Another topic discussed was how many of
the emergency management degree programs develop from social sciences
whereas many of the fire degree programs develop from engineering.

**PRESENTATION**

**International Fire Service Accreditation Congress**

Dr. Terry Heyns, Lake Superior State University

The International Fire Service Accreditation Congress (IFSAC) is a
peer-driven, self-governing system that accredits both fire service
certification programs and higher education fire-related degree
programs. IFSAC is a nonprofit project authorized by the Board of
Regents of Oklahoma State University (OSU) as a part of the fire service
programs mission of the College of Engineering, Architecture, and
Technology. The IFSAC Administrative Offices are located on the OSU
campus in Stillwater, Oklahoma.

IFSAC\'s mission is to plan and administer a high quality, uniformly
delivered accreditation system with an international scope. This is
accomplished by carrying out established policies and procedures through
the most efficient use of resources available. The membership of the
IFSAC is divided into two assemblies: Assembly of Fire Training
Certificate Programs and Assembly of Fire Related Degree Programs.

An annual meeting of IFSAC and its Assemblies is held in a member\'s
State, Province, or nation. Additionally, board meetings are held each
fall. Dr. Heyns invited the attendees to join them at the IFSAC meetings
and raise key issues.

Mr. Heyns shared that the process requires a lot of work effort and is
costly (i.e., application fee, IFSAC teams transportation, lodging, and
meal costs, etc.). However, the benefits of going through the assessment
and accreditation are worthwhile. He provided examples of how the
process benefited Lake Superior State University. Its program gained
positive visibility on the campus. The IFSAC team also provided helpful
insight into some areas where the program needed improvement.
Additionally, the team visited with local government representatives
which also improved the program\'s visibility. The program also gained
some national and international visibility.

Mr. Heyns entertained questions from the group and made membership
applications available. During the question and answer portion, the
attendees touched on several topics, including the role of accrediting
degree programs in \"professionalizing\" the fire service and the fact
that IFSAC is an international organization.

**PRESENTATION**

**Academic Fire Programs Survey Findings**

Thomas Sturtevant, Texas A&M

Mr. Sturtevant shared the purposes for the survey as well as the
findings. So far, he has experienced a 25-percent return rate.

Major sections that he gathered information on include areas such as
degree program information, student information, coordinator/director
and faculty information, and perceptions.

He provided highlights of his findings to date. Of the associate degree
programs, forty-two percent of the respondents are using distance
education. Sixty-seven percent supported a model fire science degree
program. Twenty-seven percent responded that they use NFA\'s handoff
courses, including Building Construction, Introduction to Inspection,
and Safety and Survival. They also use some EMI courses.

Of the respondents, only 31 percent replied that they are active in
FESHE. Mr. Sturtevant\'s findings were that, of the 69 percent who were
not active, the respondents didn\'t know about it, it was held at a bad
time of year, or they could not afford it. He also suggested that the
survey may not be getting to the coordinators or appropriate person.

The results will be posted on the NFA\'s Web site and will be available
in a variety of formats. He hopes to complete the survey, with a return
rate of 35 percent, over the next couple weeks. Mr. Sturtevant shared
anecdotal examples about the process of developing the survey and
lessons learned. NFA is exploring ways to continue conducting this
survey on a regular basis.

He encouraged attendees to review their Web pages to make sure that they
are user friendly and include their complete contact information (i.e.,
phone number with area code, email, mailing addresses, etc.).

The survey can be found at http://wtonline.wtamu.edu/eval/fma

thomas.sturtevant@teexmail.tamu.edu

**PRESENTATION**

**NFA\'s New Leadership Development Program**

Dr. Burt Clark, National Fire Academy

Dr. Clark provided an overview of NFA\'s proposed Leadership Development
Program (LDP) (formerly the Management Science Program). On May 8 to 12,
NFA convened a meeting of subject matter experts and development
specialists to review its Management Science Program and develop a
10-year plan.

The group suggested the name be changed to Leadership Development
Program. They also recommended that the curriculum be expanded to eight
resident courses, with a variety of Direct Delivery, 2-day handoff,
self-study, and computer-based training options.

Students who complete the eight-course program and a research practicum
would receive a Fire Service Leadership Certificate.

Dr. Clark also reported that the group recommended establishing a
certificate program for tracks within the LDP: Communication,
Leadership, and Administration. When a student completes each track,
he/she would receive a certificate.

The group also provided suggested development timeline and other
recommendations. One such recommendation is to hold an LDP conference,
similar to the EFOP. In addition, students who complete LDP would be
eligible for entry into the EFOP.

burt.clark@fema.gov

**PRESENTATION**

**FESHE Steering Committee**

Terry Spoor and James Matlock

Steering Committee representatives reported on its meeting. Proposed
action items were

1\. Establish an email list-server.

2\. Moderate continuing discussions of \"model curriculum\" on the
FEMA/USFA Higher Education Forum Web site.

3\. Maintain the present informal organization.

4\. Conduct the 2001 Conference in conjunction with the EMI Higher Ed
Conference.

5\. Distribute a complete report of this year\'s conference to all
institutions.

6\. Establish a planning process for the 2001 conference.

**PRESENTATION**

**Sample Model Curriculum Requirements**

James Matlock

# James Matlock presented his ideas for a sample model curriculum.

# Associate Degree Entry Level/Firefighter

General Education 22 SCH

Fire Training Academy 24 SCH

Approved Electives 20 SCH

EMT-B

Haz mat

Arson

Inspector

Aircraft

Driver Operator

Total: 66 SCH

# Associate Degree Company Grade Officer

General Education 30 SCH

Fire Officer II 32 SCH

Total: 62 SCH

# Baccalaureate Degree Chief Grade Officer

Associate Degree 62-66 SCH

and

Baccalaureate Work 30 SCH

Fire Officer III & IV 32 SCH

Total: 124-128 SCH

Mr. Matlock shared that this may be a good way to make the transition
between 2- and 4-year programs and across States and may lead to
employment. This sample model would make use of existing training
programs at the college level, transferring training from fire training
academies. Many colleges have limitations and concerns because fire
instructors may not meet the college\'s certification requirements, etc.
They also have restrictions because they are a certifying agency.

Much discussion on this topic followed. Some attendees felt that as a
conference on higher education, we should address a level above rookie
school. While we may want to give people credit for what they have, we
need to hold people to a higher standard. For example, Florida could not
participate in a curriculum like this.

There was also discussion on the difference between higher education
(degree) and technical training. The economics of the subject was also
addressed as technical training is very expensive. Mr. Matlock shared
that he has a program like this in place at his school and it is making
money.

Some attendees voiced the need to go back to the basic premise of
education and training. There was a suggestion to establish five to six
core academic courses. The technical training could be counted as
elective options.

An attendee expressed concern with this model by saying that if the
entire Associates Degree program is based entirely on technical
training, you will wind up with a terminal degree. Students need to get
some higher learning, higher thinking, etc. This kind of model is
already in place for the average firefighter. Need to get beyond this to
make firefighting a profession.

Mr. Matlock agreed that we have to have high academic standards.
However, most campuses have two levels of education\--academic and
technical.

An attendee shared that the one thing we are overlooking is that we have
a different paradigm than in the past. Degrees used to be very
specialized (upward pyramid, i.e., teaching). Fire operates now in the
opposite pyramid (specialized at the bottom and more general at the
top). We need to change our thought, our whole way of doing things.

Another attendee cautioned that group that in moving towards a model,
don\'t limit our freedom in being able to evaluate best ways to meet the
needs of our students.

There was further concern over use of the word \"model.\" There needs to
be a healthy arms length distance between the Federal
government/national organization and the education institutions. We can
only recommend. We need to fine tune the nomenclature. The change needs
to happen at the education system\'s level. This is a 10-year effort and
won\'t happen overnight.

The group agreed to move on to the work of establishing a suggested core
curriculum.

jmatlo@central.sjcd.cc.tx.us

**PRESENTATION**

**Program Evaluation: Getting Meaningful Feedback on Your Degree
Program\'s Effectiveness**

Janet Perry, Research and Evaluation Specialist,

Fox Valley Technical College

Ms. Perry spoke to the group about evaluating programs. Fox Valley
Technical College (FVTC) is a 2-year technical college with 5,000
full-time employees and 50,000 students. They offer 60 associate degree
and technical diploma programs. FVTC operates under a

\$55 million budget.

An evaluation is an \"identification of relevant standards of merit,
worth, or value and an investigation of performance of these
standards.\" (Scriven, 1991)

The initiation of FVTC\'s instructional program evaluation process began
in 1982. All programs are evaluated every 5 to 7 years. They evaluate 10
to 12 programs a year. The intended outcomes are to be proactive, cost
effective, time efficient, relevant for future employees, and involve
various stakeholders.

Ms. Perry provided an overview of the process. You must determine the
programs for evaluation. At FVTC, they found that it worked better to do
this on a rotating system with advance notice and approval from the
deans. Then you must meet with the staff. This is a critical process
since not all staff may be aware of the process. Other steps in the
process include collecting materials, conducting the onsite evaluation,
and implementing recommendations.

Preliminary materials and information that are collected include:

-   Identifying team members. This is a critical component. At FVTC, the
    faculty identifies the team members. The team may be made up of
    professionals, other educators, graduates, vendors, or professional
    organization representatives.

-   Employer survey, to include future job duties, hiring potential, and
    confirmation of program outcomes.

-   Current student survey. This is a course evaluation designed to look
    at the program as a whole, not to look at a specific course or
    faculty. The survey may ask the number of semesters completed, level
    of satisfaction, and program strengths and weaknesses.

-   Self-evaluation plan, asking about recent activities, curriculum,
    equipment, computers, facilities, professional growth, and
    marketing.

-   Faculty profiles, including position, education, certification,
    professional growth, and planned future professional growth.

Ms. Perry shared that the onsite evaluation includes an overview to
establish a process and structure and patterns of evidence. They also
provide a tour of the area. Then the team reviews the curriculum and may
interview faculty, students, and management. Then the team conducts a
\"recommendation brainstorming process.\" Each of the team members
individually identifies recommendations, then the group divides into two
teams to identify recommendations. Finally, the whole group reaches
consensus through a rating system which helps set priorities.

Evaluation Reports are prepared, to include a preliminary report (i.e.,
advisory committee minutes, the mission statement of the college, etc.),
recommendation follow-up form, and final report.

It is important to \"implement results, initiate follow-up activities,
and make any improvements.\" (Kellis, 1995, p. 34). Ms. Perry stressed
the importance of implementing and documenting results. FVTC does this
by using the recommendation follow-up form, which is broken down into 2
parts. Part I includes the recommendation, response, and timeline. Part
II includes the recommendation, resources, contacts, and final response.
All recommendation followup forms are reviewed by the dean to make sure
appropriate implementation is being taken.

It is critical to have management\'s buy-in and participation in the
entire evaluation process. They also conduct an evaluation of the
evaluation process, to include a faculty survey, evaluation team member
survey, faculty focus groups, and staff and management interviews.

Ms. Perry provided an example of how the evaluation process helped
FVTC\'s Fire Protection Associate Degree Program. As a direct result of
the recommendations being implemented, the fire program has built a
joint fire station/training station, built a confined space training
center, built a fire training building, added a staff member, and
expanded curriculum over Internet and ITV.

perry@foxvalley.tec.wi.us.

**PRESENTATION**

**Distance Education: A Plan for the Future of Teaching and Learning**

Ray Shackelford, California State University, Los Angeles

Mr. Shackleford addressed the group on distance education in the
California State University (CSU) system. He provided an overview of the
Cornerstones Report, a systemwide planning framework that articulates
the values, priorities, and expectations for an even stronger and more
successful future. CSU launched this comprehensive systemwide initiative
to evaluate strategies and make specific plans to meet the challenges of
the next decade.

He gave examples for the real need to explore the possibilities of
distance education. These include supporting the needs of a larger
student body and delivering learning opportunities to a wider and wider
faction of the populace. In addition, more students are working and are
unable to attend during traditional hours.

Distance learning can include multiple methods of course delivery, such
as cable TV, CD-ROM, email communication, video conferencing, and
Web-based training on the Internet. Distance learning extends the hours
of availability to meet the time constraint needs of more students,
provides a \"research proven\" effective means of delivering education,
and encourages technology competency in students, making them better
candidates in the job market.

Mr. Shackleford cited several Web resources, such as:

-   http://www.sport.ussa.edu/distance/dlresour.htm\--resources for
    distance learning on the Internet

-   http://www.uwex.edu/disted/home.html\--distance education
    clearinghouse

-   http://www.digitalthink.com/training/sites.html\--DigitalThink

The U.S. Department of Education and Library of Congress also are good
sources of information. Several universities with distance learning
programs include the California Virtual University and the University of
Phoenix. A database of academic institutions offering online learning
can be found at: http://www.centra.come/DISTANCE/deiacad.html.

Developing and planning your distance education course can be
challenging. Rather than reinvent the wheel visit a model developed by
the University of Maryland University College at:
http://www.umuc.edu/ide/modlmenu.html#common.

There are unique opportunities for assessment of distance learning, such
as online quizzes, self tests, and competency based learning. Support
for the online course delivery includes student support, faculty
support, developer support, and technology support.

For more information on CSU\'s distance learning programs, visit
http://www.calstatela.edu/centers/cetl/fitsc/ or email
teachme@calstatela.edu.

rshacke@calstate.la.edu

######## Higher Education Web Site

Ed Kaplan

Ed Kaplan presented information on NFA\'s Web site which includes a
higher education discussion forum. Links to other valuable sites are
also available, including firedawg.com, a useful site listing fire
science degree programs.

He encouraged the group to begin discussion on the model curriculum
using the forum. The site can also be used to establish chat rooms on
the topic and forum capabilities for classes.

Higher education page: http://www.usfa.fema.gov/nfa/tr_high.htm

Higher education forum: http://www.fema.gov:8080/\~usfa

ed.kaplan@fema.gov

**PLENARY REPORT**

**Developing a Model Fire Science Degree Curriculum**

The conference attendees worked in small groups to determine a model
core curriculum and definition. The following is a plenary report on the
consensus of the group.

The four original working groups identified similar areas for the core
curriculum:

+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| **AD           | **TECHNOLOGY** | **PRESERVICE** | **FIRE         |
| MINISTRATION** |                |                | SCIENCE**      |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Hydraulics  | Hydraulics     | Hydraulics and | Hydraulics     |
|                |                | Pumps          |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## F           | Fire           | Fundamentals   | Fire           |
| ire Prevention | Prevention     | Of Fire        | Prevention     |
|                |                | Prevention     | Strategies     |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Buildin     | Building       | Building       | Building       |
| g Construction | Construction   | Construction   | Construction   |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Fire Prot   | Fire           | Fire           | Protection and |
| ection Systems | Protection     | Protection     | Detection      |
|                | Systems        | Systems        | Systems        |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ##             | Introduction   | Orient         | Introduction   |
| Introduction t | to Fire        | ation/Concepts | to Fire        |
| o Fire Science | Science        | of the Fire    |                |
|                |                | Service        |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ##             | Fire Behavior/ | Fire Behavior/ | Fire Behavior, |
| Fire Chemistry | Dynamics       | Dynamics       | Chemistry      |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+

The working groups then defined the core areas:

**FIRE PREVENTION**

This course is designed to provide an historical perspective of the
origins of fire prevention practices and life safety considerations

Presentation of relevant codes will cover contemporary fire safety, fire
prevention, and life safety initiatives that reduce a community\'s risk
associated with fire.

Emphasis will be on the responsibility for code enforcement, fire
investigation, fire safety education, and assemblage of relevant data.

**BUILDING CONSTRUCTION GROUP**

-   Loads/Load application;

-   Structural components/systems;

-   Basic/General types of construction;

-   Construction materials/terminology;

-   Fire resistance/Flame spread;

-   Smoke movement/management;

-   Electrical and mechanical systems; and

-   Construction/Structural hazards.

Sample course description:

This course provides a concentrated study of structural loads and
systems, construction materials, recognized construction types,
electrical and mechanical systems, as well as their resistance to fire.
This course also explores the hazards associated with fire spread, smoke
production, and collapse.

**FIRE PROTECTION HYDRAULICS**

A study of water as an extinguishing agent. The mechanical properties of
water at rest and in motion, water supply and distribution, calculating
fire flow requirements, and pump theory.

**INTRODUCTION TO FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS**

A study of manual and automatic detection and signaling systems; fixed
and portable fire suppression systems. Including: hazard analysis,
hardware, basic calculations, system specifications, code compliance,
and acceptance.

**INTRODUCTION TO FIRE SCIENCE**

This course provides an overview of fire protection; career
opportunities in fire protection and related fields; philosophy and
history of fire protection/service; fire loss analysis; organization and
function of public and private fire protection services; fire department
as part of local government; laws and regulations affecting the fire
service; fire service nomenclature; specific fire protection functions;
basic fire chemistry and physics; introduction to fire protection
systems; introduction to fire strategy and tactics.\
Lecture: 3 Hours

**FIRE BEHAVIOR AND COMBUSTION **

This course explains the theories and fundamentals of how and why fires
start, spread, and are controlled; provides an indepth study of fire
chemistry and physics; and examines fire characteristics of materials,
extinguishing agents, and fire control techniques.\
Lecture: 3 Hours

######## SUGGESTIONS FOR FESHE 2001

-   Degree Programs presentations followed by panel discussions. Would
    like to have more depth in presentations.

-   Create TRADE-ing Post concept.

-   Content presentations.

-   Solicit papers for conference/steering committee to choose.

-   Examples of student newsletters, Web sites, etc.

-   Nominate and recognize outstanding student projects.

-   Problems with graduation and retention and improve student success
    (awaiting name).

-   Evaluation of textbooks. Bring publishers for exhibiting their
    products.

-   Follow-up to core curriculum. Work on baccalaureate.

-   Continue to invite State Training Directors.

-   Advocate joint effort with State Training Directors and
    college/university representatives.

-   Have a State directors\' meeting; overlap with FESHE.

-   Address the issue of bridging gap between training and education in
    an academic setting, including the need to maintain oversight and
    responsibility.

\- Suggested presentation: example of a successful program/process that
bridges this gap.

-   Consider impact of *Daubert* decision. Reach out to arson
    investigation community; how to apply science to cause
    determination.

-   Suggest reviewing the processes used by other professions that moved
    from a technical to academic standard (i.e., nursing); suggest
    inviting representatives to share their experiences (speaker,
    presentation, etc.).

-   Fire accreditation process.

-   Suggestion to move location of FESHE meeting (off campus):

\- FDIC, college campuses.

\- Benefits of holding on NFA campus.

-   Discussion on FESHE Conference dates.

-   Invite observers from other organizations (i.e., IAFC\'s
    Professional Development Committee).

\- Invite key representatives of national organizations to attend a
reception.

\- Use of media; buy-in from fire service.

-   Use CFSI Dinner.

\- Have FEMA Director/U.S. Fire Administrator mention FESHE.

**APPENDICES**

**CORE MODEL**

+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| **AD           | **TECHNOLOGY** | **PRESERVICE** | **FIRE         |
| MINISTRATION** |                |                | SCIENCE**      |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Hydraulics  | **Hydraulics** | **Hydraulics   | **Hydraulics** |
|                |                | and Pumps**    |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## F           | **Fire         | **Fundamentals | **Fire         |
| ire Prevention | Prevention**   | Of Fire        | Prevention     |
|                |                | Prevention**   | Strategies**   |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Buildin     | **Building     | **Building     | **Building     |
| g Construction | Construction** | Construction** | Construction** |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Fire Prot   | **Fire         | **Fire         | **Protection   |
| ection Systems | Protection     | Protection     | and Detection  |
|                | Systems**      | Systems**      | Systems**      |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ##             | **Introduction | **Orient       | **Introduction |
| Introduction t | To Fire        | ation/Concepts | to Fire**      |
| o Fire Science | Science**      | of the Fire    |                |
|                |                | Service**      |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ##             | **Fire         | **Fire         | **Fire         |
| Fire Chemistry | Behav          | Behav          | Behavior,      |
|                | ior/Dynamics** | ior/Dynamics** | Chemistry**    |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+

**Additional background information on Core Model**

+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| **AD           | **TECHNOLOGY** | **PRESERVICE** | **FIRE         |
| MINISTRATION** |                |                | SCIENCE**      |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Tactics     | **Strategy and | **Tactics and  | **\-\--**      |
| and Strategies | Tactics**      | Strategy**     |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Equipment   | **Appar        | **\-\--**      | **\-\--**      |
|  and Apparatus | atus/Equipment |                |                |
|                | **             |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## \-\--       | **Management** | **Fire         | **\-\--**      |
|                |                | A              |                |
|                |                | dministration/ |                |
|                |                | Mgmt.**        |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Fire Codes  | **\-\--**      | **Codes and    | **\-\--**      |
|                |                | Enforcement**  |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Intro. to C | **Leadership   | **\-\--**      | **\-\--**      |
| ompany Officer | /Supervision** |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| **I.C.S.**     | **Incident     | **\-\--**      | **\-\--**      |
|                | Management**   |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Hea         | **Firefighter  | **\-\--**      | **\-\--**      |
| lth and Safety | Safety**       |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Instruction | **Instructor** | **\-\--**      | **\-\--**      |
| al Methodology |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
| ## Fire Haza   | **Industrial   | **\-\--**      | **\-\--**      |
| rd and Control | Fire           |                |                |
|                | Protection**   |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                | *              | **ELECTIVES**  | **CE           |
|                | *Investigation |                | RTIFICATIONS** |
|                | **             | **Apparatus    |                |
|                |                | Driver         | **FF**         |
|                | **Emerg. Med.  | Operator**     |                |
|                | Tech. **       |                | **Med**        |
|                |                | **Instructor   |                |
|                | **Information  | **             | **Haz Mat**    |
|                | Management **  |                |                |
|                |                | ***HazMat 40   | **GE**         |
|                | **Legal        | Hr. (FRO)***   |                |
|                | Aspects **     |                | *              |
|                |                | **Fire         | *Skills/Traini |
|                | **Hazardous    | I              | ng/Electives** |
|                | Materials **   | nvestigation** |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                | **Customer     | **Hazard       |                |
|                | Service **     | Planning       |                |
|                |                | /Contingency** |                |
|                | **Public       |                |                |
|                | Relations **   | **FF Safety**  |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                | *              | *              |                |
|                | *Antiterrorism | *Specification |                |
|                | **             | s\--Apparatus, |                |
|                |                | Stations,      |                |
|                | **Pre          | PPE**          |                |
|                | planning/Comp. |                |                |
|                | Design **      | **Blueprints** |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                | **Fire/Life    | **I            |                |
|                | Safety         | nternship/Work |                |
|                | Education **   | Experience**   |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **Special      |                |
|                |                | To             |                |
|                |                | pics/Seminars, |                |
|                |                | i.e.,          |                |
|                |                | Technical      |                |
|                |                | Rescue,        |                |
|                |                | Wildlands,     |                |
|                |                | NFA**          |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **GENERAL      |                |
|                |                | EDUCATION**    |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **English 1 &  |                |
|                |                | 2**            |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **Speech**     |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **Lab          |                |
|                |                | Science**      |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **College      |                |
|                |                | Algebra**      |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **Political    |                |
|                |                | Science**      |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **Physical     |                |
|                |                | Education**    |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **Ethics**     |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **K-12**       |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **2+2 (Tech    |                |
|                |                | Pr             |                |
|                |                | ep/Explorer)** |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **College      |                |
|                |                | Bound H.S.     |                |
|                |                | Students**     |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **2-yr.        |                |
|                |                | Degree**       |                |
|                |                |                |                |
|                |                | **Preservice   |                |
|                |                | Academy**      |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
|                |                |                |                |
+----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+

######