the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Effects of Web GIS Technology and Curriculum Approaches on Education for Disaster Risk Reduction
Jiali Song
Hiroyuki Yamauchi
Takashi Oguchi
Takuro Ogura
Yosuke Nakamura
Jipeng Wang
Abstract. Disaster risk reduction education (DRRE) is a strategy to mitigate the harmful effects of disasters. The implementation of DRRE in schools is on the rise, and Web GIS technology in DRRE is becoming increasingly prevalent. However, little knowledge exists about whether students can improve their understanding of disaster risk reduction (DRR) through Web GIS technology and which factors affect their learning of web hazard maps. This study has provided materials and curricula for DRR education in Chinese and Japanese high schools, and utilized them eight times in the classroom between 2020 and 2022. These classes had three forms of implementation due to the COVID-19 pandemic: online, onsite, and online-onsite mixed. The students first answered a pretest. Then they learned about DRR using the explanatory web pages and the web hazard maps with answering quizzes shown on the pages. After that, they answered a posttest and a questionnaire. Most students show improved results after using the digital DRR materials. It is pronounced for the onsite implementations, whereas the online-onsite mixed implementation was less effective. The pretest scores for the implementations using local disaster cases are low, but the subsequent improvement is significant. The ability of students to utilize electronic devices affects the learning of GIS-related content rather than other aspects. The frequency of daily usage of online maps and daily attention to disaster prevention and mitigation affect learning the entire materials. Increasing the use of online hazard maps is a key to realizing social DRR.
- Preprint
(1281 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Jiali Song et al.
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1036', Sun Tong, 19 Jun 2023
I think this paper has important implications for international disaster prevention education. However, I hope that the results of the analysis and comparison between the two countries, China and Japan, can be published soon and would like to know more.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1036-CC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Jipeng Wang, 21 Jun 2023
Thank you for your insightful review of our paper. We deeply appreciate your acknowledgment of the significant international disaster risk reduction education implications of our research.
We understand your interest in the analysis and comparison between China and Japan, as it would provide valuable insights into the differences and similarities in disaster risk reduction practices and education between the two countries. We are writing a comparison article focusing on China and Japan and are eager to share the results with the academic community in the near future.Â
Once again, we sincerely appreciate your feedback and support. Please stay tuned for our future work.Â
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1036-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Jipeng Wang, 21 Jun 2023
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1036', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Jun 2023
The authors have experienced a very interesting DRRE in seven Chinese schools and one Japanese. The use of Web GIS technology to interrogate Hazard maps resulted in a good learning of web hazard maps. The students first answered a pretest, then they were introduced to DRR concepts using the explanatory web pages and the web hazard maps, throughout different procedures. Importantly, each student had one electronic device to use the learning materials. After that they answered a posttest and to a questionnaire. Cumulatively they obtained 526 valid test results and questionnaires which were statistically analyzed.
To improve the quality of the manuscript the authors should better explain how and why systematic educational work by using WebGIS technology with students could improve hazard understanding. Does it depend on the novelty of using digital geographic maps more interesting than school books? Starting from their DRRE experience the authors can discuss if and how it can also use to increase risk awareness and risk prevention among young people and teachers and as second hands information among parents.
Here are some comments I would like to share:
 - 10 tables are really a lot, the authors should aggregate the outputs of the analyzes differently,
 - boxplot figure captions should contain information about reported outlier values,
The description of the results should be better highlighted:
  - the type of test that the authors have performed to define statistically significant scores,
  - the role of gender and whether it affects student learning, especially in the post-test,
 - the role of school proximity (inside or outside) in relation to hazard maps.
Finally, more details should be provided explaining the differences, if any, between the two countries.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1036-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Jipeng Wang, 21 Jun 2023
Thank you for your insightful comments and suggestions. We sincerely appreciate your comments and will take them into consideration to improve the quality of our manuscript.
We agree with your suggestion to better explain how and why systematic educational work using Web GIS technology can enhance hazard understanding. We will provide additional explanations in the manuscript to highlight the novelty and effectiveness of using digital geographic maps compared to traditional school textbooks. Furthermore, we will expand on the discussion of how this approach can contribute to increased risk awareness and prevention among young people, teachers, and parents.
Regarding the number of tables, we will carefully review the tables and consider aggregating the outputs of the analysis in a more concise and organized manner. Additionally, we will include information about reported outlier values in the captions of the boxplot figures as you suggested.
In terms of the results, thank you for pointing out that the description of the test types and the influence of gender on student learning could be further clarified. I apologize for any confusion caused. I would like to clarify that in our manuscript, we have provided an explanation of the test types used to analyze the data, and we will expand on this explanation to make it more explicit and detailed. Additionally, we have already mentioned and discussed the potential influence of gender on student learning in the article. However, we understand the importance of providing a more comprehensive and explicit explanation of this aspect, and we will ensure to address it in greater depth in our revised manuscript. Moreover, to provide further clarity, in our study, the hazard maps were categorized into local hazard maps and non-local hazard maps. The schools in the local hazard maps were situated in non-hazardous areas on the maps. We did not specifically consider the proximity of schools to hazardous zones in our analysis. However, we acknowledge that this aspect presents an interesting topic and avenue for future exploration. We appreciate your insight and will take it into consideration for future research.
We are writing a comparison article focusing on China and Japan, which encompasses various similarities and differences, and are eager to share the results in the near future. Please stay tuned for our future work.
We sincerely appreciate your feedback and your contribution to improving our manuscript. We will incorporate these suggestions to enhance the clarity and comprehensiveness of our research.
Â
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1036-AC2 -
AC3: 'Reply on AC2', Jipeng Wang, 21 Jun 2023
Please allow me to make an additional response: a detailed explanation of the test types used can be found in lines 218-220 of the manuscript.Â
In terms of the influence of gender on student learning, we apologize for any confusion caused by the lack of explicit mention in the results section. However, we would like to clarify that we did include gender as a variable of interest in each analysis. The results consistently indicated no significant impact of gender on student learning outcomes. We did mention this finding briefly in the discussion section (lines 384-386) where we explored various factors affecting student learning. However, we understand the importance of providing a more extensive explanation. In light of your feedback, we will expand on this aspect to ensure a thorough and comprehensive discussion of the gender-related findings in our revised manuscript.
If you have any further suggestions or questions, please do not hesitate to let us know.Â
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1036-AC3
-
AC3: 'Reply on AC2', Jipeng Wang, 21 Jun 2023
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Jipeng Wang, 21 Jun 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1036', Anonymous Referee #2, 10 Jul 2023
The issue addressed by the manuscript is interesting, relevant and has the potential to contribute to the improvement of DRRE. However, the manuscript needs a deep review to clarify some points, fill some gaps and follow a better scientific rigor.
I present some key points (general and specific) that should be considered.
- Lines 46-47: I do not agree that DRR must be prioritized in education, but instead DRR must be really and seriously integrated in education.
- Line 51: Petal 2008
- Lines 57-63: Some comments should be made regarding the limitation of usage of digital technologies by poorer populations, at least in poor countries.
- Lines 81: Recent scientific works have proposed to abolish the term "natural disaster", as disasters are understood to be result of social construction. I suggest using only disaster or disaster related to natural hazards.
- Section 1. Introduction: The manuscript is about DRRE. Then, the authors should present a short review, based on the literature, about the content/materials and methods adopted in projects of DRRE carried out in schools in different countries. It is important to contextualize the methods/materials and after that to talk about the use of maps.
- Page 6: fig. 2 must be shown after being cited.
- Section 3. Implementations:
Which kind of disaster exists in the regions of the schools? They must be mentioned.
Which kind of material and quizzes were used in the teaching process?
The pretest, the posttest, and, also, the questionnaire, which are the main studied objects in the work, need to be presented.
- Lines 178-179: The contents must be explained.
- Line 183: The problems and questions solved by the students must be described.
- Lines 199-204: The experiment assessment should be based not only on the tests but also on observations of the student´s behavior and interactions. The lasting effects on the learning process must be evaluated.
- Lines 204-205: This statement is very qualitative and deficient. More data is lacking.
- Lines 224-226: Explain the purpose of the use of computers and smartphones. General purposes or DRR learning? The section is about "DRR learning".
- Fig. 4: The figure legend is lacking.
- About Fig. 5: Some comment on the difference of information they have from the different sources is needed.
- About Fig. 6: What does "pay great attention to DRR-related information in their daily lives" mean? This kind of response is very subjective and qualitative. I believe the correlation is almost obvious because people who pay little attention to DRR are not interested in DRR materials, regardless they are electronic or not.
- Table 2: not necessary
- Some figures and tables should be grouped.
-Â The meaning of the statistics parameters must be shown and explained.
- Lines 362-364: Mention where and when this research was carried out.
- Lines 364-366: The effect of covid-19 could be the cause of this difference?
- Line 366: You say that "school education still plays a certain role". I believe this role is high (67%), compared to computer/smartphone (87%).
- Lines 368-369: There is a long and complex distance between scientific knowledge and awareness. You must be more specific about how media can aid to reduce this gap. And, also, mention the limitations of this aid.
- Lines 410-425: The work should address if there are inequalities related to the quality of internet connections and the technological devices among the groups of students.
- Section 6. Conclusions: Based on the research findings, the authors should present an objective proposal for the integration of these technologies and content in education to improve the DRRE. The limitations of the research must be added.
General:
- The format of some references cited in the middle of the text is wrong. Revise them.
- There are a few grammar and typing mistakes and awkward sentences. Please, the writing must be carefully revised.
Â
-
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1036-RC2 -
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Jipeng Wang, 10 Jul 2023
We wish to express our deepest gratitude for the time and effort you have generously devoted to reviewing our manuscript. Your detailed and constructive comments have provided us with valuable insights to improve our work. We acknowledge the need for an in-depth review of the manuscript as per your recommendations. We will undertake a careful review and revision, addressing each issue you pointed out.Â
We appreciate your emphasis on the stringent adherence to scientific rigor and the importance of crafting a manuscript that is reader-friendly. Assuredly, we will endeavor to meet these standards in our revisions. Thank you for your comprehensive and thoughtful feedback.
Â
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1036-AC4
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Jipeng Wang, 10 Jul 2023
Jiali Song et al.
Jiali Song et al.
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 192 | 88 | 22 | 302 | 4 | 5 |
- HTML: 192
- PDF: 88
- XML: 22
- Total: 302
- BibTeX: 4
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1