Disaster Risk Reduction and Management: Bicol Experience

A Closer Look

Today, I am sharing this research work as a learning experience for the nine pilot schools on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Adaptation. This may also be a learning experience for all schools not only in Bicol Region, but also in the Philippines and other countries who may have in one way or the other similar context with us.

By the way, this endeavor was in partnership with Dr. Chozara P. Duroy, an Education Program Supervisor, National Educators Academy of the Philippines, DepEd, Bicol Region.

Here is the account:



Abstract

This research describes the Bicol Region experience in the implementation of disaster risk reduction and climate change education among pilot schools of Region V. Areas of focus include the technical constraints/challenges, best practices, opportunities and strategies in the implementation of Disaster Risk Reduction Education (DRRE) and Climate Change Education (CCE) programs in the school curriculum.


This study made use of descriptive-evaluative type of research with fifty three (53) respondents consisting of nine (9) school principals and forty four (44) pilot teachers from the nine (9) DRR and CCE pilot schools of Region V. Sources of data include the interview and survey questionnaires administered among respondents as well as the DRR reports submitted in the region.


Outcome showed that pilot schools experienced almost the same technical constraints and challenges in its implementation like problems on time allotment, lack of DRR learning modules, hectic schedule and negative attitude of some teachers. Likewise, many opportunities were identified which include more capacity-building programs for teachers, harmonization of the efforts done by stakeholders along DRR projects, awareness of education leaders on their roles alongside DRRE and CCE. Similarly, identification of best practices in the course of DRR and CCE implementation were determined.


Results of the study will serve as basis for crafting programs and projects for the eventual roll-out of Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Education among schools in Bicol Region.


Introduction

In January 2005 at the World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction held in Kobe, Japan, one hundred sixty eight (168) governments signified the adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015 which was subtitled Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. HFA lays out a strategic and systematic approach for risk reduction from natural hazards by incorporating strategic goals, priorities for action and key activities in which Priority 3 is directly most relevant to education. This calls for governments, organizations and stakeholders to ‘use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels’. As such, it has also identified the following school-related key activities:

  • Inclusion of disaster risk reduction knowledge in relevant sections of school curricula at all levels;
  • Implementation of local risk assessment and disaster preparedness programs in schools and institutions of higher education; and
  • Implementation of programs and activities in schools for learning how to minimize the effects of hazards.


Using the HFA, the Department of Education issued DepEd Order No. 55, s. 2007 entitled Prioritizing the Mainstreaming of Disaster Risk Reduction Management in the School System and Implementation of Programs and Projects Relative Thereof in order to enjoin all concerned to implement Safe Schools Program relative to DRR that includes both structural and non-structural components.


Structural components cover construction of hazard resilient school buildings, while the non-structural covers mainstreaming DRR concepts in the elementary and secondary school curricula; school mapping exercise; schools water and electrical facilities assessment project; preparation of disaster preparedness modules through multimedia; quarterly conduct of earthquake and fire drills; and road safety education for children.


In 2010, the Philippine government through the congress has approved Republic Act 10121, entitled Philippine Risk Reduction and Management Act, which has made the implementation of DRR in schools stronger.


In Bicol Region, the schools have positively responded to this marching order in order to make school-communities better prepared as it has been known to be the typhoon capital of the Philippines together with the other natural hazards brought by the existence of volcanoes in the place.


This study aimed then to gain better understanding of the implementation and integration of DRR in the school curricula in the Bicol Region and provide interventions to strengthen its implementation.


Specifically, it sought answers to the following questions:

  1. What are the technical constraints/problems, challenges and opportunities faced by schools in the integration of DRRE and CCE in the school curriculum?
  2. What are some of the best practices shared by pilot teachers and principals in the implementation of DRR program in the schools?
  3. What strategies and interventions maybe proposed for the effective integration of DRRE and CCE in the school curriculum?



Review of Related Literature and Studies

UNESCO with other organizations has set the goals of Comprehensive School Safety which included protection of learners and education workers from death, injury, and harm in schools, planning for educational continuity in the face of expected hazards, safeguarding education sector investments and strengthening climate-smart disaster resilience through education. Accordingly, these are addressed by education policy and practices aligned with disaster management covering three pillars which include safe learning facilities, school disaster management and risk reduction and resilience education.


Among the gaps and priorities identified for safe learning facilities are the construction of schools with assurance that every new school is a safe school; encouragement for national governments to assess safety of facilities and implementation of action plan; and development of guidance for non-structural and infrastructure measure for schools, among others.


For school disaster management, the gaps and priorities include the development of guidance for education authorities on policies and practices of school-based disaster risk reduction and preparedness, standard operating procedures and disaster drills; for family, home-based, congregate child-care providers; planned and limited use of schools as temporary post-disaster shelters while protecting educational continuity; and monitoring and evaluation tools of accountability.


For risk reduction and resilience education, identified gaps and priorities include promotion of national and local adaptation of consensus-based and actionable key messages for household and community risk reduction impede shared understanding and measurable progress; and development of educational materials incorporated to meet different needs of children of different ages, gender and disabilities, among others.


In the Philippines, the Department of Education (DepEd) has considered one of the objectives of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015 that is on building schools, nations and communities resilient to disaster as a policy for implementation. This framework is a global blueprint for disaster risk reduction efforts that aims to reduce disaster losses in lives, properties, social and environmental assets of communities and countries.


Related to these, DepEd has prioritized the preparation of the Disaster Risk Reduction Resource Manual (DRRRM) for the schools in 2007 which covers structural and non-structural components. The structural components include construction of hazards resilient school buildings, while the non-structural components have mainstreaming disaster risk reduction concepts in the elementary and secondary school curricula; school mapping exercise; schools water and electrical facilities assessment project; preparation of disaster preparedness modules through multi-media; quarterly conduct of earthquake and fire drills and road safety education for children. Orientation on the use of the manual had been done to better guide the teachers implement DRR and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA). Recently, these concepts have been covered across curriculum from the early grades to the secondary levels.


But even before the issuance of DepEd Order No. 55, s. 2007 and the use of the manual, the concept of disaster preparedness and management has already been integrated in the basic education curriculum as early as 1973. Likewise, the concepts on climate change such as weather conditions in the Philippines and other Asian countries were also integrated in the curriculum.


Tuguinayo et al (2013) on the Disaster Risk Reduction in the School Curricula has emphasized in the Philippine Report that the challenges in the policy implementation of DRR and CCA include the utilization of schools for evacuation centers, proper conduct of various drills, suspension of classes, establishment of school disaster management committee, integration of DRR and CCA into the K to 12 Basic Education Program, and sustaining DRR and CCA projects, programs and interventions. Other challenges identified include plans for sustained DRR and CCA initiatives with concept mapping for long term goal and project implementation and capacitating competencies and effectiveness of various players in schools and establishing and strengthening collaboration and coordination with stakeholders.


In Bicol Region where most weather disturbances, calamities and natural and man-made hazards happen, the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) now the DepEd, partnered with the Albay Provincial Disaster Coordinating Council to come up with teacher’s manual which was later distributed to schools in 1990 to 2007, the DepEd chose pilot schools for DRR and CCA in the school curriculum with various organizations giving technical and material assistance. Aside from these, infrastructure projects under the Safe Schools Program were constructed together with the production of the lesson exemplars across curriculum for elementary and secondary schools.


Identified constraints for integration of DRR and CCA include congested subject matter, scarcity of DRR learning materials and reluctance of teachers due to lack of knowledge and background in DRR education.


Tuguinayo et al (2013) in their report, summed up the challenges to integrating DRR and CCA in the school curriculum as needing more focus on harmonizing of efforts done by different stakeholders in the development of DRR materials, more integration of activities to reduce redundancies and confusion at the field level and more capacity building activities for teachers on DRR and CCA content. It is more interesting and significant to deepen understanding on the implementation challenges of DRR and CCA in the Bicol Region where real-life calamities are experienced annually and resilience becomes a consequent challenge.


A study conducted in 2009 and published in 2010 by the Accion Contre La Faim (ACF) and Save the Children (SC) in Camarines Sur and Catanduanes entitled Comprehensive Household Vulnerability and Risk Analysis acknowledged that education plays a vital role in the increased susceptibility of households to crisis. Their level of education and skills provides them opportunity for alternative sources of income to cope with disasters. As such, they found only few school children who would stop schooling and most parents would immediately send them to school as soon as classes resumed.


The same study recommended multipronged approach to mainstream disaster risk reduction activities in the community including evacuation centers. Accordingly, the community should be equipped with necessary facilities and skills in emergencies, search and rescue among others, which are both structural and non-structural in nature.



Synthesis of the State-of-the-Art and Gap Bridged in the Study

The foregoing literature and studies support the present study in strengthening awareness and preparedness of the school-community for disaster risk reduction. Specifically, the studies reviewed present both similarities with and differences from the present study. Tuguinayo et al (2013) and this study focused on the implementation of DRR in the schools; ACF and SC was community-based. Tuguinayo et al (2013) was on a national scope, ACF and SC (2010) had Camarines Sur and Catanduanes, while the present study focused on the DRR pilot schools in Bicol Region. Tuguinayo et al (2013) described the DRR implementation in the country, but this study used the described implementation as bases for formulating and/or proposing strategies for further implementation and sustainability of DRR in the schools in Bicol Region.


Theoretical Framework

The theories that influenced this study included the following:

1. School-Based Management (SBM) with the four (4) principles of A Child and Community-Centered Educational Systems (SBM - ACCESs). This is a system approach to school management that transfers authority to the school with the participation of the community, while fully guided by DepEd policies for improved outcomes and performance as embodied in Republic Act 9155 and as recognized by the Local Government Code thru the local government units and stakeholders as partners in the delivery of education service. Responsibility and decision-making process over school operations are given to the principals, teachers, parents, students and community members in terms of budget allocation and procurement, curriculum development and implementation, school plant development, monitoring and evaluation of personnel performance and learning outcomes.


As cited in DepEd Order No. 83, s. 2012, it empowers the schools and communities to address access and quality issues in basic education captured in the vision for change called ACCESs (A Child and Community-Centered Educational Systems) characterizing four (4) principles that include (1) collective leadership and governance, (2) community-based learning, (3) accountability for performance and results, and (4) convergence to harness resources for education. Principle 1 establishes a network of leadership and governance for the attainment of shared vision, mission and goals; Principle 2 anchors curriculum and learning systems on the community and learners’ contexts and aspirations; Principle 3 establishes and/or strengthens accountability system through collaborative development; and Principle 4 mobilizes support for the targeted education outcomes and performance.


In the light of the foregoing, this study is influenced by herein cited principles of SBM-ACCESs as DRR covers both the structural and non-structural components enumerated in DepEd Order No. 55, s. 2007 which altogether propel school improvement and prepare build resilient communities.


2. Safe Schools Program. This program of the DepEd is anchored also on the principles of DRR as they relate to school disaster risk reduction and management covering four (4) thematic areas as enumerated in the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP) 2011-2028 to fulfill the requirement of RA 10121. These areas are (1) disaster prevention and mitigation, (2) disaster preparedness, (3) disaster response, and (4) disaster rehabilitation and recovery. Theme 1 covers risk assessment, establishment of early warning systems, involvement of communities on DRR management, resource allocation, and mainstreaming DRRM into the national planning systems among others; Theme 2 includes DRR researches, multi-stakeholders dialogue, capacity building activities, contingency planning, and DRR school curricula development among others; Theme 3 covers establishment of institutional mechanisms for disaster response operations, search , rescue and retrieval; while Theme 4 is on mainstreaming DRR in development plans, disaster assessments, recovery and rehabilitation processes.


In the light of this discussion, DepEd as a whole issued and reiterated the policy for Safe Schools Program for sustained implementation in the schools covering both structural and non-structural components that integrate the four (4) thematic areas of the NDRRMP for 2011-2028 as its contribution in implementing RA 10121 through DepEd Order No. 55, s. 2007.


Conceptual Framework

The input-throughput-output process was considered in this study which included the following: The input covered the nine (9) pilot schools and their experiences in implementing DRR; the throughput covered the conduct of survey and interview with the school heads and teachers of the DRR pilot schools together with their accomplishment reports; and the output consisted proposed strategies to enhance and sustain the implementation of DRR in the schools.


Research Design and Methodology


Research Method

This study made use of descriptive-evaluative type of research in order to get the perception of pilot implementers on Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Education in the school curriculum. Descriptive method describes the data and characteristics about what was studied and used to obtain information concerning the current status of the phenomena, further, this described "what existed" with respect to variables or conditions in a situation.1 This method was used to gain a better understanding on the status of DRR education in Region V.


Sources of Data

In finding out the status of DRR implementation in Region V, the researchers used secondary data using the reports submitted by pilot schools in the region.


Regarding the actual experiences, perceptions and status of DRRE and CCE implementation in various schools, primary data were gathered using sample sizes computed as follows:

  1. Nine (9) principals from nine (9) pilot schools in Region V
  2. Forty-four (44) teachers who integrated DRRE and CCE in their classroom teaching. These were taken from the fifty-three (53) pilot teachers of DRR and CCE in Region V using Slovin’s formula at 5% margin of error.


Research Instrument

To determine the perceptions and status of implementation of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Education (CCE) in Region V, various tools were used in this study. This comprised the questionnaires given to teachers, and principals of DRR pilot schools. The following were used in this study.


Interview Questionnaire- This refers to the survey questionnaires given to principals and pilot teachers who implemented Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Education in their respective schools. Contents include questions to determine their perceptions, experiences and status of implementation of DRR and CCE. (Please see the questionnaire below.)


Accomplishment Report- This refers to the reports submitted by DRR pilot schools in the Bicol Region.


Data Gathering Procedure

In determining the status and perception of respondents on the integration of Disaster Risk Reduction Education (DRR) and Climate Change Education (CCE) in Region V, interview questionnaires were administered to nine (9) principals of nine (9) pilot schools and forty-four (44) pilot teachers of DRRE and CCE. Random sampling was used in the selection process of the four (4) to five (5) pilot teachers gotten from each pilot school totaling to a sum of fifty-three (53) respondents consisting of principals and teachers.


Prior to the administration of the interview questionnaire to the respondents, these were validated by three (3) supervisors in-charge of DRR in the region. Comments and suggestions were incorporated and only then that it was used among teachers and principals of DRR pilot schools.


In the collation of the data, reports were analyzed and tabulated with the purpose of establishing a clearer picture of the real status of DRR implementation in the region. Likewise, interview questionnaires were administered to know more about the problems, issues and concerns of principals and teachers regarding DRRE implementation.


Results and Discussion

The Department of Education is presently in a strategic position to infuse Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Education (CCE) in the school curriculum. With this in mind, baseline studies on the process of DRR curriculum development and policies are crucial in the success of the program because they will provide guideposts in conducting next-steps, whether in policy direction setting, curriculum development, preparation of lesson exemplars, lesson planning, instructional materials development and other activities. In order to do this, there is a need to assess how DRR implementation among pilot schools fared particularly its areas of success and failures.


To determine the technical constraints, challenges, opportunities and best practices for including DRRE and CCE in the school curriculum, data from teachers and principals of DRR and CCE pilot schools were gathered. These are shown in Table 1 below:


Table 1 .1

Technical Constraints/ Problems Encountered for Including DRR and CCE in the School Curriculum

Constraints/Hindrances

1. The present curriculum does not have specific time allotment on DRR as a topic. Instead, it is integrated into existing subject matter and topics, e. g. science, social studies, agriculture, etc. = 48 or 91%

2. Lack of Learning Modules and Lesson Exemplars given to teachers/Scarcity of learning materials = 48 or 91%

3. Congested curriculum. = 51 or 96%

4. Overlapping activities/Hectic Schedule of the work of Teachers = 47 or 89%

5. Negative attitude of some teachers. = 30 or 57%

* 53 respondents from 9 pilot schools of Region V


As depicted in Table 1.1 above, congested curriculum is one of the major constraints/problems encountered by pilot teachers and principals in its implementation. This was followed by the problem on time allotment and lack of DRR learning materials given to teachers and students, overlapping activities and negative attitude of teachers.


Considering these problems provided a clear picture of some areas of concern which must be addressed for the effective implementation of DRR and CCE in the school curriculum.


Table 1.2 further shows a comprehensive eye view of the opportunities and challenges faced by pilot schools in its three-year implementation of DRRE. Taking these into account, one can see that there are still many challenges which need to be faced not only by schools, but also by the curriculum experts of DRRE.


Table 1.2

Opportunities and Challenges Faced for Including DRR and CCE in the School Curriculum

Opportunities

Challenges

  • More programs to capacitate teachers on DRRE and CCE as well as on the utilization of instructional materials.
  • Continuing efforts on the development, review and finalization of policies and guidelines in mainstreaming DRR/CCA in the school system.
  • Teachers and students are pro-active in engaging in both instructional and co/extra curricular activities.
  • Development of more sustainable programs, projects and interventions on DRR/CCA in the school system.
  • Education leaders and stakeholders in the school system are already aware of their roles and delineations before, during and after any disaster or hazard.
    • Solidifying significant plans and courses of actions for a sustainable development and approach for DRR/CCA initiatives.
    • More stakeholders are willing to support DRR and CCE programs in the school curriculum.
    • Capacitating the competencies and effectiveness of various DRR/CCA players in schools.
  • Establishing and strengthening collaboration and coordination with various stakeholders and partners in DRR/CCA.
  • Sustaining the positive results and scaling up the DRR projects and activities to effect rippling positive changes in students learning and values
  • Harmonizing all efforts done by different stakeholders especially in the development of materials related to DRR.

Considering the above identified challenges and opportunities faced by schools in the implementation of DRR will aid curriculum experts of DRRE in coming up with better plans in their next steps of implementation. On the positive note, Bicol Region, particularly Albay, is one of the most ready provinces in the Philippines when it comes to disaster preparedness despite facing many challenges. Among the best practices mentioned in its implementation are shown in Table 2.


Table 2

Best Practices for Including DRR and CCE

Best Practices


  1. DRR concepts are being integrated in the lessons. This has become a part of everyday lesson. = 53 or 100%
  2. Earthquake and Fire Drill periodically conducted in school. = 53 or 100%
  3. Created a school community DRR team. = 53 or 100%
  4. Proper waste segregation/disposal practiced in the school community. = 53 or 100%
  5. Symposium on DRR and CCE = 45 or 85%
  6. First Aid Training among Teachers and Students = 46 or 87%
  7. Pera sa Basura/ Reduce, Reuse, Recycle = 44 or 83%
  8. Awareness of the duties and responsibilities of the different DRRMC = 50 or 94%
  9. Simulation of warning system in the school = 53 or 100%
  10. Implementation of “Bawal ang Plastic sa Albay” = 44 or 83%
  11. Monthly Tree Planting/Quarterly Tree Planting = 45 or 85%
  12. Integration of Emergency Preparedness in the lesson = 53 or 100%
  13. Hazard Mapping = 46 or 87%
  14. Creation of BERT (Bulilit Emergency Response Team) = 29 or 55%
  15. Clean-up Drive = 53 or 100%
  16. School Nursery was set-up, maintaining a school mini-forest = 45 or 85%
  17. Launched Best DRR Implementer, Clean and Green Implementer, Gawad Kalasag = 47 or 89%
  18. Promotion of Organic Vegetable Gardening/Gulayan sa Paaralan/Pamayanan = 53 or 100%
  19. Linis Ilog and Linis Canal as community service for NSTP students = 44 or 83%
  20. More stakeholder involvement/partnership; Involvement of Networking Organizations = 50 or 94%

* 53 respondents from 9 pilot schools of Region V


The table above discloses the best practices mentioned by respondents in the implementation of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Education (CCE) in the school curriculum for the last three (3) years of implementation.


It can be gleaned that majority of the pilot implementers of DRR and CCE had the same best practices which can also be adopted by other schools in the implementation of DRR programs. All of the pilot schools effectively practiced the integration of DRR concepts, periodically conducted earthquake and fire drills, created school-community DRR teams, practiced proper waste segregation, integrated emergency preparedness and promoted organic vegetable gardening.


With the many best practices being practiced by pilot schools of DRR, it is therefore implied that success in its implementation happened because of the support from various stakeholders. Moreover, DRR and CCE integration in the school curriculum became a priority for the Department of Education with the aim of establishing safety and resilience among schools in the community.


Table 2.1

Stakeholders Participation in the Implementation of DRR and CCE Program among Pilot Schools Stakeholder Involvement

  1. UNESCO = 100%
  2. UNICEF = 100%
  3. APSEMO (Albay Public Safety and Emergency Management Office) = 100%
  4. TABI (Tabang Para Sa Bicol) = 100%
  5. CIRCA (Center for Initiatives and Research on Climate Adaptation) = 100%


As evident in Table 2.1, there was 100% stakeholder involvement of UNESCO, UNICEF, APSEMO, TABI and CIRCA among DRR pilot schools. Survey conducted among all these schools mentioned all these organizations/offices as their major stakeholders who provided much support in the implementation of various programs and activities related to disaster risk reduction and climate change education.


To address various concerns which cropped up from this study, some strategies and recommendations are hereby proposed. These are shown in Table 3 below.


Table 3

Strategies/Recommendations Proposed for the Effective Integration of DRR in the School Curriculum

Problem/Issue and Action to be taken

  1. 1. Lack of DRR Learning Materials
  • Coordinate with all DRRE implementing schools and share resources. Pool the resources to be able to create a hub of learning materials along DRR and CCE.
  • Tap stakeholders to help in the reproduction of these learning materials.
  1. 2. Time Allotment and Hectic Schedule of Teachers
  • Prepare a practical budget of work at the very start of the school year and prioritize activities in order to lighten the schedule without sacrificing important DRR and CCE topics.
  1. 3. Negative Attitude of Some Teachers
  • Conduct training of trainers of DRRE and CCE who will train and equip more teachers along these topics. Doing so will motivate them to become more confident in teaching.


Conclusion

Based from the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

  1. Much of the technical constraints/problems encountered by DRR pilot implementers in Region V include the following: a) lack of specific time allotment for DRR and CCE topics; b) scarcity of DRR learning materials; c) congested curriculum; d) overlapping school activities/hectic schedule of teachers; and, e) negative attitude of some teachers who teach the subject.


To counteract some of these problems, many opportunities were identified which must not be ignored. These include the following: a) more programs to capacitate teachers on DRRE and CCE as well as on the utilization of instructional materials; b) pro-active teachers in engaging in various co and extracurricular activities; c) awareness of education leaders and stakeholders of their roles and delineations before, during and after disaster.


Also, capacitating the school personnel necessitates coordination and partnership with concerned individuals, organizations or government agencies who may provide trainings, seminars or workshops on DRR and CCE related themes or topics.

  1. Among the best practices shared by pilot implementers of DRRE and CCE are as follows:

a) DRR and CCE became part of everyday lesson; b) Periodic conduct of earthquake and fire drills; c) Creation of school community DRR teams; d) Practice of proper waste segregation; d) yearly conduct of symposium on DRR and CCE, and first aid training; e) implementation of “Bawal ang Plastic sa Albay”; f) quarterly conduct of tree planting; g) launched Best DRR and Clean and Green Implementer, and Gawad Kalasag; h) Clean-up drive; i) creation of school mini forest; j) promotion of organic vegetable gardening; and, k) involvement of stakeholders in various programs and projects along DRR and CCE.

2. In order to address some of the issues and problems which cropped up from this study, the following strategies and recommendations are hereby proposed: a) Pool and share resources by coordinating with all DRR implementing schools. Together they will be able to create a hub of DRR learning resources for the entire region to use; b) Tap more stakeholders who are willing to help in the reproduction of these learning materials; c) Prepare a practical budget of work at the onset of the school year, prioritize activities in order to lighten the schedule without sacrificing DRR and CCE essential topics. This will address problems on the time allotment and hectic schedule of teachers; d) Training of trainers on DRRE and CCE is needed for they will eventually help train other teachers along this area. Doing so will motivate teachers and equip them with the necessary skill and confidence of teaching DRR and CCE concepts among their students.


Recommendations

On the basis of the foregoing findings, the following recommendations are hereby drawn:

  1. With the urgent need to integrate DRRE and CCE in the school curriculum, it is suggested that results of this study be addressed and be included in the preparation of school improvement plan to ensure smoother, more successful implementation to the best interest of the students and the whole community. Moreover, training and education of teachers along these topics should be part of their development plan. This will equip them with the necessary facts and information along disaster preparedness and resilience which they will share as leaders in the community.
  2. Implementation of strategies proposed in this study is strongly recommended for these were based on the views and felt needs of the school community. Doing so, would strengthen the integration of DRRE and CCE in the school curriculum.
  3. Monitoring and evaluation on the implementation of DRRE and CCE in the school curriculum should be given more attention by concerned DepEd personnel and government agencies. Results of which will serve as a basis for providing technical inputs in integrating DRRE/CCE concepts in line with the K-12 curriculum.
  4. Sharing of resources may also be necessary for school-community to work hand-in-hand in the development and implementation of DRR and CCE initiatives in both the schools and communities. Emphasis on the utilization of the DRRM funds as provided in RA 10121, and guidelines relating to its utilization need consideration in the preparation of the school improvement plans (SIPs), annual implementation plans (AIPs), annual budget, and annual procurement plans (APP). Results of these resource mobilization activities will feed into the practice of School-Based Management (SBM).
  5. Continuous capacity building for all school personnel (teaching and non-teaching) and community stakeholders must be in place in collaboration with concerned individuals, government and non-government agencies to establish learning communities in the schools. Results of this activity will strengthen external linkages for SBM practice and sustain the implementation of Safe Schools Program.

______________________________________________________________________________

References:

DepEd Order N. 55, s. 2007.

DepEd Order No. 83, s. 2012.

Republic Act 10121.

UNICEF et al. Comprehensive School Safety.

Jose D. Tuguinayo Jr. et al., Disaster Risk Reduction in the School Curricula: The Philippine Country Report

UNESCO et al. Towards a Learning Culture of Safety and Resilience: Technical Guidance for Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction in the School Curriculum


ACF and Save the Children. Comprehensive Household Vulnerability and Risk Analysis. 2010.

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP) 2011-2028.


Interview Questionnaire

  1. What are the technical constraints for including DRR in the national educational curriculum as tasked by Priority 3 of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFO) 2005-2015?

  2. In your specific context, which of the five dimensions of DRR were frequently, infrequently and rarely addressed during DRR integration in curriculum development?

  3. In your specific context, could it be feasible to link DRRE and CCE together within an ESD framework, as a cost-effective and time-effective strategy to reduce the demands on teachers and pressure on an overloaded curriculum? Please elaborate.

  4. In your specific context, could it be useful to link DRR initiatives to the concept of quality education? Please elaborate.

  5. If any, what are the subjects that include interconnections between infused DRR themes across the curriculum, enabling one subject to build upon what is learned in other subjects?

  6. In your specific context, which of the four key approaches to horizontal DRR integration would be desirable and feasible? Please take into account available resources, capacity and momentum for DRR integration?

  7. In your specific context, are there any synergies established between co-curricular and curricular learning by using special events to catalyze DRR curriculum development? Please elaborate.

  8. In your specific context, is there any vertical integration of DRR through a curriculum progression within grade levels? Please elaborate. (Please refer to section 2.4 and Figure 8)

  9. Looking at the different stages of DRR curriculum development, what stage is your country at? What has been done so far?

  10. In your specific context, what type of partnerships and networking organizations have been established for a greater coordination of efforts to influence and effect change?

  11. Has consensus been built around the curriculum to be developed, if so, how?

  12. If you already went through the preparatory stages of the curriculum development process, how useful was it to undertake a baseline study or curriculum review to examine the ‘state of the art’ of existing DRR curriculum and related policy? If not, what were the obstacles for conducting this assessment?

  13. In your country, if any, which of the competency-based or subject-based approaches have been taken in the development of learning outcomes? Which approach is the most suitable?

  14. Has vertical integration of learning outcomes been applied? If yes, please provide an example.

  15. Have assessments been aligned with DRR outcomes? If yes, please provide examples of student assessment tools.

  16. Looking at the tasks in this chapter, which ones can be useful in your development of learning outcomes?

  17. Which of the steps in the Ten Step Approach for DRR Learning Program Development are applicable in your country?

  18. What types of specialists were involved in developing DRR learning programs and materials?

  19. What learning styles are currently being adopted for DRR learning programs?

  20. Do you think that the templates provided (pp. 95-96) can be useful in DRR lesson and activity development in your own context?

  21. Have comprehensive teacher manuals on DRR as a theme, curriculum, pedagogy and assessment been developed? Please provide feedback on the usefulness of these manuals and the degree of practical guidance from a teacher perspective.

  22. What types of student DRR Action in the Community exist in your country? Please highlight a few good practices.

  23. In your specific context, which elements can be useful to facilitate the learning activities applied by teachers during the learning process?

  24. In your specific context, do students express a frightening emotional response when learning about actual and potential hazards? Please elaborate.

  25. What types of teacher professional development for DRR has been utilized and for what duration?

  26. Are any curriculum changes linked to training and continued support of teachers to ensure that changes are supported at classroom level? Please elaborate.

  27. What are the existing resources to coordinate and support necessary training, orientation, or re-orientation of trained teachers in DRR?

  28. Are there immediate programmes for DRR skills development for specific areas such as pedagogy, educational modalities and content done through workshops, online, study visits, and other alternative forums? Please give few examples.

  29. Are there any examples of whole-school approaches in your country?

  30. Are there any examples of schools where children contribute to the DRR Learning Community in your country?

  31. Please rate on a scale of 1 (extremely unsafe) to 10 (extremely safe) the safety of school facilities in your country? What are the main barriers for ensuring the safety of school facilities?

  32. Are there any school disaster management programmes set by school principals in your country? Please elaborate.

  33. Is the local community, including local leaders, engaged in periodic school forums where people and students raise their concerns, action ideas and experiences? Please give examples if any.

  34. Looking at your specific context, which scaling-up approach would be most suitable and why?

  35. What are the enabling and disabling factors for scaling-up/mainstreaming DRR curriculum?

  36. Look at Discussion Tool 9 on page 159 and create a SWOT analysis of DRR curriculum scaling-up/mainstreaming.

  37. How can international/regional collaboration support mainstreaming in your country?

  38. Please describe any monitoring and evaluation practices for DRR curriculum in your country. What is the current need?

  39. Who is responsible for conducting the monitoring and evaluation of DRR curriculum in your country? Are stakeholders engaged in the process?

More by this Author

  • Welcome to Tabaco City
    6

    Tabaco City, a newly born city in the cradle of history, with colorful and festive fiestas, with places endowed with beauty and splendor, with unique character and sense of nationalism. It is a home for all.

  • Modularized Instruction in Philippine Schools
    10

    Today, I would like to share with you some readings I did in relation to modularized instruction. This is because I have found many studies conducted in the schools focus on this and were submitted for their masters and...

  • Making Schools Drug-Free
    2

    Schools are venues caring for children and their future, and not for their destruction. Drugs and addiction to it will dislodge their future and their lives. Spare the children, their education and their future.


Comments 6 comments

Bernard Opinaldo profile image

Bernard Opinaldo 2 years ago from Quezon City, Philippines

Hi Sir!

Your research is very helpful since it targets integration of disaster risk reduction to our current education curriculum. I would like to ask permission to use your assessment tool tool for my proposed research for the development of disaster risk reduction in-service training program for primary school teachers. I am grateful for your reply sir.


Bernard Opinaldo profile image

Bernard Opinaldo 2 years ago from Quezon City, Philippines

Hello Sir Dan!

I would like to seek permission to adopt your assessment tool for my thesis regarding disaster risk reduction. I hope that I could reach you through email so that I can send you sir a formal letter request. Thank you and God bless!


DON BALDERAS profile image

DON BALDERAS 2 years ago Author

Dear Bernard,

The research team had actually used a tool provided by the Department of Education and the United Nations in the Philippines. I left it with a team member in DepEd Bicol. Thank you for reading and taking interest in the published work. The same research was presented in Bangkok, Thailand in a gathering espoused by the United Nations Bangkok in April of 2013. I hope that its results will be of greater help to you as we all strive to make our place safer for our constituents.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Don


DON BALDERAS profile image

DON BALDERAS 22 months ago Author

Xexilla: Thank you very much for such comment on this particular hub. It is always my pleasure to receive comments like yours. Am I right htat IJWTS means 'I just want to say'? Thank you very much. That is my IJWTS.


Marlon Lora evsu region 8 18 months ago

Good am Sir. Just like the others am also asking for a possibility of adopting your questionnaire for research purposes but this one is for nstp. I believe this can be of great help in promoting and protecting one's well being. Thank you in advance and God bless bicol. I can be reach at melora372@gmail.com


DON BALDERAS profile image

DON BALDERAS 16 months ago Author

Sir Marlon,

I am so glad to be of service to you. May I just request your email add so I can provide you with the needed questionnaire. Thank you very much. Good luck.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working