Today’s societies assign challenging tasks to their members who are dealing with various challenges in many areas of their lives. Specific competences are needed for the achievement of tasks or for the maintenance and improvement of the current level of well-being. The identification of these competences can improve young people’s and adults’ assessment of their readiness to cope with the challenges involved and set the goals of education systems and lifelong learning. Competence is the ability to meet complex demands by using and mobilizing psychosocial resources. According to OECD (2005), for a competence to be considered key, it should: contribute to valuable outcomes for societies and individuals, help individuals meet important demands in a wide range of contexts, and be important for all individuals, not just specialists. 1 (p.4) From this point of view, disaster literacy provides protection of the individual and enhancement of community resilience by identifying and controlling the factors affecting vulnerabilities at both the individual and social level. With the understanding that disaster literacy is an important area of competence for citizens, it will be important to establish school-based standards of disaster literacy in combating disaster inequalities.
Disaster literacy is seen as a concept, process, outcome, and a public health goal to be developed.Reference Çalışkan and Üner 2 , Reference Çalışkan and Üner 3 At the same time, different levels of disaster literacy can be considered as an output in terms of disaster education. Disaster education is defined as “any kind of teaching activity designed to ensure voluntary participation of the individual with the aim of protecting him/her and to make positive behaviours related to disaster a social value” Çalışkan (2019 and 2021).Reference Çalışkan 4 , Reference Çalışkan 5 Before becoming a disaster victim, the individual and the society should know the ways that lead to becoming a disaster victim and how to prevent them. In this case, disaster education and disaster literacy as a learning strategy for education act as tools. Actions aimed at engaging people in improving their disaster risk management and preparedness capacities are then both outputs and instruments. Both the concepts of disaster literacy and disaster education are fundamentally related to capacity building for the protection and well-being of individuals and societies.
This conceptual study advocates the systematic development and implementation of a disaster literacy course with the integration of teaching and health literacy principles in a higher education setting. This course is the first program on disaster literacy to be developed and implemented in a higher education setting. The systematic planning of methods, programs, delivery, contexts, interventions, and assessments from this course can be transferred to pre-university curricula and adult education courses. This curriculum proposal assists higher education settings in understanding how to develop a systematic learning program in which students can learn how to become change agents in the evolving field of disaster literacy. In developing the disaster literacy course and designing learning activities and assessments, Vamos and Yeung (2017)’s development of a core online health literacy course in Canada Reference Vamos and Yeung 6 was inspired by his work. The problem statement of the research is as follows:
How should the method, program, presentation, context, intervention and evaluation options of a disaster literacy course in formal education be systematically developed?
Background of Disaster Literacy Course
It is known that people’s health literacy levels affect health risks and outcomes. In particular, it ranges from a patient’s ability to read and write basic medical information (functional health literacy) to the ability to make meaning from different forms of communication and apply new information to changing situations (interactive health literacy). However, the role of disaster literacy in influencing health and safety is still a new research area.Reference Bawden, Lankshear and Knobel 7 –Reference Hogarth and Hilgert 9 Nevertheless, it is seen that comparisons can be made between various groups, and cause-effect relationships have been investigated in a small number of studies. For example, it is known that older adults of the populationReference Bodstein, Lima and Barros 10 , Reference McGuire, Ford and Okoro 11 or different vulnerable groups with social isolation and low educationReference Altevogt, Pope and Hill 12 are more at risk due to unfavorable conditions that may occur during and after disasters.Reference Bodstein, Lima and Barros 10 , Reference Burton and Breen 13 – 15 There is a need for further research on different determinants and disaster literacy. In this direction, disaster trainings that improve the quality of life of people can be developed by exploring the social determinants between different levels of disaster literacy.
It is seen that a term related to the concept of disaster literacy was first referred to in the literature with the concept of “disaster mitigation literacy” in a study by Suwa (2003).Reference Suwa 16 The study discusses the importance and scope of disaster mitigation education in line with the outputs obtained from the disaster that occurred in Japan in 1995 and known as the Kobe Earthquake (Great Hanshin-Awaji Disaster). Suwa (2003)Reference Suwa 16 aimed to develop disaster mitigation literacy in citizens with the “environment and disaster mitigation course” developed at Maiko High School in line with the lessons learned from the Kobe Earthquake. With the scope of this study, Suwa (2003)Reference Suwa 16 established a link between education, experts, and society in order to determine how education can be effectively developed to prevent human vulnerability. From this study, it was discovered that disaster education is an important social policy issue.
In the following years, it had been seen that there are various studies on the definition, conceptual framework, models, and measurement techniques of disaster literacy.Reference Çalışkan and Üner 2 , Reference Çalışkan and Üner 3 , Reference Çalışkan 17 However, no direct study on disaster literacy has been found. For example, 18 studies were found in Web of Science, PubMed, and ScienceDirect databases with the keywords “disaster literacy” and “course” on March 30, 2024. It was determined that these studies did not reveal a curriculum in the field of disaster literacy. In the literature, it was seen that only a course proposal consisting of 5 subjects and 49 outcomes with 2 hours of weekly education for high school students within the framework of natural disaster literacy from Turkiye was included. The curriculum was prepared with knowledge, attitude, and behavior taxonomy within the scope of selected natural disasters.Reference Sözcü 18 However, it has been seen that there is a need for an education and training program that deals with disasters in general and systematically handles disaster and literacy dimensions. For this reason, since disaster literacy is a newly developing discipline in disaster science, it is thought that the education and training content of the proposed disaster literacy course is the first.
Discussion
Theoretical Framework of Disaster Literacy Curriculum
Disaster literacy is defined as the capacity to access, understand, evaluate and apply disaster information to make informed decisions and follow instructions in daily life related to mitigating/preventing, preparing for, responding to and recovering/rehabilitating from a disaster in order to maintain or improve the quality of life of people throughout their lifetime,Reference Çalışkan and Üner 2 and effective communication between the community and the expertReference Suwa 16 is one of the basic elements. Suwa (2003),Reference Suwa 16 indirectly emphasised the importance of closed communication by highlighting the discrepancy between the expert opinion and the community perspective. The public wants to know how to get help, what risks they face, and how they can protect themselves and their families.Reference Rubin, Amlôt and Page 19 In such a situation, a risk communication model is needed to inform the public about hazard risks that pose a threat to health, safety, and the environment.Reference Reynolds and Quinn 20 By avoiding nontechnical communication between the public and disaster experts, people’s ability to remember information and adapt to messages can be increased through open communication.Reference Sugerman, Keir and Dee 21 Since disaster literacy is a new and developing discipline, disaster experts do not have sufficient knowledge about the problems of disaster literacy and the skills required to address these problems effectively. It is suggested that the subject of disaster literacy should be increased and improved within the scope of disaster trainings. In this direction, disaster literacy curriculum should be structured on definition components.
-
• Disaster literacy allows all members of society to find, understand, evaluate, and use disaster-related information.
-
• Disaster literacy utilizes the ability to act on disaster knowledge in the context of reducing disaster risks for the well-being of people and building their preparedness capacities.
-
• These skills include reading, writing, communicating, arithmetic, and critical analysis.
Disaster literacy curricula and assessment tools should ideally be evidence-based. However, since disaster literacy is new to individuals and societies, there is a lack of research and evaluation. Nevertheless, by utilizing disaster education studies and practices, the field of disaster literacy can describe how disaster literacy contributes to individual and community well-being and how interventions work. While outlining general principles for the development of a health literacy curriculum (2008), these principles, which are not agreed upon, may provide an idea for a disaster literacy curriculum. The scope of disaster literacy curriculum principles adapted from The Calgrary Chater (2008)Reference Coleman, Kurtz-Rossi and Mckinney 22 may include the following:
-
• Disaster literacy curricula should be based on disaster literacy interventions. For example, disaster intervention studies with high evidence value obtained from experimental studies with quasi-experimental and/or control group before and after the training can be conducted.
-
• The use and implementation of disaster literacy curricula should contribute to the development of the evidence base for disaster literacy interventions using methodological approaches to evaluation.
-
• A participatory approach can be used by involving the target group in all stages.
-
• Disaster literacy should build on a basic understanding of health literacy to enable comparison between different contexts (e.g., disaster professionals or adults with low disaster literacy).
-
• An integrated approach to individual, social, societal, socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental determinants of disasters should be adopted to reduce disaster risks and improve preparedness capacities of people.
-
• It should address skills and abilities related to individual disaster literacy and the cultural, social, economic, and policy issues associated with disaster systems.
Students should be able to form their own views on disaster issues and understand the perspectives of others within the scope of the competence, definition components, and principles given above. This can be realized through a deep understanding of the importance of knowledge and awareness of themselves and others. This also means that the learner becomes literate in the broad scope of disaster literacy of which he/she is a part. These consist of disaster phases and literacy domains. The components partly overlap and move cyclically. Since they are intertwined, the separation of the meaning and critical differences between them consists of a partially artificial separation. After this stage, the learning conditions required for each of the basic components of disaster literacy are analyzed in terms of the triad of the role of the teacher, the role of the learner, and the nature of knowledge that Paakkari and Paakkari (2012) follow in health literacy. In general, the role of the teacher is shaped from didactic teaching to a combination of interactive, inquiry, and experiential learning. The role of the student moves from memorizing to role-playing, criticizing, and creative thinking. The nature of knowledge changes from a simple and easy structure to a complex structure where new connections are created and the nature of knowledge is questioned and new solutions are searched. In the following, the main characteristics of each disaster phase and the literacy context are given in terms of the role of the student, the role of the teacher, and the role of knowledge. Although the processing method of each context is similar, the scope of the subject differs. Context-specific differences and sample applications are given in more detail in the tables specific to earthquake.
Conditions for Promoting the Literacy Context of Mitigation and Prevention Knowledge
In the harm reduction/prevention dimension, it is essential to learn the knowledge to prevent the hazard or mitigate the risk. 23 , Reference Koçak 24 Since natural hazards cannot be prevented, prevention knowledge can be developed on man-made disasters. However, the cycle of damage recurrence and disaster damage can be broken with an effective mitigation knowledge within the scope of both man-made and natural hazards. 25 Knowledge evolves from its pure form to instructions shaped by other contexts and finally to a point where the nature of knowledge is questioned. In particular, the basic characteristics of structural and nonstructural knowledge and their new applications with technological developments are evaluated. Students learn about mitigation and prevention knowledge, gain a deeper understanding of various disaster issues, and are encouraged to adopt a critical thinking style by making connections between them. The teacher sequentially presents the conceptual framework of mitigation and prevention knowledge in a student-ready form, supports students’ active participation and application of the instructions, and encourages them to explore in an inquiring manner both in school and in everyday life (Table 1).
Table 1. Promoting harm reduction/prevention knowledge in the context of literacy
Source: Caliskan and Uner (2021)Reference Çalışkan and Üner 2 derived from the article.
Conditions for Promoting the Literacy Context of Preparatory Knowledge
Disaster preparedness consists of the knowledge of actions taken in advance that can ensure rapid recovery from the adverse consequences of a disaster, assistance, and adequate response to its effects.Reference Alexander 26 , Reference Coppola 27 This guarantees that intervention and assistance are provided in a timely, appropriate and efficient framework, and that the adverse effects of the hazard are minimised.Reference Coppola 27 Information evolves from its pure form to instructions shaped by other contexts and finally to a point where the nature of information is questioned. In particular, the main characteristics of knowledge related to state and community preparedness, policies, and methods are assessed. Students are encouraged to learn about state and community preparedness knowledge, to establish causal linkages across a range of disaster issues, and to adopt a critical thinking style for capacity building. In the first stage, the teacher presents the conceptual framework of preparedness knowledge to the students in a ready-to-use manner. In the following stages, the teacher supports the implementation of the instructions by enabling the active participation of the students and leads them to explore disaster preparedness in an inquiring manner both in school and in daily life (Table 2).
Table 2. Promoting preparatory knowledge in the context of literacy
Source: Caliskan and Uner (2021)Reference Çalışkan and Üner 2 derived from the article.
Conditions for Promoting the Literacy Context of Intervention Knowledge
The term ‘response knowledge’ encompasses the actions that are taken in order to limit the damage, loss of life and environmental degradation that occurs before, during and after a disaster. The response process emphasizes immediate needs such as first aid, search and rescue and shelter. Reference Alexander 26 , Reference Coppola 27 Response knowledge evolves from its pure form to instructions shaped by other contexts and finally to a point where the nature of knowledge is questioned. In particular, the main features, policies, and methods of knowledge of intervention studies before and after disasters are evaluated. Students are encouraged to adopt a critical thinking style to learn about response issues and to establish causal linkages in the context of various disaster problems. The teacher takes the role of presenting the conceptual framework of response knowledge to the students in a ready-made way, supporting the implementation of the instructions by ensuring the active participation of the students and guiding them to explore response studies with a questioning attitude both in school and in daily life (Table 3).
Table 3. Promoting intervention knowledge in the context of literacy
Source: Caliskan and Uner (2021)Reference Çalışkan and Üner 2 derived from the article.
Conditions for Promoting the Literacy Context of Recovery/Rehabilitation Information
Recovery is the phase in which the destruction caused by the disaster is reconstructed, repaired, and restored to its former functional state.Reference Alexander 26 In the recovery phase, information on reconstruction evolves from its pure form to a point where the nature of instructions and knowledge is questioned, shaped by other disaster phases. In particular, actions for reconstruction are evaluated at the family, community, workplace, and policy level. Students learn about recovery knowledge, gain a deeper understanding of various disaster issues, and are encouraged to adopt a critical thinking style by making connections between them. The teacher presents the conceptual framework of recovery knowledge to the students in a ready-made way, supports the students to apply the instructions by ensuring their active participation, and encourages them to explore in an enquiring manner both in school and in daily life (Table 4).
Table 4. Promoting recovery/rehabilitation knowledge in the context of literacy
Source: Caliskan and Uner (2021)Reference Çalışkan and Üner 2 derived from the article.
Development of Disaster Literacy Course
Turkiye is a country that regularly experiences earthquakes, landslides, floods, and drought disasters.Reference Koçak, Çaliskan and Kaya 28 In particular, Turkiye is located in one of the most active seismic zones of the world due to its geological position, which significantly increases the earthquake disaster risk of the country. Earthquakes are the most costly and loss-causing natural disaster in Turkiye,Reference Akar 29 , Reference Ersoy and Koçak 30 and four major earthquakes have occurred in the last 24 years. The first two (Marmara) earthquakes occurred in 1999 with epicenters in Kocaeli (Mw = 7.4) and Düzce (Mw = 7.2). The last two earthquakes occurred in 2023 with a magnitude of Mw = 7.7 and Mw = 7.6 at the epicenter in Kahramanmaras. 31 – 35 Therefore, communities that see disasters as an opportunity for reconstruction need to be able to recognize hazards, conduct risk analysis, prepare, and activate appropriate response options. Within the scope of this objective, which is in line with the Sendai Framework for Action, 36 a disaster literacy course has been developed with a triggering role and task to increase the country’s disaster preparedness and response skills and capacity.
A course study on disaster literacy was conducted for the first time in Turkiye with the introduction of an elective course at an undergraduate level in the Emergency Aid and Disaster Management program at the University of Health Sciences in Istanbul. The students of this program are given education and training activities in the disciplines of clinical, search and rescue, firefighting and fire safety, and disaster management for 4 years. Therefore, the syllabus developed here is specific to this department. The course was divided into themes over a 12-week period to ensure students’ learning motivation. Students actively participate in the topics presented by the instructor, and relevant documents are shared with them before each week. In the course, students are given the opportunity to learn the scope of disaster literacy, influencing factors, management of disaster risks, capacity building for disaster phases, and access to disaster services and to experience them at an individual and a community level. Due to the lack of evidence-based outputs related to disaster literacy, students are mostly provided with studies on the management of risks related to disaster phases and capacity building for preparedness. The 12-week program of the course at a glance is shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Disaster literacy course curriculum at a glance
The developed curriculum was specially prepared for a professional group trained in disaster discipline. For this reason, in disaster literacy studies for students trained in other professions, instead of the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th weeks in Table 5, the topics of disaster literacy mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery should be covered in detail. This feature shows that the curriculum structure can be restructured in the form of those who are trained in disaster discipline and other professional groups and that it is dynamic.
The course focuses on understanding the basic concepts underpinning disaster literacy skills, critical evaluation of disaster information, and strengthening behavioral experiences. Each week in the course, students are asked to write a 1-page summary on the weekly discussion topic given by the instructor. By encouraging students to take action in their work, a link is established between the course material and the ongoing assessment process.Reference Vamos and Yeung 6 Thus, it is ensured that students repeat and reinforce the subject.
In some weeks, students work in groups to explore disaster literacy areas within the scope of group activities and to develop their capacity to manage disaster risks and improve their preparedness capacities. Group activities are discussed in the classroom at the end of each lesson. With this method, students develop their skills to review the information and activities presented in the course and to communicate effectively with others about their perspectives and practices in disaster literacy. Here, students work on applying disaster literacy concepts to a disaster program. Thus, by developing and presenting an example of a community disaster activity, they learn by applying disaster literacy strategies. Each group presents their case study in the context of a template given to them. The template analyzes the selected sample under 3 criteria.
-
• Contextualization (ability to access, understand, evaluate, and apply) of disaster literacy for the selected example,
-
• Mitigation/prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and disaster timing for the selected sample,
-
• The scope of the selected example in terms of individual, society, practitioners, and policy makers in the context of disaster literacy is desired.
Course Design and Outcomes
The developed syllabus is designed for students to understand that their disaster literacy capacities can both mediate their use of disaster knowledge and help them meet disaster risk management and cultural needs. Students who want to manage their risks and improve their preparedness capacities in the face of disasters can solve the problems they face by developing their disaster literacy skills. Disaster literacy education requires students to be prepared in advance when faced with a disaster and to analyze and put into practice the behaviors expected of them during a disaster. Expected actions can be achieved through interactive and experiential learning environments.Reference Selby and Kagawa 37 In the disaster literacy course, interactive, exploratory, and field-experienced learning methods were used through presentations, reading materials, assignments, and group work.Reference Selby and Kagawa 37 However, since disaster literacy is a new field and its development momentum will be high, the up-to-dateness of learning methods should be maintained by following the latest developments.
Limitations
The scope of this study should be evaluated in the context of the following issues. Since disaster literacy is a new concept, evidence-based studies are insufficient. This curriculum study was prepared within the scope of a synthesis of the achievements of the author from the studies on disaster literacy definition, model, matrix, and scale development. In addition, a measurement for the effectiveness of the developed curriculum was not developed.
Conclusion
A dynamic syllabus has been developed to improve the disaster literacy skills of both the experts trained in the field of disaster and other professional groups and the society. The course aims to develop disaster literacy skills through interactive, exploratory, and field visits on different topics for 12 weeks. The disaster literacy syllabus covers topics related to the ability to access, understand, evaluate, and apply disaster information related to the management of disaster risks and development of preparedness capacity. The knowledge and experience learned here can be transferred to disaster professionals, practitioners, institutions, and nongovernmental organiations. This course constitutes the first step towards a national disaster preparedness or the realization of resilient societies. Finally, there is a need for evidence-based studies to demonstrate the effectiveness of the disaster literacy curriculum and to ensure the support of decision-makers.
Sources of support
None.
Competing interest
The author(s) declare none.
