Global Security and Intelligence Studies Volume 4, Number 1, Spring/Summer 2019 | Page 16

Forging Consensus? Approaches to Assessment in Intelligence Studies Programs
tion (IAFIE) articulated a set of educational standards (i.e., learning outcomes) for
undergraduate and graduate programs in the field in 2011. However, unless a program
is seeking certification of their program from IAFIE, there is no obligation
for a program to follow this standard.
Within the literature on intelligence studies, there has been a robust debate
regarding the program objectives and pedagogical approaches within the field.
Perhaps the broadest debate regarding these academic programs is the question
of whether such programs focus on the development of specialists or generalists
in the field of intelligence. Stephen Marrin sees the rise in intelligence studies programs
as adding a new dimension of academic support to the intelligence community—the
development of process-oriented generalists (Marrin 2011). In contrast,
former practitioners such as Mark Lowenthal reflect a contrary view that students
preparing for careers in the field should primarily focus on area expertise and
language skills, and that majoring in intelligence studies may be of limited value
(Dujmovic 2017/2018, 60).
Many of the emerging programs would appear to be focusing on the skills
related to analytic generalists. For instance, William Spracher’s doctoral dissertation
featured a “crosswalk” between the core competencies that are identified
by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for nonsupervisory
analytic staff with the program objectives of a sample of education programs. He
concluded that the objectives of most of the academic programs that he reviewed
largely corresponded with the ODNI objectives (Spracher 2009).
Discussions of pedagogy largely reflect a desire for students to develop
higher level intellectual skills associated with intelligence analysis. For instance,
Kris Wheaton has been a strong advocate for the use of simulations and games
as a tool to improve analytic skill sets. Corpora echoes a similar sentiment in his
call for the use of open source intelligence exercises in the classroom to promote
activities such as evaluating assumptions and exploring different methodological
approaches to intelligence questions (Corpora 2007/2008, 12). Michael Collier
stressed the importance of education on advanced social science methods and
modeling to prepare students for advanced intelligence analysis positions (Collier
2005, 33).
However, one area that the literature has not directly addressed is how these
programs are assessed. While the focus on the objectives and activities within
programs is useful, whether these programs are producing graduates that attain
the programmatic objectives remains unaddressed. For instance, while Spracher’s
conclusions in 2009 suggest an emerging consensus on program objectives, are
the programs he reviewed actually educating students adequately in these areas?
Placement as an indirect measure of assessment has been considered by some
scholars in the field, but exploration of assessment remains a largely neglected
area in the discipline of intelligence studies. This study hopes to begin a more
5