This page is referenced by:

• 1 2021-12-14T13:57:22-05:00 Analyzing the Effectiveness of Disaster Education 15 The current conclusions about disaster education and potential issues with these conclusions. plain 2021-12-18T18:23:38-05:00 A 2019 review article from the Journal of Education and Health Promotion compiled the results of 11 studies, all looking at the effectiveness of various forms of disaster education. The article concluded that disaster education is an effective way to help protect and prepare vulnerable groups for the inevitability of disasters, with no one method of disaster education found to be better than others. Children were one of these key vulnerable groups, and the authors concluded that disaster education for children should be a top DRR priority, finding that “Individuals familiar with the concepts of hazards and disasters in their childhood can respond better and faster when disasters and accidents occur” and “Children tend to define what they have learned from their parents. As a result, education for children can gradually increase the level of awareness of the community” (Majd et. al., 2019, Table 3). They also pointed out the important role parents and teachers play in the effectiveness of childhood disaster education, advocating for more comprehensive and standardized training in disaster response for teachers and healthcare professionals. Overall, the article determined that “disaster education is a functional, operational, and cost‑effective tool for risk management in vulnerable people,” supporting the generally held belief that disaster education is effective.
  
  While this conclusion is accurate given the findings studied, not all disaster education research fully supports this limited conclusion. A 2013 study of two junior high schools in Indonesia found that students from the school that implemented an earthquake education program had better knowledge and attitude toward earthquake preparedness, but actual preparedness during the 2006 Yogyakarta Earthquake was quite low at both schools. This finding “supports previous research findings that better knowledge of disasters is not always followed by real action” (Adiyoso and Kanegae, 2013), complicating the vote of effectiveness found in the Majd et. al. review paper. A 2016 article for the journal Risk Analysis points to the limitations of disaster education study methods as a potential reason for this disparity. According to Johnson et. al., most studies on the effectiveness of disaster education mostly look at “children’s correct answers to knowledge-based questions about disaster risks and protective actions” based on the assumption that this knowledge will result in actual behavioral changes in the case of an emergency. However, as Adiyoso and Kanagae found, knowledge and action are not as correlated as the studies in the Majd et. al. review paper suggests.
  
  Based on these findings it seems fair to conclude that disaster education is an effective tool for teaching about and fostering a better attitude towards disaster situations, but it’s effect on disaster response and preparedness behaviors might be more limited than current studies suggest. This conclusion is not to suggest that disaster education is a waste of funding or an ineffective form of DRR, but rather that the actual connection between disaster education and preparedness should be studied further.
  
  
  Adiyoso, W., & Kanegae, H. (2013). Effectiveness of Disaster-Based School Program on Students’
          Earthquake-Preparedness. Journal of Disaster Research, 8(5), 1009–1017.
          https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2013.p1009
  Johnson, V. A., Ronan, K. R., Johnston, D. M., & Peace, R. (2016). Improving the Impact and Implementation
          of Disaster Education: Programs for Children Through Theory-Based Evaluation. Risk Analysis, 36(11),
          2120–2135. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12545
  Majd, P., Torani, S., Maroufi, S., Dowlati, M., & Sheikhi, R. (2019). The importance of education on disasters
          and emergencies: A review article. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 8(1), 85.
          https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_262_18