Disaster Decision-Makers: A Geoscience RPG

This activity is designed for middle school students but can be adapted for a wide range of learners, from upper elementary through college-level courses. It is also well suited for community groups interested in understanding and preparing for volcanic hazards.

Students do not need prior knowledge of volcanology. However, a basic understanding of natural hazards (e.g., what a hazard is and how it can impact people and infrastructure) is helpful. The activity is designed to introduce and reinforce concepts related to volcanic hazards, risk, and decision-making.

This activity is flexible and can be used at multiple points within a course. It works well as a mid- to late-unit application or synthesis activity, where students apply their understanding of volcanic hazards to decision-making scenarios. It can also function as a standalone activity in outreach or informal learning settings, where the focus is on introducing hazard concepts through interactive, scenario-based learning.

1) Understand different types of volcanic hazards (e.g., lava flows, ash fall, lahars) and how they can affect people and the environment.
2) Recognize that not all volcanoes behave the same, and hazards can vary from place to place.
3) Understand that the impact of a hazard depends on both the event and the people or communities affected.

1) Use knowledge of volcanic hazards to make decisions in a real-world scenario.
2) Compare different choices and think about their impacts on people and communities.
3) Combine scientific information with social considerations to decide on a course of action.

1) Work together in groups to make decisions.
2) Share and explain ideas clearly.
3) Adjust decisions when new information is introduced.

This activity is a role-playing, team-based simulation in which students take on scientific roles to assess volcanic hazards and make decisions to reduce risk to nearby communities. It is designed to be completed in a single class period (2 hours) but can be extended depending on discussion and pacing.

Students are divided into teams of five. Each student is assigned a specific scientific role (Seismologist, Volcanologist, Geophysicist, Remote Sensing Specialist, and Hazards Specialist), which provides them with unique information about the volcanic system. Role assignments are distributed randomly at the start of the activity.

Each team is given a map showing several regions surrounding a volcano, along with population data and scenario-specific hazard information. Students must work together to interpret their individual data and decide on protective actions for each region (e.g., evacuation, shelter in place, monitoring).

The activity is structured in multiple rounds. In the first round, students analyze hazard data and make initial decisions as a team. In the second round, an eruption scenario unfolds, introducing new information and changing conditions. Public response to team decisions is incorporated through dice rolls, which introduce uncertainty and simulate real-world variability in how communities respond to hazard communication. Modifiers are applied to these rolls based on how effectively teams interpret and communicate their data, as well as how appropriate their decisions are for the scenario. For example, overly extreme or poorly justified decisions in the first round may reduce public trust in later rounds.

Facilitators (e.g., instructor, teaching assistants, or designated roles such as "Governor" or "Mountain Master") guide the activity, introduce new information, and help manage the progression of the scenario.

The activity emphasizes collaboration, communication, and decision-making under uncertainty, and encourages students to balance scientific data with societal impacts.

Instructor Guide (Acrobat (PDF) 214kB May18 26)
VolcanoMap.pdf (Acrobat (PDF) 4.5MB May18 26)
Role Materials (Zip Archive 648.8MB May18 26) 
Scenario Data (Zip Archive 969MB May18 26) 
Facilitator Materials (Zip Archive 173kB May18 26) 
Assessment and Tracking (Zip Archive 77kB May18 26)

The success of this activity depends on student engagement and willingness to participate in role-playing and group decision-making. Encouraging students to take ownership of their roles, create a character, and share their unique information helps create a more collaborative and dynamic experience. Optional role identifiers (e.g., name tags or costume props) can support engagement but are not required.

For larger groups, the activity can be framed as a "multiverse" scenario, where each team represents a parallel version of the same community. In this format, the designated role of Chronicle Keeper reports outcomes to a central facilitator (the Mountain Master), allowing for comparison across teams. This approach can help unify the class experience but can be simplified depending on time and classroom needs.

Active facilitation is important for maintaining pacing and clarity. The Mountain Master and Governor roles help introduce new information, guide transitions between rounds, and keep teams on track. Facilitators should circulate throughout the activity to clarify instructions, prompt discussion, and ensure all students understand their role within the group.

Students may initially struggle to interpret their individual datasets or see how their role contributes to team decisions. Early check-ins, along with encouraging students to ask questions and use their expert cards, can help ensure information is being shared effectively and reinforce that no single role has all the answers.

The public response system (dice rolls with modifiers) reinforces the role of uncertainty in hazard events and the importance of clear communication. Facilitators should emphasize that outcomes are influenced both by chance and by the quality of team decisions and communication (e.g., a +5 modifier when all datasets are plotted on the map). This provides an opportunity to highlight a key takeaway: even well-informed decisions do not always lead to optimal outcomes.

Flexibility is key. Depending on time and student engagement, the activity can be shortened (e.g., focusing on a single round) or extended (e.g., adding additional scenarios or discussion time). Instructors are encouraged to adapt the activity as needed and may reach out to the author (Elizabeth Curtiss) to discuss modifications.

Assessment for this activity is primarily based on observation of student discussions, decision-making, and group collaboration during the simulation. Circulating among groups provides insight into how students interpret data, justify decisions, and communicate with one another.

A key component of assessment occurs during the class debrief. Each team's Chronicle Keeper reports outcomes (e.g., injuries and fatalities), allowing for comparison across groups. This is followed by a guided discussion in which students reflect on how their decisions influenced those outcomes and why results differed between teams.

Additional assessment can be incorporated through whole-class discussion prompts that connect the activity to real-world events (e.g., media coverage of volcanic or seismic hazards), encouraging students to consider how similar information is communicated outside the classroom.

For more structured assessment, instructors may assign a short reflection in which students explain their decision-making process, evaluate the effectiveness of their team's choices, and connect the activity to broader concepts of hazard mitigation and community response.

No external references were used in the development of this activity.