How new media for Disaster Risk Reduction Education

can be used effectively as a tool for and generating

educational materials by children and youth, for
children and youth

Justin Sharpe1

Abstract:

Although a number of education projects have been carried out in

areas of the world perceived to be at risk from natural hazards, those
visiting countries as tourists are unaware what to do if faced by a
hazard such as an earthquake or a tornado for instance. This paper
outlines a project carried out with children from schools in the UK that
enabled children and youth to become better prepared while also
becoming advocates for Disaster Risk Reduction through the
production of their own information films. The methodology of this
ongoing project uses a number of new media techniques to engage
children and youth in Education for Disaster Risk Reduction, which is
both by and for youth. This approach illustrates that children and
youth are important agents of change with regard to DRR because they
are open to new ideas ands concepts and will often discuss these with
their parents. It is argued that ‘learning conversations’ in the home
also result in a positive impact on the ‘protective behaviour’ of the
family and the wider community as a whole.

Key Words: Education, Disaster Risk Reduction, New

MediaTechnologies.

Introduction
As cheap air travel increases and standards of living increase in the
UK, the number of children travelling abroad also increases. In 2005
and 2006, there were 68 million visits made by Britons abroad,
accounting for almost 10 per cent of worldwide travel 2. Children now
visit countries where hazards they have learned about in the
classroom are a reality.

Additionally, a recent paper investigating the perception of risk at

Versuvius by its local population, also pointed to the additional risks
posed by tourists who are unaware or poorly prepared for a hazard
event:

1
Disaster and Development Centre, University of Northumbria, UK
2
Source: “Independent on Sunday” newspaper, 2006
 Tourists pose another challenge to a
community’s hazard education effort and
emergency planning, since these short term
visitors are unlikely to be familiar with the
local hazards or be aware of the proper
actions to take in the event of an eruption.
Davis, Ricci & Mitchell, (2004)

What this suggest is that tourists who are not prepared for a hazard
event will put a further strain on the already over burdened emergency
services if a hazard event occurs. This was illustrated recently by
headlines in newspapers talking about the ‘plight of tourists’ seeking
shelter from Hurricane Dean in Church halls and schools in Jamaica in
August 2007.

Risk Perception amongst tourists and visitors

Research by Ronan and Johnston (2001 suggests that lack of
knowledge and understanding coupled with a need for personal
control, causes many of those at risk from hazards to develop the
concept of “illusions of unique invulnerability”(Perloff and Felzer, 1986;
Perloff, 1987). This in turn allows them to create a certain stereotype
for the type of person likely to become a victim of a hazard event; and
if they don’t fit that stereotype, the perceived risk to them is less.
(Ronan & Johnston, 2001, p3). More importantly, they point out that
that those with an ‘internal locus of control’ believe the situation they
are in to be a consequence of their own actions, while those with an
‘external locus of control’ believe that: “External forces such as nature,
luck or society have the dominant control over their situation.” (Ronan
and Johnston, 2001, p3)

This viewpoint will be magnified further when people go on holiday,

because instead of living with the hazard risk over a lifetime or a
number of years, they are facing it for only a short period of time and
are less likely to take actions to modify their vulnerability to such
hazards when on holiday or travelling abroad. Tourists and visitors from
countries where natural hazards rarely occur, such as the UK, may not
have even thought about risk in other countries and are unlikely to
have taken actions to prepare themselves for a hurricane, tornado or
earthquake for example. Children, however, have either not made up
their mind, perceive their vulnerability more keenly, or due to their
education, are more aware of the dangers posed by natural hazards
when compared to their parents.

Children as capacity builders

It is therefore important that children’s knowledge of disaster threats is
investigated, so that appropriate education and involvement can take
place. John Twigg, reported (2004) on the findings of a Vulnerability
and Capacity Assessment by the Palestine Red Crescent which
collected children’s drawings showing they were well aware of the
threats facing the community; viewed disasters and their
consequences as part of the broader environment, not as self-
contained events; and were full of ideas for preparedness. Twigg also
makes the point those current and future projects: “need to build on
such activities to involve children more fully in their broader mitigation
and preparedness work at community level” (Twigg, J., 2004)

Unfortunately, not many studies have been carried out in this area, as
much of the work regarding theoretical perspectives and research in
the area of hazard risk are adult-based (Ronan and Johnston, 2003;
Lidstone, 2001).

The edu4hazards.org project sought to address these issues by using

the web-based materials and classroom teaching to educate students
about the risk posed by natural hazards while encouraging them to
develop their own capacities. Additionally participants were actively
encouraged to share what they had learned so that others could
benefit from their experiences and expertise.

Careful consideration was given to how the material would be

presented and what would be left out. In particular the website didn’t
use disaster images on the advice pages, but pointed out in a simple
format, what steps to take to mitigate for a hazard before during and
after the event. The website was built in this way to illustrate correct
behaviour rather than using disaster images that ‘heighten avoidance
and denial’ (Lopes, 1992)

The project was set up and implemented to follow up on, research by

Ronan and Johnston and others which had shown that the more a child
is educated about hazards and the risks associated with them, the
higher the potential for this information to filter through to parents,
increasing the parents’ knowledge and understanding of the risks,
which may also lead to action being taken to mitigate for these risks.
However it should also be noted that such learning conversations in
the home may not occur and that child-centred education that not only
imparts knowledge but illustrates capacity can be very effective: “it is
important to include information that helps a child understand what he
or she can do relatively independently to be prepared physically and
emotionally.” (Ronan and Johnston, 2003, p 1011)
It is also essential to make the information accessible as well as useful
and that the children have fun while they are learning. This is an
important approach. As a proponent of earthquake education in Turkey
Marla Petal has said: ‘Make your approach interactive and experiential
- engage your audience, rather than preaching at it.’ (Petal, M, 2000)
This also leads to a discussion of the hazards by children with their
peers, teachers and parents. This is an integral part of the education
process as it leads people to find out: ‘Can I do anything to reduce the
risks?’ This would begin to address the goal of public education about
geo-hazards – to ‘change people’s behaviour’ (Public Education for
Earthquake Hazards, Sara Nathe et al, 1999).

Context for the project

Although the UK occasionally experiences adverse weather conditions,

which can lead to flooding (e.g. in June and July 2007), there is not a
perceived threat from natural hazards. Consequently when these
hazards are taught about within the education system students enjoy
learning about the hazards, but view them from the point of an
observer of calamity, rather than being threatened by or at risk from
these hazards. However as cheap air travel increases and standards of
living increase in the UK, the number of children travelling abroad also
increases – both for holidays and for visiting family. Children now visit
countries where hazards that they have learned about in the classroom
are a reality. However knowing what a hazard may do and reacting to
the threat of it are two different concepts, requiring different thought
processes and responses from children and parents.

Therefore the project sought to respond to these changing demands

and to attempt to educate students about how to prepare for and
respond to a number of hazards.

How the project works

A website (http://www.edu4hazards.org) was created which used

interactive navigation set out as labels on a suitcase, which pointed to
different types of hazards they may experience. The idea was for
children to explore the site and to discover how to protect themselves,
whilst also learning about the nature of the hazard at the same time.
The site was purposely made less obvious in terms of navigation, but
there were visual clue and text on the index page to help with this.
A user of the site would notice an interesting interface that is meant to
be explored and clicked, but with the most important information such
as how to survive a tornado taking up the main page space, while
designed in a way so that people with screen resolution of 1024x768
do not have to scroll. This is more than just design – the relevant
information appears as a graphic file, so that it cannot be posted
straight into a word document, meaning that students have to read,
assimilate and then apply their knowledge.

The delivery of the project has differed according to the teacher and
the age ranges involved. Year 9 students (14 years of age) were taken
through two or more of the hazards by a teacher and some of the
instructions about how to respond were acted out in class where
practical. Students were then given follow up work to carry out at
home and then report back on their findings. Students were also told
that they needed to prepare an emergency ‘go bag’, take a photograph
and bring into school. As this was a complicated task, they were given
up to six weeks to complete and were reminded to slowly make their
kit up and to talk to their parents about this.

After photographs were brought in and shared with classes, one class
were given a project brief of making their own films showing what to
do if an earthquake, tsunami, flash-flood etc occurred. This encouraged
students to reflect upon what they had learned but also empowered
them to be proactive in sharing this knowledge amongst their peers. At
the same time this was an extremely useful way of evaluating the
success of this project in a meaningful and very visual way. Students
were given total control over what to shoot, edit and show, so that
their understanding was clear to see. The films were also created in a
variety of home languages so there is a guide to surviving a volcanic
eruption in French, as well as surviving other hazards in Urdu, Turkish
and English)

The films that the students created were then uploaded onto a channel
on the youtube.com website:
(http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=edu4hazards ) as well as being
made available as a set of video podcasts:
(http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id
=260353245 ) This meant that students were able to view their own
finished product while sharing it with their friends. It also means that
other schools, teachers and students will be able to see a ‘finished
product’ and learning outcomes can be judged from this, which is an
important part of any educational activity for both teachers and
students, as it is one by which they are both constantly judged.

Implementation

The first stage of implementation has been carried out, in terms of

web-build, teaching with school groups in two different schools and in
two different age ranges (a primary school in East London with nine
year olds and a secondary school in north east London with 14 year
olds).

It has been agreed with ISDR that they will be able to link to the site
and it is hoped that this will increase traffic and therefore use of the
site. Without any ‘marketing; the site has been linked to by educational
and government based educational websites in the USA and Australia,
where geo-hazards and responses are taught in more detail. The
videos showing what to do in a variety of languages are an indicator of
what needs to come next: the translation of the site into a number of
languages, so as to maximise accessibility and usability and ultimately
leading to a large number of children and their parents being prepared
for and knowing what to do if a natural hazard occurs.

It is envisaged that this could be ready within 6 months, but requires

funding for the translation, and time to change the images with this
information on.

Results:

In terms of communicating the dangers from natural hazards and

reinforcing capacities to deal with them through simple acts of
preparedness, the website and associated activities where children and
youth showed their understanding of such capacities, the project was
and still is successful. However at the moment this is only on a small
scale with around 180 children in the 11-14 age group directly involved
and 30 in the 8-9 year old age group having used the site to further
their knowledge and understanding of risk and capacity. The overall
results can be seen by looking at photographs of emergency ‘go-bags’
that children have made up either themselves or with the help of
parents. This also indicates that home learning conversations were
taking place, and I was contacted by at least three parents seeking
confirmation about what their son or daughter was supposed to have in
their pack, or asking for advice about where to get hold of an
emergency blanket.

The youtube channel also serves to show how students interpreted the
information from the website and enabled them to think about how
they were going to get this information over to other children, who may
not be able to read the current English version of the site. It is also
important to note that the easy accessibility of both the website and
film channels for those with an internet connection illustrate what can
be achieved with a limited budget.

Challenges
There were relatively few challenges to this project. The main inputs
were time, dedication and planning. Once the site had been built and
then tested it was used with students who then gave me further ideas
of how to improve it further. This is an important part of any web
project and it is essential that students are allowed a free reign in
terms of what they are expressing.

I believe the next stage, where it is hoped that the site will be
translated along with teaching materials and guidelines for use for
educators is trickier as it will require greater financial resources as well
as time. (Although these are not prohibitive in any way!)

Lessons Learned

The key lessons from this, is that small-scale projects created by

educators can have enormous value, both to children and the wider
community. It is important that there is a solid understanding of how
children learn and are engaged by resources. The website interface
helps with this because it is never too wordy, but pitched at a variety
of levels of intellectual ability. The other important factor is that this
resource is most useful if there is some facilitation by a teacher at least
initially so that students are guided through one of the hazards with
discussion or ‘duck and cover’ type demonstrations and enactments.

This is particularly important as it appeals to different learning styles.

Visual learners will be happy reading and assimilating the information,
which may lead them to answer further questions while auditory
learners will happily engage an listening and taking part in Q&A, while
kinaesthetic learners will enjoy the role play and practicing elements of
the teacher led activities.

The initial ‘go-bag’ activities and subsequent homework activities

carried out by students, has allowed me to review the advice about
what to take on holiday as a ‘go-bag’. It is therefore important that five
essentials, which are light and small can be taken. I have therefore
decided to provide a blank rucksack with space for children to draw or
stick in what five items they should take with them and why. This is
because there was some resistance to the idea of so many items being
needed, especially when going on holiday.

Having a final ‘product’ in terms of a short film that can be used by

others and perhaps save lives, was particularly inspiring to these
students, who wanted to produce something worthwhile, and while the
results may be mixed in terms of quality, the overall effect is reinforced
when watching the films that students made. It is not necessarily
integral to the success of the project, but I would argue that it is key to
evaluating what students had learned, while providing a marker for
others to follow.

The fact that the project is primarily web-based means that it is

accessible to a large audience and easily replicable, however it needs
support from key UN agencies and NGO’s to make it a success. The
potential for this project is huge in terms engaging children and youth
in the processes of Disaster Risk Reduction and letting them educate
the next generation of children at risk from natural hazards.

The Future

Children and youth are important agents of change with regard to DRR
because they are open to new ideas ands concepts and will often
discuss these with their parents. These ‘learning conversations’ in the
home may also result in a positive impact on the ‘protective behaviour’
of the family and the wider community as a whole. Consequently,
educational materials online that have been developed specifically for
helping children to realise both their vulnerabilities but also (and more
importantly) their capacities, will enable them to reduce the former
while increasing the latter. What is needed is research that tracks the
effectiveness of such materials while examining whether there has
been a change in ‘protective behaviour’ as a result.

Ronan and Johnston (2001) make the point that hazard education
programmes are ‘designed to explicitly help give the recipient an
increased sense of personal control through the provision of relevant
information (e.g. appropriate risk mitigation behaviours). Studies by
Miletti & Fitzpatrick (1992) have shown that an educated individual will
then search out their own information – which has a further positive
impact on protective behaviours. Miletti and Fitzpatrick (1993) argued
that this was less for children as they ‘rely on “information receiving”
rather than on “information gathering”’. However the growth of
internet use coupled with increased access to computers both in school
and in the home, means that children are often the principal
‘information gatherers’.

However, although successful in the short term at engaging children

and allowing them to discover how they can prepare and protect
themselves against natural hazard risk, programmes that follow up on
this initial learning need to be put in place. Ronan and Johnston, have
carried out research into how well children and youth respond to
hazards education programmes, found that:
 Recent programs involvement (i.e., during the
past two years) along with multiple program
involvement related significantly to both child-
and parent-reported adjustments. An
implication here is that any initial program
efficacy, including beneficial effects on hazard
adjustments, may begin to diminish with time.
(Ronan & Johnston, 2002)

There is a strong argument, therefore, for a wider hazards education

programme that is tailored to the needs of the community, and useful
on a practical level. This should include a variety of media, including
web-based materials that children and youth can interact with and
continue to learn from.

The obvious place to do this is within the education system and

through the geography and citizenship curriculum in the United
Kingdom. However this is not in place at the present time and would
require a dramatic change in how hazards are perceived by the
government and the Department for Children, Schools and Families,
before projects such as this will have a greater impact and children and
youth are prepared and aware of how to tackle natural hazards when
they occur. In particular it is important that hazards and human
responses are not just taught from the current perspective of
‘observers of calamity’, and that practical education for DRR is
included in the curriculum in the UK, including First Aid training, which
is currently not offered, but could easily be accommodated by the
Citizenship/PSHE (Personal, Social and Health Education) curriculum.

However the author recognises that this may take some time and that
attaching it onto or making it part of an already crowded geography
curriculum is not the answer. In the short term, therefore the
government in the UK could put in place simple protective measures
for their citizens travelling abroad, including children. One
recommendation of this paper is that the information given through the
UK foreign and commonwealth office website be updated to include a
wide range of natural hazards. Currently there is only information
about hurricanes and the advice is very limited, with no mention of
emergency go bags or protective measures that could be taken other
than listen to the radio or TV for advice.
However this advice also needs to be made available for hazards that
affect the population and communities living in the UK now. The recent
interim review on the flooding that took place in the summer of 2007
highlighted shortcomings that led to such widespread impacts on a
number of communities throughout the country. However, what was
not mentioned or highlighted as a shortcoming was the lack of
knowledge and education about the possible effects of flooding and
how all members of the community should have been prepared for
such an event.

The word ‘education’ was mentioned once in the entire document, but
within the context of public education about flood insurance. Although
this is a useful contribution to future preparation and mitigation, it is
not necessarily the most practical and cost effective step for
householders to take. The first chapters make note of the events and
the impact on communities, highlighting the lack of preparedness
regarding access to clean water. But it is clear that people did not
stock pile water for drinking and for other uses before the floodwaters
arrived, and it is not clear whether this message will be clear and
accessible in the future.

Furthermore, it was noted by Sir Michael Pitt, the reports author, that
people should prepare in future by having emergency flood kits
including a battery operated radio, mobile phone etc, but this is of
limited use if adequate drinking water is not kept aside as well –
something NOT highlighted by the report or put forward as one of the
72 Interim Conclusions. The message from the government needs to
be clear and consistent and made accessible to every home, including
children and the elderly – a ‘generic emergency kit’ may not be
sufficient – different people have different needs – but the basics
should be known by all. This can be achieved by communicating with
those working within the field of Disaster Risk Reduction and Education
and implementing their advice with regards to preparation, mitigation
and planning. Many have worked in the field for may years both in the
UK and abroad and have learned and written about what makes for
good practice and knowledgeable about how to implement such
practices within the United Kingdom.

In the meantime, it is imperative that education projects that such as

the one outlined here continue to engage children and youth in the
processes of Disaster Risk Reduction while the participatory and
creative approaches outlined will allow them to educate the next
generation of children at risk from natural hazards.
Within the context of the UK and elsewhere, it is important that
hazards and human responses are not taught only from the
perspective of ‘observers of calamity’, but that a community’s
vulnerability is explored while practical education for DRR is included in
the curriculum to enable capacity to be improved.

Therefore, children and youth should learn about potential hazards and
appropriate responses in their area as well as being prepared for
hazards in other countries. The edu4hazards site is a good launching
point to examine and prepare for low frequency, high magnitude
events such as large earthquakes or volcanic eruptions, before
examining flood risk or landslide hazards in their own communities,
using a variety of tools such as GIS, physical mapping and fieldwork.

It is also important that children and youth continue to participate in

the decision making processes within their communities so that they
are more involved and become co-opted into the democratic process
from an early age – a recent government initiative in the UK suggests
that ‘Every child Matter’ - It is important that this goes beyond
sloganeering and engages children and youth in the process of
Disaster Risk Reduction.

Conclusions

It has long been argued that hazards needn’t become disasters and
that it is human interaction and in some cases inaction within the
environment that allows such disasters to develop. Education is key to
reducing the impact of hazards on the community, while being both
sustainable and cost effective. Children can be involved in problem-
solving and planning for both urban and rural flood risk reduction,
through careful land-use planning, community-based early warning
systems, and contingency planning for livelihood asset protection. This
education does not need to be didactic, but should be practical, useful
and a focal point for rebuilding communities that have lost much in the
floods of 2007 in the UK and in communities affected adversely and
needlessly by hazards across the globe.

For further information contact:

E-Mail jesharpe@mac.com or justin.sharpe@northumbria.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0)7824 888404

Acknowledgements:

The author would like to thank the students of Beal High School, Ilford
and Jenny Hammond Primary School, Leyton for their continued
support and enthusiasm for this project.

References

Davis, M.S., Ricci, T. & Mitchell, L. (2005). Perceptions of risk for volcanic
hazards at Vesuvio and Etna, Italy. Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma
Studies, Volume 2005-1.

Lidstone, J. (2001), “Citizenship in Cities on Volcanoes: Can Education Really

Help?” Presentation at Cities on Volcanoes II, Auckland, New Zealand.

Lopes, R. (1992). Public Perception of Disaster Preparedness Presentations

Using Disaster Images. Washington D.C. The American Red Cross.

Mileti, D.S. Fitzpatarick, C. and Farhar, B.C. (1992) Fostering public pre
paredness for natural hazards: Lessons from the Parkfield earthquake
prediction, Environment 34 (1992), pp. 16–20 (see also pp. 36–39).

Mileti, D.S. and Fitzpatarick, C. (1993) The Great Earthquake

Experiment : Risk Communication and public action. San Francisco:
Westview

Nathe, S. Gori, P. Greene, M.Lemersal, E. Mileti, D (1999) Natural Hazards

Informer (No.2) Public Education for Earthquake Hazards.
http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/informer/infrmr2/infrm2wb.htm

Perloff, L. S. (1987), Social comparison and illusions of invulnerability to

negative life events, in C. R. Snyder and C. E. Ford (eds.), Coping with Negative
Life Events: Clinical and Social Psychological Perspectives (Plenum, New York),
pp. 217–242.

Perloff, L. S. and Fetzer, B. K. (1986), Self-other judgements and perceived

vulnerability to victimization, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50,
pp. 502–510.

Petal. M October, (2000) Bogazici University, Kandilli Observatory and

Earthquake Research Institute, Disaster Preparedness Education Project
(accessed via internet - http://www.ahep.org/ev/ahep1_2e.htm 2006)

Ronan, Kevin. R. & Johnston, David. M. (2001), School Children’s Risk

Perceptions and Preparedness: A Hazards Education Survey in The Australian
Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies

Ronan, Kevin. R. & Johnston, David. M. (2003), Hazards education for

youth: A quasi-experimental investigation in Risk Analysis vol. 23, no5, pp.
1009-1020 [12 page(s) p 1011

Twigg, J (March 2004) Disaster Risk Reduction: Mitigation and Preparedness

in Development and Emergency Programming. Humanitarian Practice Network
Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London, UK