Educating about radiation risks in high schools: towards improved public understanding of the complexity of low-dose radiation health effects

Abstract

The levels of stochastic health effects following exposure to low doses of ionising radiation are not well known. A consequence of the uncertainty is that any radiation exposure is met with deep concern—both by the public and by scientists who disagree about how the partly conflicting results from low-dose studies should be interpreted. The concern is not limited to ionising radiation but is inherent to other areas of modern technologies such as biotechnology or electromagnetic fields. The everyday presence of advanced technologies confronts people with the necessity to take decisions and there is an ongoing debate regarding both the nature and magnitude of potential risks and how education efforts may empower peoples´ decision-making. In the field of radiation research there are different opinions regarding the optimal education methods, spanning from the idea that peoples’ fears will be eliminated by introducing dose thresholds below which the risk is assumed to be zero, to suggestions of concentrating research efforts in an attempt to eliminate all uncertainties regarding the effects of low doses. The aim of this paper was to present our approach which is based on developing an education program at the secondary school level where students learn to understand the role of science in society. Teaching about radiation risk as a socio-scientific issue is not based on presenting facts but on showing risks in a broader perspective aiming at developing students’ competency in making decisions based on informed assessment. We hope to stimulate and encourage other researchers to pursue similar approaches.

Socioscientific Issues in Science Education: An opportunity to Incorporate Education about Risk and Risk Analysis?

“…One of these is also the only empirical publication in our database using the word risk in the title. A slightly larger share, 7% ( n = 5) of the theoretical/review publications name the concept more than 30 times, and all of these also engage, to various degrees, with the definition of the concept of risk (Christensen, 2009; Boerwinkel et al., 2014; Lee, 2012; Hansen & Hammann, 2017; Wojcik et al., 2019). Three of the publications also use the word risk in the title (Christensen, 2009; Hansen & Hammann, 2017; Wojcik et al., 2019).…”

“…However, to develop high quality teaching materials we believe that collaborations between experts on risk analysis, or a particular risk issue with science education researchers and teachers will be necessary. Such collaborations across disciplines and professions can make valuable contributions to teaching the future educated citizens and decisionmakers (see also Wojcik et al., 2019).…”

“…Risk, risk assessment, or risk analysis are dealt with in a variety of ways within science education research (Christensen, 2009; Cross, 1993; Hansen & Hammann, 2017; Schenk et al., 2019). This is particularly true for the areas of scientific literacy, Science and Technology in Society (STS), and socioscientific issues (SSI; Boerwinkel, Swierstra, & Warloo, 2014; Kolstø, 2006; Levinson, Kent, Pratt, Kapadia, & Yougi, 2011; Simonneaux, Panissal, & Brossais, 2013; Wojcik et al., 2019). The origins of this stream of research lies in the idea of making science education more socially responsible and contribute to science for citizenship and may be traced back at least to the 1930's (Ratcliffe, 2001), although it began to be more widely argued from the 1970's (see Howes, 1975).…”

Promoting engineering students’ social responsibility and willingness to act on socioscientific issues

“…Many empirical studies have proven the efficacy of SSIs in enhancing students’ understanding of the nature of science, technology, and engineering (Lee & Lee, 2021 ) and in promoting their feelings of responsibility and willingness to act on the issues as proactive agents (Choi & Lee, 2021 ; Kim & Lee, 2021 ; Lee & Lee, 2021 ; Lee et al, 2013 ). Some exemplary programs implemented by the European Union or Canada, such as PARRISE (Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research and Innovation in Science Education) (Amos & Levinson, 2019 ; Ariza et al, 2021 ; Levinson, 2018 ), RISKEDU (Schenk et al, 2019 ; Wojcik et al, 2019 ), and STEPWISE (Science & Technology Education Promoting Wellbeing for Individuals, Societies & Environments) (Bencze, 2017 ), aim to promote students’ social responsibility as citizens and their activism in the context of SSIs.…”

How to Communicate Food Safety after Radiological Contamination: The Effectiveness of Numerical and Narrative News Messages

“…As with naturally occurring radioactivity, the public is widely unaware of food irradiation, a man-made preservation method that involves destroying pathogenic organisms, including Salmonella and E. Coli, by exposing food to radiation in order to increase its safety. Food irradiation is endorsed by the World Health Organization (WHO), yet despite its benefits, people hold negative views about it [10,11] and many producers are reluctant to indicate irradiation in their products [12], even if all food containing irradiated ingredients must be labeled as such [13]. Every second adult in Belgium is unaware of the use of ionizing radiation [13] and three out of four wrongly think food irradiation makes food radioactive [10], which indicates another challenge for food safety communication.…”