Disaster Risk Reduction in School Curricula: Case Studies ... - Unicef

More documents

Recommendations

Info

145 Industrialized Countries Post-Christchurch, there is clearly a felt need for a revisiting of disaster awareness teacher training in New Zealand, especially in the socio-affective sphere. Learning Outcomes/Competencies The WTPS Teacher’s Guide (MCDEM, 2009, 13) identifies the following ‘key competencies’ students require to ‘live, learn, work and contribute as active members of their communities’: thinking; using language symbols and texts; managing oneself; relating to others; participating and communicating. The ‘strong link’ between disaster awareness education and managing oneself is particularly emphasized. WTPS takes its student learning outcomes from relevant grade-level achievement objectives set forth for the Health and Physical Science, Social Sciences, Science and English learning areas in the New Zealand national curriculum (examples given above). There is no discrete codified enumeration of disaster awareness student learning outcomes. Policy Development, Planning and Implementation Aspects WTPS is an outcome of the MCDEM National Public Education Strategy 2003-2008 and its Strategic Framework for the National CDEM Public Education Programme 2006-2015. In 2004 a ‘CDEM in Schools’ working group comprised of civil defence staff was formed. The CDEM working group first conducted an analysis of MCDEM public education materials and surveyed teachers, identifying a lack of linkage with the national curriculum as a key finding. It went on to ‘develop and roll out a national “all-hazards” resource for schools,’ choosing to ‘create a brand specific to CDEM education that would allow any future resource development to have a strong, pre-existing identity’. In 2005 MCDEM tendered Educating NZ to develop the resource. The consultancy group proceeded to do so, having first gathered data and ideas through focus groups with teachers, students and MCDEM staff (Johnson, 2011, 5). The first edition of What’s the Plan Stan? became available in 2006. MCDEM distributed hard copies to all primary and intermediate schools and conducted the training program for teachers and principals described above. What’s the Plan Stan? was upgraded in 2007 and, following the gathering of focus group feedback from teachers and civil defence staff on ways to improve the resource and enhance its fit with the national curriculum, it appeared in its current form in 2009 (Ibid). MCDEM has not conducted an evaluation of the level of use or effectiveness of the resource (Ibid. 4, 49). But Johnson’s implementation study (ibid) offers clear pointers to the patchy pick-up of the resource by teachers, as do the remarks by the Director of Civil Defence Emergency Management speaking at the launch of the study: ‘The key finding for New Zealand is we have a good teaching resource that too many schools do not use’ (MCDEM, 2011, 1). Amongst Johnson’s findings from 2011 focus groups with 49 volunteer teachers, principals and other senior managers from 31 schools from rural, suburban and urban communities spread across the North and South Islands of New Zealand (and subsequent online survey and/or personal interview with some) are the following: Approximately half of focus group participants had not heard of WTPS before their invitation to participate in the study Disaster Risk Reduction in School Curricula: Case Studies from Thirty Countries
146 Section 10. Case 18: The Case Studies New Zealand (Johnson, 2011, 13). Of the participants who had used WTPS most had only used the resource once since its 2006 launch (Ibid. 15). A fall-away of use occurred after the successive launches of 2006 and 2009 (Ibid. 38). For Johnson, a shift on the part of the Ministry of Education from a passively sanctioning role to a proactive role as far as disaster preparedness curriculum is concerned is what is needed. While MCDEM and the CDEM Groups have taken great strides to work more directly with schools on civil defence, the Ministry of Education remains the national authority that teachers, school leadership and Boards of Trustees turn to for information and guidance. Therefore, if disaster awareness and preparedness among children and their families are a national priority and not just an MCDEM priority, it is imperative that the Ministry of Education play a leading role in supporting disaster preparedness in schools (Ibid. 47). The WTPS website, she points out, can only be accessed on the MoE website through an internal page with the title ‘Emergency Management Plan;’ there is no reference to the programme under its ‘teaching and learning resources’ pages; and a search for WTPS by name garners no result (Ibid). She concludes: Greater coordination and consistency in messages about disaster education and preparedness for children is needed across MCDEM and the Ministry of Education, particularly after a significant disaster like the Christchurch earthquake when educators are seeking information from trusted sources (Ibid). Greater ‘proactivity’ and a higher profile for the Ministry of Education in DRR would more thoroughly embed WTPS, Johnson suggests, especially if other measures were taken in tandem. A disinclination to engage with a programme that originated outside its own ministerial auspices needs to be confronted. Johnson recommends that an outcomes-based strategy for national implementation be developed: ‘MCDEM should identify the intended outcomes for disaster preparedness education in schools and strategies for achieving those outcomes while appropriately addressing children’s sensitivities’ (Ibid. 49). This would help address the piecemeal approach to DRR in schools and the problem of sporadic teacher pick-up (Ibid. 45). Disaster Risk Reduction in School Curricula: Case Studies from Thirty Countries
Page 1 and 2:
United United Nations Nations Unite
Page 3 and 4:
Disaster Risk Reduction in School C
Page 5 and 6:
5 Acknowledgements UNICEF and UNESC
Page 7 and 8:
8 Executive Summary This document r
Page 9 and 10:
10 Section 1. Introduction The Hyog
Page 11 and 12:
12 © UNICEF/NYHQ2009-1460/Josh Est
Page 13 and 14:
14 Section 2. Methodology Environme
Page 15 and 16:
16 © UNICEF/NYHQ2010-1356/Marta Ra
Page 17 and 18:
18 Section 3. Disaster Risk Reducti
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
22 © UNICEF/NYHQ2009-1818/Susan Ma
Page 23 and 24:
24 Section 4. Approaches to Integra
Page 25 and 26:
26 Section 4. Approaches to Integra
Page 27 and 28:
28 © UNICEF/NYHQ2010-2125/Olivier
Page 29 and 30:
30 Section 5. Towards a Pedagogy of
Page 31 and 32:
32 Section 5. Towards a Pedagogy of
Page 33 and 34:
34 © UNICEF/NYHQ2009-1271/Marta Ra
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
38 © UNICEF/NYHQ2011-0563/Olivier
Page 39 and 40:
40 Section 7. Teacher Professional
Page 41 and 42:
42 Section 7. Teacher Professional
Page 43 and 44:
44 © UNICEF/NYHQ2004-0238/Ben Park
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
54 © UNICEF/NYHQ1997-0893/Roger Le
Page 55 and 56:
56 Section 9. Diagram 1. Integratin
Page 57 and 58:
58 Section 9. Integrating Disaster
Page 59 and 60:
60 © UNICEF/NYHQ2008-0459/Adam Dea
Page 61 and 62:
62 Section 10. Case 1: The Case Stu
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94: 94 Section 10. Case 7: The Case Stu
Page 99 and 100: 100 Section 10. Case 8: The Case St
Page 107 and 108: 108 Section 10. Case 10: The Case S
Page 143: 144 Section 10. Case 18: The Case S
Page 193 and 194: 194 Section 11. Checklist of Optima
Page 195 and 196:
196 Section 11. Checklist of Optima
Page 197 and 198:
198 Section Photographs Cover: Youn
Page 199 and 200:
200 Section 6: page 34 On 1 August,
Page 201 and 202:
202 Country Case Study Photographs
Page 203 and 204:
204 Myanmar page 109 Students atten
Page 205 and 206:
206 Chile page 151 In 1994 in Chile
Page 207 and 208:
Colophon The report was printed on
Page 209:
CO PUBLISHED CO PUBLISHED United Na
show all

Disaster Risk Reduction in School Curricula: Case Studies ... - Unicef

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?