The objectives of disaster education from teachers’ perspectives

Abstract

This study aims to examine teachers' judgments on the objectives of disaster education regarding basic three aspects; clarity, measurability and attainability. A 3-point Likert-type scale was developed, and completed by 142 teachers who participated in several in-service trainings about disaster education. Descriptive statistics were carried out to analyze the data. Results of this study revealed that there was no single objective that teachers perceived as clear, measurable and attainable at one hundred percent. So, there is an urgent need to do a comprehensive list of learning objectives in a way that they are perceived clearer, more measureable and attainable for the purpose of achieving a well-qualified disaster education including all domains of disaster education, namely cognitive, affective and psychomotor.

Heralding Ideas of a Resilient Nation through Education of Disaster Science in 21st Century

“…(Toya and Skidmore, 2007;Omelicheva, 2011;D Selby and Kagawa, 2012) supported a stronger resilience by adopting the strategy of investing today and saving lives tomorrow. Few authors demonstrated that the best actions are people-centered and that pre-disaster investments are essential as the first step in reducing chronic vulnerability to disasters (Karnawati et al, 2015;Khorram-Manesh et al, 2015;Erdur-Baker, 2015). Some studies (Komac et al, 2013;Takahashi et al, 2015) emphasized on building and maintaining relationships between and within communities, between governments and organizations, across departments, and so on to enhance the accessibility of resources, services, and information under an integrated disaster management system.…”

“…(Komac et al, 2013;Sauerborn and Ebi, 2012;United Nations, 2019) substantiated the claim that long-run disaster reduction policies require efforts to improve the disaster education for a foolproof DRR. Field-workers (D Selby and Kagawa, 2012;Khorram-Manesh et al, 2015;Erdur-Baker, 2015) suggested for imparting systematized training to schools and communities based on the lessons drawn from past disasters. Investigators (Neal, 2005;Neumayer and Plümper, 2007;Komac et al, 2013;Bui et al, 2014) concluded that a meaningful and essential disaster science education in schools and colleges fosters an attitude of stronger resilience in people.…”

“…The reasons for such timely variations are manifold but culminating at one focal point of the study. After 1972, the global population grew enormously with more and more exploitation of resources, and the sustainability of the earth has been tested from this time onwards (Codreanu et al, 2014;Erdur-Baker, 2015). Better technologies came, more industrial clusters and agglomerations sprawled, industries dominated with persistent agriculture to feed a huge population of 7.8 billion humans as of March 2020.…”

“…The scientific community has made several strides to locate the cause of them and have successfully given both quantified and qualitative assessment of disasters (Sauerborn and Ebi, 2012;YAMORI, 2008). If at one end lie, are the causes of natural hazards then, their assessment, risk evaluation, monitoring, control, and preventions are the other major objectives of science at the other end (Chou et al, 2015;Erdur-Baker, 2015;Karnawati et al, 2015). This sufficiently justifies that disasters have science in them, and this science forms a bridge of human response to natural disasters between their causes and measures of mitigation and management.…”

“…Disaster mitigation and management effort aim to achieve its objectives through six levels of imparting education and training, namely as prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and recovery (Erdur-Baker, 2015;Khorram-Manesh et al, 2015;D Selby and Kagawa, 2012). What is provided by the earth is destroyed by disasters, thus interrupting the sustainable development process and downgrading sustainability (Sauerborn and Ebi, 2012)?…”