Use good narrative paragraphs.  I should be able to see the answers to all the questions either in how you develop the answer, or how the answers might be implicit in your response.  Have an introductory paragraph so I know the topic you are responding and what you are going to develop.  Have one paragraph for each issue, argument, point you want to make.  Have a concluding statement.

Have a cover sheet to the exam, use good one idea paragraphs; if you use direct quotes, use them correctly, if you have data or specific examples, be sure to cite them correctly.   But use outside sources sparingly, I want to see your words and ideas in the responses, not paraphrasing of the text, outside sources, or quotes used to write the responses.   Never ever cut and paste hunks of data from the web, or copy from a text, even if you document, to write the paper.   Quotes are used to support your writing not replace it.  See my PowerPoint on using quotes correctly, as well as the primer for writing.

There is no minimum or maximum number of paragraphs or length to the answers.  Write as much as you need to answer the question, a good answer is no shorter or longer than it needs to be.

1. If you were analyzing potential targets for vulnerability to a terrorist attack in 2013 which would you focus your first attention, hard targets with heavy security such as airports, government buildings, or nuclear facilities, or soft targets such as railway bridges, tunnels, or shopping malls? Why? Defend your position in a few paragraphs use a specific target in your example.
2. The text  suggest that companies which deal with dangerous products, such as the chemical industry; sports franchises that fill stadiums and create large public crowds need to take security more seriously than others?  Pick just one industroy or large event to discuss.   Do you agree, or disagree, why?
3. As explained in Lethal Fantasies, the basic breakdown of the 15 scenarios used for determining Homeland Security’s organizational and funding priorities were based on three scenarios involving natural disasters; 12 scenarios depicting terrorist attacks. Is this breakdown still valid? If you were redesigning the Department of Homeland Security, would you follow this same model? If so would you have the same ratio? If not how would you focus the reorganization?
4. Do you agree with the argument posited in Are We Ready for the Next 9/11? that by trying to protect people everywhere, Congress ensures that Americans are adequately protected almost nowhere. Why or why not? What would be your solution?
5. In the text, and in the classroom discussions, there was discussion on whether or the Coast Guard should remain in the Department of Homeland Security or not? What is your view? Defend your position.
6. If one read only the media, the consensus seems to blame George W. Bush for the poor response in wake of Hurricane Katrina. Yet, Bob Williams pulls no punches in his hard-hitting assessment of the devastation suffered by New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina ravaged the city and first responders failed to take appropriate action. The inaction of state and local officials was an  inexcusable disgrace, and it is incumbent on Louisiana legislators to take serious and  immediate steps to address this colossal failure. Which assessment to you agree with and why? What do you think should have been done differently?