 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
||||||||||
|
Nancy Mathis: Why are you doing this grant competition? Bill Modzeleski: Our goal is to prepare schools to deal with the various contingencies of the 21st century. September 11th, 2001, was a real turning point for our country. I think it told us that the issues that schools are facing now are quite different than those they were facing prior to that day. We need to bring schools into the 21st century so that they can prepare for all possible contingencies. Nancy Mathis: Generally, what would you like to see as the outcome of this grant competition? Bill Modzeleski: There are a couple of things we would like to see. First, is that we want to see every school in the United States have a crisis plan. That’s absolutely imperative. It’s also imperative that schools that already have a plan in place review it. Again, that’s because we’re in a different time and a different age. We’re dealing with different situations. Second, we want to see every school review and practice their plan, and make sure that it is a comprehensive one that deals with the wide range of issues that they may face. Nancy Mathis: Secretary Paige has said that we can’t start planning for a crisis when we’re in the middle of it. What have you learned from having gone through some of these crises? Bill Modzeleski: We’ve learned quite a few things. First of all, we’ve learned that having a plan is essential. I don’t think we could underestimate the value of having a plan. Second, we’ve learned that not only do you have to have a plan, but it has to be a comprehensive one that deals with a wide range of issues and contingencies that may face the school. Third, we’ve seen that the plan can’t be a shelf document. It must be a dynamic plan that is reviewed and updated on a regular basis. Fourth, we’ve learned that many of the plans that have been developed by schools around the country have not been coordinated with others in the community. And, indeed, what we’ve discovered is that if we’re going to be successful in responding to crises, schools need to be part of the overall community. Lastly, we’ve learned the importance of developing a comprehensive program that addresses issues of recovery as well as some other issues. Nancy Mathis: What do you mean by a comprehensive plan or a comprehensive effort? Bill Modzeleski: There are two parts of comprehensiveness. The first part is that the plan is comprehensive because of who developed it. In the past, many plans were developed by the school or the school district and they brought in few representatives from the larger community. What we are saying is that if a plan is going to be successful and if it’s going to be effective, it can no longer be a school plan, but it must be a school/ community plan. The school really needs to work with the community—with fire, police, mental health, health, faith-based communities and youth organizations. They all need to be brought into the development of the plan. The second part of comprehensiveness is that it’s not just about responding to a crisis. It’s really about four phases. First of all, there is mitigation and prevention. Can you do things today that will ease or reduce your risk down the road? Second, is preparedness. What are those things you want to do? Do you have a plan? How do you prepare? Are you linked up with people in the community? Third, is response. When an event finally occurs, how do you respond to that event? And fourth, is recovery. How can you make sure that students, teachers, and parents get back to teaching and learning as quickly as possible?
|
