Developing student literacy on risk, resilience, and strategies for living with disaster uncertainty
This activity was selected for the On the Cutting Edge Reviewed Teaching Collection
This activity has received positive reviews in a peer review process involving five review categories. The five categories included in the process are
- Scientific Accuracy
- Alignment of Learning Goals, Activities, and Assessments
- Pedagogic Effectiveness
- Robustness (usability and dependability of all components)
- Completeness of the ActivitySheet web page
For more information about the peer review process itself, please see http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/review.html.
This page first made public: May 1, 2014
In this guided research and critical thinking activity, undergraduate students will review literature from the fields of decision science, geoscience, health science, social science, and public policy to better understand historic and emerging conceptualizations of risk and resilience. Students will focus on learning how resilience is defined and operationalized into measurable variables, and interpret, evaluate, and explore how this knowledge can be effectively transferred and integrated into disaster risk reduction and resilience strategies. Students will prepare a written literature review paper that effectively communicates their understanding of the state-of-the-science and how resilience paradigms could be applied in a real-world scenario.
Pedagogic goals: Students will develop and strengthen their literature research and review skills, critical thinking, ability to synthesize complex concepts and constructs, problem solving, and writing skills. Students will also gain a first-hand awareness of the current advances in and challenges to building resiliency, and exposure to the process of translating and applying scientific knowledge to real-world problem solving.
Content goals: The activity addresses risk, resilience, and geoscience by helping the students understand the diverse, changing, and dynamic nature of geologic hazards; explore how risk and uncertainty is conceptualized; learn interdisciplinary definitions of resilience as both a process and outcome; and be introduced to the meaning and implications of resilience trajectories. They will also learn about motivation and behavior change theory and how cognitive, affective, and behavioral patterns can affect levels of disaster readiness.Career preparedness goals: Gaining multidisciplinary perspectives on the "plain meaning" of risk and resilience is critical for research integrity and evidence-based science, and for transdisciplinary partnerships leading to solutions. Students will be able to participate in this arena through newly-developed awareness on the complexity and dimensions of these constructs at an introductory level, and provide some perspective on the science that supports them to practitioners, educators, decision-makers and stakeholders. Further, developing these perspectives from a solid and foundational understanding of the geological environment will give the students valuable skills for contextualizing risk and resilience for themselves within the inherent uncertainties of the natural world.
Context for Use
Description and Teaching Materials
Teaching Notes and Tips
References and Resources
Students should review the following:
Alemdom AM. 2013. Resilience: Outcome, Process, Emergence, Narrative (OPEN) theory. On the Horizon 2013, 21(1):15-23.
Alexander, DE. 2013. Resilience and disaster risk reduction: an etymological journey, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 13:2707-2716.
Bonanno GA, 2004. Loss, trauma, and human resilience: have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events?
Harrop E, Addis S, Elliott E, Williams G. 2006. Resilience, coping and salutogenic approaches to maintaining and generating health: a review.
Kimhi S, 2014. Levels of resilience: associations among individual, community, and national levels of resilience. J Health Psychol, March 3, 2014, 0: 1359105314524009v1-1359105314524009
Leppin et al. 2014. The efficacy of resilience training programs: a systematic review protocol. Systematic Reviews 2014, 3:20.
Martin-Breen P, Anderies JM. 2011. Resilience: A literature review. The Bellagio Initiative, Rockefeller Foundation, NY.
Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. 2004. Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis 2004, 24:311-322.
Slovic P. 1987. Perception of Risk. Science 1987, 236:280-285.
Windle G, Bennett K, Noyes J. 2011. A methodological review of resilience measurement scales. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 2011, 9:8.