https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2022.p1000
Paper:Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education
Program for Children with No Experience of Earthquake
Disaster – Practice and Verification at Shichigahama Town,
Miyagi Prefecture
Toshimitsu Nagata∗1,∗2,∗3,† , Masaki Ikeda∗4 , Reo Kimura∗2,∗4 , and Takashi Oda∗3,∗4∗1

Niigata Local Meteorological Office, Japan Meteorological Agency
1-2-1 Misaki-cho, Chuo-ku, Niigata, Niigata 950-0954, Japan†
Corresponding author, E-mail: nagata@met.kishou.go.jp∗2 Faculty and Graduate School of Human Science and Environment, University of Hyogo, Himeji, Japan∗3
Graduate School of Education, Miyagi University of Education, Sendai, Japan∗4 Disaster Resilience Research Division, National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Resilience (NIED), Tsukuba, Japan[Received March 22, 2022; accepted August 15, 2022]

In this study, we developed a tsunami disaster risk reduction (DRR) education program for children withlittle or no memory/experience of the Great East
Japan Earthquake. The objective was to strengthen
their disaster response capacity and enable them tothink and act to protect their lives from tsunami disasters. The development of this program employed
the ADDIE model of Instructional Design in learning theory. Based on the GIGA school concept promoted by Japan, information and communications
technology (ICT)-based education and DRR education
were integrated into the program from a geographical perspective. Using the ICT-based teaching materials, YOU@RISK Tsunami Disaster Edition, empirical learning was introduced. The town of Shichigahama in Miyagi Prefecture, which was devastated by
the tsunami during the Great East Japan Earthquake,
was selected as the study target. The study implemented and verified the program with local elementary school students to assess its effectiveness.

Keywords: Great East Japan Earthquake, tsunami, disaster risk reduction education, instructional design (ID),ICT education

1. Introduction
1.1. Great East Japan Earthquake and theResulting Damage
On March 11, 2011, Tohoku Offshore Earthquake
recorded a magnitude of 9.0 and became the greatest
earthquake ever recorded in Japan. The earthquake resulted in a giant tsunami, which wrought devastation anddamage over an extensive area around the Pacific Coast in
Eastern Japan. This composite disaster, which included
an earthquake, a tsunami, and a nuclear plant accident,
1000

was called the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami
Disaster and adversely impacted the lives of the Japanesepeople [1, 2].
While various measures of disaster reconstruction, including physical infrastructure and social programs, havebeen promulgated in Japan, the tenth year of the disaster marks a turning point as we enter a new phase of reconstruction and renewal [3]. Meanwhile, in the disasteraffected areas, children, who have no memory/experienceof the disaster, have reached school age. Thus, the “transmission of disaster,” through which the lessons culledfrom past earthquake disasters are handed down to thechildren who make up the next generation of citizens,and the strengthening of disaster risk reduction (DRR)
education, will equip these children with the knowledge
to make appropriate decisions and proactively act during
disasters [4–6]. To learn from past disasters and be prepared for future disasters, it is necessary to promulgate
DRR education that would incorporate new perspectivesof “soft” measures that are important for disaster reconstruction and renewal.

1.2. Current Status and Issues of Tsunami DRR
Education
Following the Great East Japan Earthquake, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) compiled the “Expert Committee on DRR
Education and Disaster Risk Management in Response to
the Great East Japan Earthquake (Final Report)” [7]. The
report put forth “the attitude of acting proactively” as a
general direction for DRR education in schools. Learningfrom the earthquake disaster, the report noted the importance of tsunami DRR education, whereby students aretaught to use tsunami hazard maps to estimate inundationlevels and undertake evacuation actions in various scenarios according to local disaster features. Furthermore, thedocument “Deploying DRR education to nurture the ‘zest
for life”’ [8] presented practical cases of and teaching maJournal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

© Fuji Technology Press Ltd. Creative Commons CC BY-ND: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 InternationalLicense (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/)

Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education Programfor Children with No Experience of Earthquake Disasterterial about tsunami disasters.
In DRR education in the Tohoku region, which was
hit by the tsunami caused by the Great East Japan Earthquake, it was noted that tsunami preparedness education,
based on the idea of “tsunami-tendenko,” also known as
the “miracle of Kamaishi,” greatly contributed to the reduction of human suffering. The Iwate Prefecture Boardof Education presented, on its portal, practical cases of
DRR education that followed the notion of “tsunamitendenko” [9]. The Miyagi Prefecture, which was also
affected by the tsunami, published the DRR education
supplementary reading, “Mirai eno Kizuna” (Link to the
Future) [10] in 2013, based on the “Miyagi Basic Guidelines for School Safety (2012),” which was based on
the lessons of the earthquake disaster and presented examples of DRR education teaching material for learning about tsunami disasters. Similarly, the adjacent prefecture, Fukushima, published “DRR Education Instruction Resources – Fukushima Prefecture DRR Education
to Nurture the Strength to Survive (3rd edition)” in 2016
and presented practical cases of tsunami DRR education
on its website [11]. While the affected areas have practiced DRR education, using the guidelines and supplementary reading material prepared by the national andprefectural governments, there remain certain aspects ofthe tsunami disaster that have not received due coveragein school education due to the magnitude of devastationand loss of human lives caused by the Great East Japan
Earthquake [12]. In addition, the teaching material provided to the schools mostly consists of content premisedon classroom-type instruction in which students take apassive role. However, there are a few teaching materials
that incorporate “proactive, dialogue-based, deep learning” (active learning), as recommended in the new government course guidelines [13, 14].

1.3. DRR Education that Utilizes Information andCommunications Technology (ICT)As natural disasters continue to occur with increasing
frequency and severity, Japan’s expectations for using ICT
in DRR and disaster mitigation are high.
The MEXT has set a goal to develop education using
ICT (ICT education) in all educational settings in Japanby promoting the GIGA School Concept [15]. As a specific measure, the MEXT is promoting the developmentof a learning environment where every student in Japan
can use an information terminal (e.g., a tablet) at school.
The creation of classes using tablets calls for the proactive
use of ICT material for developing children’s ability tothink independently and solve problems on their own initiative. Furthermore, to enhance ICT education at schools,
various types of support for schools that practice ICT education are being promoted, such as the creation of the“Guide to the Informatization of Education: Supplementary Edition” [16] and the establishment of a portal [17] tosupport ICT education. Yet, when we review the progressunder the GIGA School Concept, we find that, although
the distribution of information terminals is increasing, theJournal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

development or application of digital material for DRR
education or the environment for practical case presentation as a valid means to promote DRR education, has notbeen established.
Meanwhile, the Geography Education Subcommittee,
Science Council of Japan, has proposed the need for ICT
education, using geographical information system (GIS)
at the compulsory education level [18]. This proposal
points out that the ability to accurately read geographical spatial information is necessary and is directly connected with nurturing the “zest for life” necessary to protect one’s life during disasters. In addition, it points outthat the use of information terminals for education is suitable for learning environments where the students learn
proactively and collectively and stresses the importanceof ICT education in elementary and secondary education [19].
This indicates that the learning opportunities provided
by ICT will continue to increase due to the GIGA School
Concept being promulgated as a national policy. Therefore, it will be necessary to address DRR education implementation, which is not recognized as a curriculum subject in connection to ICT education.
Recent examples of ICT application in DRR education include studies on the practice of tsunami evacuation drills based on the use of tablets or portable terminals [20, 21], the use of ICT in DRR map-making [22],and the development of disaster-related video contents
that can be viewed on online terminals [23]. In addition, some studies utilize ICT, such as a system that gives
the user a simulated experience of tsunami disasters using virtual reality [24]. Yet, most of these studies deal
with learning situations in which the user captures photos
or videos, plays back videos, or searches for information
online. There have been very few learning materials or
studies in Japan that employ ICT for DRR education byusing maps to acquire a spatial understanding of the disaster risks or connect such an understanding of evacuation
behavior.

1.4. Objective of this Study
In Japan, the GIGA School Concept, promoted by the
MEXT, is creating a learning environment where every
student has access to an information terminal.
In this study, we developed a tsunami preparedness education program for Shichigahama Town, Miyagi County,
Miyagi Prefecture, which was hit by a tsunami following the Great East Japan Earthquake. The program targets children with limited memories/experiences of thedisaster and is based on the issues of DRR education intsunami-affected areas. It is a learning program that educates children about the risks of an earthquake-related
tsunami and imparts disaster response skills to enable
children to make decisions and evacuate in the event ofa tsunami. In addition, to introduce ICT education, using tablets, which are the information terminals prepared
under the GIGA School Concept, to DRR education, thepresent study incorporated learning using “YOU@RISK:
1001

Nagata, T. et al.

'HVLJQ'HYHORS5HYLVH$QDO\]H,PSOHPHQW(YDOXDWH
Fig. 1. ADDIE model.

Tsunami Disaster Version (developed by the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Resilience[NIED]),” an ICT teaching material that links map information with tsunami disasters.
Based on the knowledge and skills acquired in thesestudies, through hands-on learning in “community walking” with the residents, students can spatially perceive thenatural environment and tsunami hazards in their immediate area, understand the tsunami damage and the vulnerability of the area, and increase their awareness of preparedness for tsunami hazards.
In the development of this program, we adopted the
ADDIE model of Instructional Design (ID) as the learningtheory. We evaluated the program’s effectiveness via implementation and testing with children who had never experienced a tsunami. Furthermore, to examine the scopeof DRR education using YOU@RISK: Tsunami Disaster
Version, we verified the program’s application with children of different grades. Through the development of the
program, in this study, we aim to standardize teaching
methods for tsunami preparedness education, which has
been a concern at schools in areas at risk of a tsunami.

2. Study Method
2.1. Development and Evaluation of the
Educational Program Based on the ID Theory
The tsunami DRR educational program was developed
by applying the ADDIE model of ID theory. ID is a learning theory used in education, psychology, and educational
technology and is defined as the “model or research fieldthat combines methods to increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and appeal of educational activities, or the processof realizing a learning environment, such as instructional
materials and classroom lectures, based on the applicationof this research” [25]. The ADDIE model’s five-step process – Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate – can be used to design and develop effective educational programs [26] (Fig. 1).
Our tsunami preparedness education program was developed based on each step of the ADDIE model. A single cycle consisted of the following: (1) analysis of theneeds for tsunami preparedness education and establishment of research targets and learning objectives, (2) design of syllabus and examination of the implementation
plan at target schools and the learning methods, (3) development of teaching materials, such as lesson plans, work1002

Fig. 2. Tsunami damage (due to Great East Japan Earthquake, source: Record of Earthquake Disaster in Shichigahama Town).

sheets, supplementary materials, and evaluation sheets,(4) implementation of the program at the schools includedin the study, and (5) evaluation (self-evaluation) by children, qualitative survey of teachers, and measurement ofeffectiveness. In this study, the steps from (1) analysis to(3) development of ADDIE were repeated, and followedby (4) implementation and (5) evaluation.
To evaluate the validity of the developed tsunami DRR
educational program, its effectiveness was measured byencouraging the learners (students) to self-evaluate theirachievement levels of the learning objectives. Based on
the definition of ID, researcher Robert M. Gagné stated,“program evaluation is expressed solely by the evaluationof the learner’s performance” [27]. This measure of effectiveness is a commonly used method to evaluate educational programs developed using ID theory.
Several studies have employed the ID theory. For example, Kimura et al. [28] developed a disaster education
program based on the experience of local historical disasters. Higashino and Yoshimoto [29] developed e-learningmaterials for elementary school teachers. Ikeda et al. [30]developed DRR education programs in response to heavy
rainfall disasters. In academic research, outside the fieldof ID education, Umeno and Asada [31] developed an
educational program for large-scale disaster training inmedical institutions, Ogasawara [32] developed a learning support program for a company using ID theory, andIshii et al. [33] developed a technical management education program in an engineering course. In recent years inJapan, ID theory has become potentially applicable to awide range of fields of academic research.

2.2. Areas and Schools Targeted by this Study
Shichigahama Town, Miyagi County, located along the
Pacific coast between the northern and southern bordersof Miyagi Prefecture, is adjacent to the cities of Sendai,
Shiogama, and Tagajo, and consists of seven settlements
along the coastline, which is surrounded on three sides by
the sea. The topography is characterized by rocky uplands
and coastal plains, with no rivers, and the low-lying areas
are dotted by inland sea lakes and oxbow lakes.
While Shichigahama was subjected to maximum seismic intensity in the upper five during the Great East Japan
Earthquake, the giant tsunami generated by the earthquake inundated 36.4% of the town area, leaving 111 people dead or missing and destroying 674 houses (Fig. 2).
Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education Programfor Children with No Experience of Earthquake DisasterFig. 3. Shichigahama Town, Miyagi Prefecture.

The NIED has been supporting tsunami preparedness
education for elementary schools in response to a requestfrom Shichigahama after the Great East Japan Earthquake. In this study, Eiraku Elementary School (fifthgrade students) and Matsugahama Elementary School(fourth-grade students) in the Shichigahama area wereselected as the subject schools (subject students) for the
study (Fig. 3). They were selected due to their continued
DRR education centered on community walking and disaster map-making in cooperation with elementary schools
and residents of the area.

3. Development of Tsunami DRR Education
Program
3.1. Program Outline
Eleven years have passed since the earthquake disaster. However, the current generation of children living
in disaster-affected areas did not directly experience thetsunami damage. Shichigahama Town is no exception
where the local teachers felt the need to reexamine DRR
education for children without experience of the disaster.
In the past, DRR education had been practiced in
Shichigahama by using the DRR education supplementary reading material, “Link to the Future,” produced by
Miyagi Prefecture. In addition, residents and schools
jointly conducted experiential learning activities using the“Study Guide for DRR Map Making” produced by the
town government based on the experience of tsunami
damages. However, interviews with school personnel revealed that preparatory learning programs, whereby students can acquire the basic knowledge of earthquakes andtsunamis, learn about the area’s tsunami risks, and acquire
the skills to visualize a tsunami and evacuate, were lackJournal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

ing. Although the teachers used the DRR educational supplementary reading material to conduct classes, they had
to develop and teach the course content based on their experience and knowledge since the study objectives were
not clearly defined and a standard teachers’ guide was unavailable. Moreover, the teachers had been unable to begin teaching the courses using the tablets distributed under
the GIGA School Concept.
Therefore, we consulted with the teachers to develop
a program configured to obtain the study objectivesof learning the basic information on earthquakes andtsunamis and acquiring the skills necessary to protect oneself. Furthermore, we introduced ICT education and experiential learning, which link geographical learning with
DRR education and encourage the students to employ
tablets. To achieve the specific learning objectives, wedeveloped a teacher’s guide, worksheets, and slides forclassroom use based on course units. Through this program, children with little memory/experience of the disaster will understand the tsunami damage that occurredin their community and its vulnerability. In addition,
the program will improve their thinking ability to protect
themselves during a tsunami.

3.2. Program Composition
The tsunami DRR education program developed in thisstudy consists of four units (1–4), which can be broken
down into six study periods, each with an independent
study objective (Table 1).
3.2.1. Outline of Unit 1 – “Preparatory Learning”
Unit 1 consists of preparatory learning (classroom instruction) where students acquire the basic knowledge
about earthquakes and tsunamis, learn how to act toprotect themselves, acquire DRR information knowledge
necessary to make decisions, and develop an awareness toprotect one’s life from earthquake and tsunami disasters.
It consists of two learning sessions.
In learning session 1 – “Learn the dangers of earthquakes and how to protect yourself” – the study objectives are to (1) understand the mechanism of earthquakes
and Earthquake Early Warning (EEW), (2) understand thedamage due to and the effects of earthquakes, (3) understand the actions to be taken when one senses strong
tremors caused by an earthquake or hears an EEW, and(4) use one’s judgment to avoid earthquake danger. The
teaching materials are adapted from certain study guides
and worksheets of the earthquake preparedness education
program developed by the author in previous studies [34,35]. Improvements to the program include the additionof the importance of associating the strong shaking of anearthquake with the subsequent occurrence of a tsunami to
the study guide. The study time is one period of 45 minutes.
In learning session 2 – “Learn the dangers of tsunamis
and how to protect yourself” – the study objectives areto (5) understand the mechanism of tsunami generation,(6) understand the damage due to and the effects of1003

Nagata, T. et al.

Table 1. Unit composition.
Unit

No. ofperiod(s)Learning
Learning 1
Learn the dangers of earthquakes andhow to protect yourself

1

Learning 2
Learn the dangers of tsunamis andhow to protect yourself

1

Learning 3
Examine the tsunami risks of thelocal area using YOU@RISK

2

Learning 4
Discuss evacuation to avoid tsunamis

2

Unit 1

Unit 2

Unit 3

Unit 4

Learning 5
Check one’s own area by taking adisaster-mitigation town walk
Learning 6
Summarize what you have found to
make a DRR map
Learning 7
Presenting the DRR map

3

2
1

Study objective(1) Understand the mechanism of earthquakes and Earthquake Early Warning(2) Understand the damage or effects due to earthquakes(3) Understand the actions one must take when one senses strong tremors caused by anearthquake or hears an Earthquake Early Warning(4) Able to use your own judgment to avoid danger due to earthquakes(5) Understand the mechanism of how tsunamis are generated(6) Understand the damage or effects due to tsunamis(7) Understand the actions one must take when one senses strong tremors caused by anearthquake or hears a Tsunami Warning(8) Understand how to escape safely from a tsunami(9) Able to confirm estimated tsunami inundation levels using YOU@RISK(10) Able to confirm the position or elevation of evacuation site using YOU@RISK(11) Able to confirm the route to the evacuation site using YOU@RISK(12) Able to confirm estimated tsunami inundation levels of home or road used forcommuting to school using YOU@RISK(13) Able to confirm evacuation site near home or road used for commuting to school or its
elevation using YOU@RISK(14) Able to engage in a group discussion about the places to evacuate or dangerous places
when a tsunami may arrive(15) Know the safe places and the dangerous places in my town when a tsunami may arrive(16) Able to listen to adults in the area and ask them about the risks of earthquakes andtsunamis(17) Able to summarize items that one has found about tsunamis into a map and make apresentation(18) Able to make decisions and act to protect oneself when a tsunami may be arrivingᵲᶑᶓᶌᵿᶋᶇᴾᵵᶍᶐᶉᶑᶆᶃᶃᶒᴾᵆᵰᶃᶂᴾᶇᶑᴾᶒᶆᶃᴾᵿᶌᶑᶕᶃᶐᴾᵇ
<HDU

&ODVV

1DPH

 ᵫᶃᶁᶆᵿᶌᶇᶑᶋᴾᵿᶌᶂᴾᶄᶃᵿᶒᶓᶐᶃᶑᴾᶍᶄᴾᶒᶑᶓᶌᵿᶋᶇᶑ
 $WVXQDPLRFFXUVZKHQVHDZDWHULVSXVKHGXSZDUGE\⋇ DQHDUWKTXDNH 
 8QOLNHUHJXODUZDYHVDWVXQDPLKDVDVWURQJ ⋈ IRUFH  $WVXQDPLFDQFRPHLQDVHULHVRIZDYHVDQGWKHODWHUZDYHVFDQEH ⋉ KLJKHU  %HFDXVHWVXQDPLVWUDYHOYHU\ ⋊ IDVW LWPD\EHWRR
ODWHWRHVFDSHDIWHUVHHLQJRQH
 7VXQDPLVFDQ ⋋ WUDYHOXS DULYHURYHUYHU\ORQJGLVWDQFHV 7VXQDPLVDUH ⋌ KLJKHU DWWKHHQGRID9VKDSHGED\RUFDSH ᵣᶑᶁᵿᶎᶇᶌᶅᴾᵿᴾᶒᶑᶓᶌᵿᶋᶇ
 :HPXVWPRYHWRDVDIHSODFHTXLFNO\DIWHUDODUJH ⋍HDUWKTXDNH RULI\RXKHDUDWVXQDPLZDUQLQJ 7RHVFDSHDWVXQDPLZHPXVWVWD\ ⋎ DZD\ IURPWKH
VHDDQGULYHUV 7RHVFDSHDWVXQDPLZHPXVWPRYHWRD ⋏ KLJKHU
ORFDWLRQ VXFKDVDKLOOSODWHDXRUEXLOGLQJ ,I\RXFDQQRWGHFLGHZKHUHWRHVFDSHWR\RXPXVWIROORZVLJQVWKDWVKRZWKHGLUHFWLRQRI ⋐ DGHVLJQDWHG
HYDFXDWLRQVLWH  %HFDXVHWVXQDPLVFRPHLQDVHULHVRIZDYHVZHPXVWQRW ⋑ UHWXUQ IRUVRPHWLPHDIWHUHYDFXDWLQJ
 %HFDXVHDWVXQDPLFDQKDYHDJUHDWHUKHLJKWWKDQSUHGLFWHGZHPXVWFRQWLQXHPRYLQJWR ⋒ KLJKHUJURXQG HYHQDIWHUZHKDYHHYDFXDWHG

Fig. 4. Teacher’s guide and worksheet for Unit 1, Learning 2(examples).

tsunamis, (7) understand the actions to be taken when one
senses strong tremors caused by an earthquake or hears
a Tsunami Warning, and (8) understand how to escapesafely from a tsunami. The student is expected to understand the basics of tsunamis and learn the appropriate behavior to protect oneself upon hearing a Tsunami Warningor during the disaster. For the teaching material, the DRR
education supplementary reading material produced by
Miyagi Prefecture [10] and materials produced by Japan
Meteorological Agency [36, 37] are used. A teacher’s
guide, worksheets, and slides for classroom instruction
are developed in line with learning session 1. The study
time consists of one period of 45 minutes (Figs. 4 and 5).

1004

Fig. 5. Study slide for Unit 1, Learning 2 (example).

3.2.2. Outline of Unit 2 – “ICT Learning”
Unit 2 is for active learning, where the knowledge andskills acquired in Unit 1 are used to understand the local
area’s tsunami risks and natural environment and acquire
the skills to decide on proper evacuation sites or evacuation routes to protect oneself. It consists of two learning
sessions. In these sessions, the students use tablets, provided to each student under the GIGA School Concept,
to engage in ICT learning using the map learning site,“YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version,” developed by
the NIED. YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version is an
ICT learning material that employs digital map information, which presents the tsunami disaster that occurred
Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education Programfor Children with No Experience of Earthquake DisasterFig. 6. Screen display and operation of “YOU@RISKTsunami Disaster Version.”

during the Great East Japan Earthquake in a visual format and allows the students to learn by linking the natural environment with the disasters. There is also a heavy
rain disaster version of YOU@RISK, the learning effectof which has been verified by Ikeda et al. [30].
In learning session 3 – “Examine the tsunami risks ofthe local area using YOU@RISK” – the study objectives
are to be (9) able to confirm estimated tsunami inundationlevels using YOU@RISK, (10) able to confirm the position or elevation of evacuation site using YOU@RISK,
and (11) able to confirm the route to the evacuation siteusing YOU@RISK. Each student takes part in the ICT
learning by using their tablet to operate the YOU@RISKTsunami Disaster Version and acquires the skills to findout the tsunami inundation levels of specific locations andthe evacuation site and route. The basic operations of
the tablet and YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version arelearned individually (Fig. 6). We produced a teacher’s
guide to assist in providing learning instructions. The
study time consists of two periods of 45 minutes each.
In learning session 4 – “Discuss evacuation to avoid
tsunamis” – the study objectives are to be (12) able toconfirm estimated tsunami inundation levels of homes orroads used for commuting to school using YOU@RISK,(13) able to confirm evacuation site near home or roadused for commuting to school or its elevation using
YOU@RISK, and (14) able to engage in a group discussion about the places to evacuate or places at risk
when a tsunami may arrive. The students are expected
to use the skills acquired in learning session 3 to operate the YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version and findout the tsunami risks for their homes and the route they
use to commute to school. Following this, the geographical area subjected to search is extended, and the students
form groups to find out and discuss local landmarks andplaces with high tsunami risks and, thus, engage in grouplearning to understand the area’s vulnerability to earthquake disasters. Furthermore, in groups, they will discuss courses for the “town walk” in which the students
will take a walk in the local area to check for tsunami
risks, which is carried out in the “experiential learning” of
Unit 3, and draw up a “Town Walk Plan (Mission Card)”(Fig. 7). The students are expected to improve their cognitive and judgmental capabilities by listening to othersin the group learning process. In this section, the groups
were formed by students living in the same areas. The
study time consists of two periods of 45 minutes each.
Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Fig. 7. Unit 2, Learning 4, “Town Walk Plan.”

3.2.3. Outline of Unit 3 – “Experiential Learning”
The learnings that take place in Units 3 and 4 areexperiential-based and are planned and implemented as
per the “DRR education supplemental reading material” [10], published by the Miyagi Board of Education,and the “Study Guide for DRR Map Making.”
In Unit 3, the students will engage in exploratory learning in which the residents, “actors” in the transmissionof the area’s disaster experiences, will serve as guides byusing the Town Walk Plan, which was drawn in Unit 2 to
identify the local places with high tsunami risks, the evacuation sites, and the evacuation routes from high-risk areas. Through fieldwork conducted with the residents, thestudents are expected to learn about the tsunami disasterin the local area that was caused by the earthquake.
In learning session 5 – “Check one’s area by taking
a disaster-mitigation town walk” – the study objectives
are to (15) know the safe and the dangerous places in the
town when a tsunami may arrive and be (16) able to listen to adults in the area and ask them about the risks ofearthquakes and tsunamis. Here, the students engage inself-initiated learning. Based on the Town Walk Plan, thestudents are expected to personally confirm the tsunami
risks in the local area, which were found by operating
YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version. Since the residents participate in the town walk with the students, thissession provides an opportunity to orally transmit disaster experiences. In addition, geographical learning takes
place when the students are provided with the chance to
see and confirm the local topography, which they had
checked on the tablet. The study time consists of three
periods of 45 minutes each.
3.2.4. Outline of Unit 4 – “Summary”
The learning that takes place in Unit 4 entails the summation of the Unit 3 fieldwork. It consists of two learning
sessions. The learning objectives are to be (17) able tosummarize and present the research about tsunamis on a1005

Nagata, T. et al.

map and (18) able to make decisions and take actions toprotect oneself when a tsunami is likely to reach the area.
In learning session 6 – “Summarize what you havefound to make a DRR map” – the students are expected
to bring together the information obtained through theUnit 3 fieldwork in the form of a DRR map, understandthe tsunami risks by gaining a bird’s-eye view of thearea’s disaster features and vulnerability, and understandthe earthquake disaster lessons. The study time consistsof one period of 45 minutes.
In learning session 7 – “Presenting the DRR map” –the students are expected to make a presentation of theirlearnings to the residents by using the DRR map producedin learning session 6. Through this learning process, thestudents and participating residents can obtain a greaterawareness of disaster mitigation. The study time consistsof three periods of 45 minutes each.
3.2.5. Outline of the Study Questionnaire
A “learning questionnaire” is created for the students
to self-evaluate the achievement of learning objectives set
in Units 1–4 of the teaching material. The questionnaire
consists of 18 questions corresponding to the 18 learning
objectives, and the respondents are instructed to evaluate themselves quantitatively on a four-point Likert scale.
The respondents’ averages in each unit were used for the
program’s assessment. The questionnaire items on theworksheet are written using only the kanji learned in the
respondent’s grade; the other items are written in hiragana, a syllabic alphabet unique to Japan. The questionnaire items for each unit are as follows.
The questions for Unit 1 were “(1) I know what may
happen when an EEW is issued,” “(2) I know what kind ofdamage can be caused by an earthquake,” “(3) I know how
to act when I feel large tremors caused by an earthquakeor hear an EEW,” “(4) I can protect myself if I feel large
tremors caused by an earthquake or hear an EEW,” “(5) I
know how a tsunami occurs,” “(6) I know the kind of damage a tsunami can cause,” “(7) I know how to act when I
feel a strong earthquake near the sea or hear a Tsunami
Warning,” and “(8) I know a safe place to escape from atsunami.” The answers are mapped on a four-point Likert
scale with 4: I know very well, 3: I know a little, 2: I
don’t know so well, and 1: I don’t know.
The questions for Unit 2 were “(9) Using a map, I canfind places that have a high risk of tsunami,” “(10) Using amap, I can find evacuation sites and the elevation of land,”“(11) Using a map, I can find the road to get to the evacuation site,” “(12) Using a map, I can find places close to theschool or home where a tsunami may arrive,” “(13) Usinga map, I can find places close to the school or home where
I can escape from a tsunami,” and “(14) I can discuss withanother person the places or roads close to the school orhome to escape to when a tsunami may be coming.” Thefour-point Likert scale was used with 4: I can very well,
3: I can a little, 2: I can’t so well, and 1: I can’t.
The questions for Unit 3 were “(15) I know the dangerous places close to the school or home when a tsunami
1006

Table 2. Timeline of program implementation and measurement of its effectiveness.
Category

Content

Date ofimplementation

Measurement ofeffectiveness1st study questionnaire

Oct. 25, 2021

Learning

Unit 1, Learning 1 and 2 (45 min
× 2)

Oct. 26, 2021

Measurement ofeffectivenessLearning
Learning
Measurement ofeffectivenessLearning
Measurement ofeffectivenessLearning
Learning
Measurement ofeffectiveness2nd study questionnaire

Oct. 26, 2021

Unit 2, Learning 3 (45 min × 2)
Unit 2, Learning 4 (45 min × 2)

Oct. 26, 2021
Nov. 1, 2021

3rd study questionnaire

Nov. 1, 2021

Unit 3, Learning 5 (45 min × 3)

Nov. 4, 2021

4th study questionnaire

Nov. 5, 2021

Unit 4, Learning 6 (45 min × 2)
Unit 4, Learning 7 (45 min × 1)

Nov. 8, 2021
Nov. 12, 2021

5th study questionnaire

Nov. 12, 2021

may arrive and the safe places where I can escape to,” withthe possible answers on the Likert scale ranging from 4: I
know very well, 3: I know a little, 2: I don’t know so well,and 1: I don’t know and “(16) I can listen to the stories ofadults about the time when an earthquake or tsunami occurred near the school or home,” with the answers of 4: I
can very well, 3: I can a little, 2: I can’t so well, and 1: I
can’t.
The questions for Unit 4 were (17) I can summarize thefacts I have learned about what to do if a tsunami arrives
in my local town in the form of a map and make a presentation, and (18) I can protect myself if a tsunami comes to
my town for which the answers on the Likert scale ranged
from 4: I can very well, 3: I can a little, 2: I can’t so well,and 1: I can’t.
To evaluate whether children with limited memories
and experiences of the disaster gained the ability to understand the tsunami damage and vulnerability that occurred in their community and to think about actions toprotect their lives from a tsunami, we used the results of
the analysis of items (15) and (18) from the questions in
Units 1–4.

4. Practice and Evaluation of Tsunami DRR
Educational Program
4.1. Implementation of Program
We implemented the tsunami DRR educational program at the Ekiraku Elementary School in Shichigahama Town and measured its effectiveness (Table 2).
The 43 subjects comprised fifth-grade students from twoclasses. The program was carried out jointly by the teachers and the authors (Figs. 8–14). To measure the effectiveness, we employed the paired t-test, which is used forstatistical analysis.

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education Programfor Children with No Experience of Earthquake Disaster








Fig. 8. Unit 1, Learning 1, “Learning about earthquakes.”

Fig. 14. Unit 4, Learning 7, “Group presentations.”

Fig. 9. Unit 1, Learning 2, “Learning about tsunamis.”







Fig. 10. Unit 2, Learning 1, “Basic operations of YOU@RISK.”








Fig. 11.
Unit 2, Learning 2, “Group learning using
YOU@RISK.”







Fig. 12. Unit 3, Learning 5, “Town walk.”








Fig. 13. Unit 4, Learning 6, “Map making.”

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Fig. 15. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 1.

4.2. Program Evaluation
4.2.1. Analysis Results for Unit 1
The analysis results of questions (1)–(8) for Unit 1 arepresented in Fig. 15. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives changed from 3.23 before
the program to 3.98 after the program for “(1) I know what
may happen when an EEW is issued,” from 3.77 to 4.00
for “(2) I know what kind of damage can be caused by anearthquake,” from 3.74 to 3.98 for “(3) I know how to act
when I feel large tremors caused by an earthquake or hearan EEW,” from 3.53 to 3.79 for “(4) I can protect myself
if I feel large tremors caused by an earthquake or hear an
EEW,” from 3.28 to 3.86 for “(5) I know how a tsunami
occurs,” from 3.86 to 3.91 for “(6) I know the kind ofdamage a tsunami can cause,” from 3.47 to 3.88 for “(7) I
know how to act when I feel a strong earthquake near thesea or hear a Tsunami Warning,” and from 3.47 to 3.74
for “(8) I know a safe place to escape from a tsunami.”
When analyzed using the paired t-test, questions (1), (2),(4), (5), (7), and (8) displayed differences with a 1% significance level, while question (3) displayed a differencewith a 5% significance level. Question (6) did not display a statistically significant difference where the difference between the before and after scores is small because
the before-learning score was high; therefore, the afterlearning score had a small margin for increase. Scores
increased for all eight items after the program application as did the percentage of respondents who answeredthat they knew the items. These results confirmed thelearning effect of acquiring knowledge about earthquakes
1007Nagata, T. et al.

Fig. 17. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 3.

Fig. 16. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 2.

and tsunamis, protecting oneself, and disaster preparedness necessary for making decisions during disasters.
4.2.2. Analysis Results for Unit 2
The analysis results of questions (9)–(14) for Unit 2
are presented in Fig. 16. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives changed from 2.78 before the program to 3.88 after the program for “(9) Usinga map, I can find places that have a high risk of tsunami,”from 2.76 to 3.76 for “(10) Using a map, I can find evacuation sites and the elevation of land,” from 3.24 to 3.88
for “(11) Using a map, I can find the road to get to theevacuation site,” from 3.17 to 3.83 for “(12) Using a map,
I can find places close to the school or home where atsunami may arrive,” from 3.48 to 3.83 for “(13) Usinga map, I can find places close to the school or homewhere I can escape from a tsunami,” and from 3.18 to3.82 for “(14) I can discuss with another person the places
or roads close to the school or home to escape to whena tsunami may be coming.” When analyzed using thepaired t-test, all questions displayed differences with a
1% significance level. The scores increased for all six
items after program application, as did the percentage of
respondents who answered that they knew the information delivered by the program. These results confirmed
the learning effect of acquiring the skills to understandtsunami risk in the area and determine evacuation routes
using YOU@RISK: Tsunami Disaster Version.
4.2.3. Analysis Results for Unit 3
The analysis results of questions (15) and (16) for
Unit 3 are presented in Fig. 17. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives changed from
3.29 before the program to 3.93 after the program for“(15) I know the dangerous places close to the schoolor home when a tsunami may arrive and the safe places
where I can escape to” and from 3.52 to 3.71 for “(16) I
can listen to the stories of adults about the time when an
earthquake or tsunami occurred near the school or home.”
1008

Fig. 18. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 4.

When analyzed using the paired t-test, question (15) displayed a difference with a 1% significance level, while
no significant difference was found for question (16) because the difference between the before and after scores
was small. Scores increased for both the items after program application, as did the percentage of respondents
who answered that they knew the information. These
results confirmed the learning effect of walking aroundthe community with the residents to understand the local
tsunami-related traditions and tsunami risk in the region
concerning geographical and spatial dimensions.
4.2.4. Analysis Results for Unit 4
The analysis results of questions (17) and (18) for
Unit 4 are presented in Fig. 18. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives changed from2.73 before the program to 3.71 after the program for“(17) I can summarize the facts I have found about what I
should do if a tsunami arrives to my local town in the formof a map and make a presentation” and from 3.39 to 3.80
for “(18) I can protect myself if a tsunami comes to my
town.” When analyzed using the paired t-test, both questions displayed a difference with a 1% significance level.
The after-learning scores are high for both the questions,indicating that the majority of students knew the information, thus, confirming the effectiveness of the learning
process.
Through the study of Units 1–4, we examined the understanding level of tsunami disaster among children withlimited memory/experience of the disaster. The analysis used questions (15) and (18), whereby the scores increased for both the items after the study, and statisticallysignificant differences were observed at the 1% level.
These results confirmed the learning effects of being able
to present a summary of the learnings of Units 1–3 andJournal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education Programfor Children with No Experience of Earthquake Disaster

Table 3. Timeline of program implementation and measurement of its effectiveness.
Category

Content

Date ofimplementation

Measurement ofeffectiveness1st study questionnaire

Oct. 21, 2021

Learning

Unit 1, Learning 1 and 2 (45 min
× 2)

Oct. 21, 2021

Measurement ofeffectivenessLearning
Learning
Measurement ofeffectivenessLearning
Measurement ofeffectivenessLearning
Learning
Measurement ofeffectiveness2nd study questionnaire

Oct. 22, 2021

Unit 2, Learning 3 (45 min × 2)
Unit 2, Learning 4 (45 min × 2)

Oct. 25, 2021
Oct. 25, 2021

3rd study questionnaire

Oct. 25, 2021

Unit 3, Learning 5 (45 min × 3)

Oct. 28, 2021

4th study questionnaire

Oct. 28, 2021

Unit 4, Learning 6 (45 min × 2)
Unit 4, Learning 7 (45 min × 1)

Nov. 2, 2021
Nov. 5, 2021

5th study questionnaire

Nov. 12, 2021

Fig. 19. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 1.

of fostering an awareness of disaster preparedness to protect oneself during a tsunami, despite never having experienced one before.
The results of the above analysis confirmed the program’s effectiveness for acquiring disaster response skills
by learning about earthquake-induced tsunami risks in theregion and considering decisions and evacuation actions
to protect one’s life.

4.3. Program Applicability and Improvement
4.3.1. Practice and Verification at Matsugahama
Elementary School
In this study, to examine the scope of application of
the ICT teaching material, YOU@RISK: Tsunami Disaster Version, on elementary school students, we implemented and measured the effectiveness of the programwith children in different grades. Matsugahama Elementary School in the Shichigahama Town was selected as a
subject school. A total of 33 students from fourth grade
participated in the program. The teachers and the authors collaborated according to the program application at
Eiraku Elementary School. The effectiveness of the program was measured using the paired t-test as a statisticalanalysis method (Table 3).
4.3.2. Analysis Results for Units 1–4
The analysis results of questions (1)–(8) for Unit 1 arepresented in Fig. 19. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives changed from 2.94 before the program to 3.85 after for “(1) I know what may
happen when an EEW is issued,” from 3.73 to 3.85 for“(2) I know what kind of damage can be caused by anearthquake,” from 3.55 to 3.82 for “(3) I know how to
act when I feel large tremors caused by an earthquake orhear an EEW,” from 3.52 to 3.76 for “(4) I can protect
myself if I feel large tremors caused by an earthquake or
Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Fig. 20. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 2.

hear an EEW,” from 3.25 to 3.88 for “(5) I know how atsunami occurs,” from 3.61 to 3.88 for “(6) I know thekind of damage a tsunami can cause,” from 3.52 to 3.76
for “(7) I know how to act when I feel a strong earthquake near the sea or hear a Tsunami Warning,” and from3.58 to 3.67 for “(8) I know a safe place to escape froma tsunami.” When analyzed using the paired t-test, questions (1) and (5) displayed differences with a 1% significance level, while questions (3), (4), (6), and (7) displayeda difference with a 5% significance level. Questions (2)and (8) did not display statistically significant differences
since the difference between the before and after scores
were small. The after-learning scores were high across alleight questions, indicating that the majority of students
answered that they knew the information, thus, confirming the effectiveness of the learning process.
The analysis results of questions (9)–(14) for Unit 2
are presented in Fig. 20. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives from 2.72 before theprogram to 3.28 after the program for “(9) Using a map,
I can find places that have a high risk of tsunami,” from2.58 to 3.26 for “(10) Using a map, I can find evacuation sites and the elevation of land,” from 3.10 to 3.39 for1009

Nagata, T. et al.

Fig. 21. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 3.

Fig. 22. Measurement of effectiveness of Unit 4.

“(11) Using a map, I can find the road to get to the evacuation site,” from 3.19 to 3.41 for “(12) Using a map, I canfind places close to the school or home where a tsunami
may arrive,” from 2.97 to 3.39 for “(13) Using a map, I
can find places close to the school or home where I canescape from a tsunami,” and from 2.78 to 3.31 for “(14) I
can discuss with another person the places or roads close
to the school or home to escape to when a tsunami may
be coming.” When analyzed using the paired t-test, questions (9), (10), (13), and (14) displayed differences witha 1% significance level. Questions (11) and (12) did notdisplay statistically significant differences. Although theincrease in the scores indicates that the achievement levelsof the study objectives were low as compared to the otherunits since many students were unfamiliar with tablet operation, the results show that the learning process was effective to a certain degree.
The analysis results of questions (15) and (16) for
Unit 3 are presented in Fig. 21. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives changed from
3.19 before the program to 3.59 after the program for“(15) I know the dangerous places close to the schoolor home when a tsunami may arrive and the safe places
where I can escape to” and from 3.35 to 3.55 for “(16) I
can listen to the stories of adults about the time when
an earthquake or tsunami occurred near the school orhome.” When analyzed using the paired t-test, question (15) displayed a difference with a 1% significancelevel, while no significant difference was found for question (16). Although the increase in the scores indicatesthat the achievement levels of the study objectives were
low compared with the other units, the results show thatthe learning process was effective to a certain degree.
The analysis results of questions (17) and (18) for
Unit 4 are presented in Fig. 22. The scores of the questions corresponding to the study objectives changed from1010

1.97 before the program to 3.64 after the program for“(17) I can summarize the facts I have found about what
I should do if a tsunami arrives to my local town in theform of a map and make a presentation” and from 3.36 to
3.76 for “(18) I can protect myself if a tsunami comes to
my town.” When analyzed using the paired t-test, boththe questions displayed a difference with a 1% significance level. The after-learning scores were high for boththe questions, indicating that the majority of students answered that they knew the information, thus, confirming
the effectiveness of the learning process.
The understanding of the tsunami disaster among children with limited memories/experiences of the disasterwas tested with questions (15) and (18), and the scoresfor both the items were higher after learning with statistically meaningful differences at a 1% significance level,
thus, confirming the learning effect.
The above analysis indicates that the implementationof the developed program resulted in achieving the study
objectives, thus, confirming its validity.
4.3.3. Program Applicability and Improvement
Based on the results of the measured effectiveness ofthe program at Ekiraku and Matsugahama Elementary
Schools, we examined the applicability of the developed
program for different school years.
In Unit 1 for Matsugahama Elementary School, thescores indicated a high achievement level of the study objectives before the program. This is perhaps because theschool had a tsunami educational program due to its proximity to areas that were inundated by the tsunami during
the earthquake disaster and some of its students use roadsin those areas to commute to school.
In Unit 2, for which the students used tablets, the scoresof Matsugahama Elementary School were low for all thequestions. This was because some of the students used
tablets in their daily lives while others had no experience with tablets, and this difference was reflected in thescores. During program implementation, many students
were assisted by the teacher or the authors in learning thetablet’s operation. This indicated that YOU@RISK needs
to be made more user-friendly to facilitate learning for
fourth graders through tablets.
In Units 3 and 4, the scores indicated an increased
achievement level of the study objectives after the program, thus, confirming the program’s effectiveness as a
general learning method.
From the above practices and verification results, it was
found that, while the developed program yielded results inthe learning of the basic knowledge about earthquakes andtsunamis and the response actions, the method to learn theoperation of YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version, using a tablet, must be improved when the program is used
for fourth-grade students.

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education Programfor Children with No Experience of Earthquake Disaster5. Conclusions and Future Deployment
In Japan, the learning environment is evolving, andeach elementary-school student has access to an information terminal under the MEXT GIGA School Concept.
In this study, we developed a tsunami DRR educational program targeting children with little or no memory/experience of the Great East Japan Earthquake. We
implemented the program in the township of Shichigahama, Miyagi Prefecture, which faced extensive tsunami
damage during the earthquake. The program was developed by using the ADDIE model used in ID theory,a learning theory. It was implemented for elementary
school students, and its validity was confirmed. The
program incorporated the YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version, which is a map learning site developedby the NIED to realize a learning method that merges
ICT and DRR education from a geographical standpoint.
YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version was developed as
an ICT teaching material where a digital map visually displays the tsunami disaster that took place during the earthquake and allows the users to learn by linking the naturalenvironment with the disasters.
The program was implemented at Ekiraku andMatsugahama Elementary Schools in Shichigahama
Town, Miyagi Prefecture, under the collaboration of local teachers and the authors, and the learning effectwas verified using the measured effectiveness it had on
the students. Through this program, we confirmed thelearning effectiveness of children with limited memories/experiences of the disaster to understand the tsunami
damage and community vulnerability and acquire theability to think about actions to protect their lives.
The analysis results indicated that the implementationof the developed program improved the learning effect,thus, verifying the program’s validity when it was used
for the fifth-grade students of Ekiraku Elementary School.
However, when implemented for the fourth-grade students at Matsugahama Elementary School, we found thatseveral students were unable to operate the tablet during the learning sessions using the YOU@RISK-Tsunami
Disaster Version, which resulted in a low achievementlevel of the study objectives. This pointed out the need to
improve the usability of the YOU@RISK-Tsunami Disaster Version.
To follow up on this study, we intend to implement andverify the program in areas that were affected by othertsunamis and areas that are expected to be subjected totsunamis in the event of the Nankai Trough Earthquake.
This would help improve its accuracy and develop a program with a high degree of perfection, necessary for social
implementation. Since the use of YOU@RISK proved tobe effective in ICT education, we plan to develop and apply versions of YOU@RISK that target sediment disasters, volcanic eruptions, and other natural disasters.

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Acknowledgments
In conducting this study, we received the cooperation of Ekiraku
and Matsugahama Elementary Schools in Shichigahama Town,
Miyagi Prefecture, which carried out the DRR educational program, the Shichigahama Board of Education, and members of
the residents’ associations of the school districts. We wish to
express our deep gratitude to these parties. The Shichigahama
Social Welfare Council extended to us their unstinting cooperation in the necessary logistical adjustments and preparations forstudy implementation. We express our gratitude to the personnel involved. This research is based on a funded research project,“Establishment of a Disaster Prevention and Management Educational Hub for Improving Disaster Prevention Literacy among a
Wide-Ranging Stakeholders” (Representative: Reo Kimura, University of Hyogo), which is supported by the SECOM Foundation
for Promotion of Science.

References:[1] Cabinet Office, “White Paper on Disaster Management 2019,” http://www.bousai.go.jp/kaigirep/hakusho/r3.html (in Japanese) [accessed March 1, 2022][2] Cabinet Office, “Five-Year Acceleration Measures for Disaster Prevention and Mitigation and National Land Stewardship,” 2020, https://www.cas.go.jp/jp/seisaku/kokudo kyoujinka/
5kanenkasokuka/index.html (in Japanese) [accessed March 1,
2022][3] Reconstruction Agency, “Report on the status of recovery fromthe Great East Japan Earthquake (December 11, 2020),” 2020 (inJapanese).
[4] Y. Watanabe, S. Sato, and F. Imamura, “Understanding the Usage
Status of the Disaster Memorial Ficilities of the Great East Japan
Earthquake and Suggestions for Effective Utilizatioon: Focusing
on the Purpose of Visitors and the Effect Behavioral Modification ofDisaster Preparedness,” J. of Social Safety Science, Vol.39, pp. 267277, 2021 (in Japanese).
[5] S. Sasaki, K. Yamamoto, and K. Sasaki, “Roles and Possibilities
of Storytellers as an Inhheriting Method in Areas without Disaster Remains: A Case Study of Kamaishi City after the Great East
Japan Earthquake,” Papers on Environmental Information Science,
Vol.34, pp. 49-54, 2020 (in Japanese).
[6] T. Oda, “3/11 Disaster Lore and Disaster Prevention Education:
For Improving Literacy to Protect Lives,” J. of Earthquake Science,
Vol.13, pp. 96-105, 2019 (in Japanese).
[7] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology,“Final Report of Council on Disaster Education and Disaster Management after the Great East Japan Earthquake,” 2012 (in Japanese).
[8] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology,“Reference Materials for Disaster Management at School – Development of Disaster Management Education to Foster ‘Zest forLife’,” 2013 (in Japanese).
[9] Iwate Prefectural Board of Education, “Education for Reconstruction and Disaster Prevention in Iwate,” 2022, http://iwate-archive.
pref.iwate.jp/education/fukkou/ (in Japanese) [accessed March 1,2022][10] Miyagi Prefectural Board of Education, “Miyagi Disaster Prevention Education Supplementary Reader ‘Mirai eno Kizuna’,” 2017
(in Japanese).
[11] Fukushima Prefecture Board of Education, “Fukushima Prefecture’s Disaster Prevention Education and Disaster Prevention Education Guidance Materials for Developing the Ability to Survive (3rd Edition),” 2022, https://www.pref.fukushima.lg.jp/site/
edu/gimukyoiku29.html, (in Japanese) [accessed March 1, 2022][12] H. Mitsuhashi, “Trends of Disaster Educational Research in Social
Studies Education: After the Great East Japan Earthqauake,” The J.
of Social Studies, No.119, pp. 100-110, 2013 (in Japanese).
[13] M. Shibata et al., “Present Situation and Problems of Disaster Reduction Education in Japanese Schools,” Research J. of Disaster Education, Vol.1 No.1, pp. 19-30, 2020 (in Japanese).
[14] T. Nagata, “Development of Disaster Management Education Programs to Enhance Children’s ‘Zest for Life’ in Collaboration with
Stakeholders,” Annual Bulletin of Japan Academic for Educational
Policy, No.28, pp. 25-39, 2021 (in Japanese).
[15] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology,“Realization of the GIGA School Concept,” https://www.mext.go.
jp/a menu/other/index 00001.htm (in Japanese) [accessed March 1,
2022]

1011

Nagata, T. et al.

[16] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology,“Guide to the Informatization of Education (Supplementary Edition),” 2020 (in Japanese).
[17] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology,“StuDX Style,” https://www.mext.go.jp/studxstyle/ (in Japanese)[accessed March 1, 2022][18] Geography Education Subcommittee, Science Council of Japan,“Utilization of Open Data in Geography Education and Development of Cartographic Skills/GIS Skills (Proposal),” 2014 (inJapanese).
[19] T. Hotta, “Thinking about ICT and Active Learning,” Toyokan Publishing, 2016 (in Japanese).
[20] H. Mitsuhara et al., “Case Studies of ICT-based Evacuation Drill
that Promotes Participants to think,” JSiSE Research Report,
Vol.31, No.7, pp. 65-72, 2017 (in Japanese).
[21] Y. Sun et al., “Can Smartphone Apps Motivate Tsunami Evacuation?,” Trans. of Information Processing Society of Japan, Vol.58,
No.1, pp. 205-214, 2017 (in Japanese).
[22] S. Tajima et al., “The Development of a Creation System for a
Disaster-Avoidance Map Using a Smartphone and the Evaluation of
Educational Practice,” Japan J. of Educational Technology, Vol.41,
No.Suppl., pp. 85-88, 2017 (in Japanese).
[23] Y. Hayashida et al., “A Study on the Issues of Existing Video
Teaching Materials for Disaster Prevention Education in Schools,”
Bulletin of Miyagi University of Education Graduate School for
Teacher Training, Vol.2, pp. 73-78, 2021 (in Japanese).
[24] T. Itamiya, “AR disaster simulation application,” J. of Disaster Information Studies, Vol.16, No.2, pp. 149-152, 2018 (in Japanese).
[25] K. Suzuki, “Instructional Design for e-learning Practices,” JapanJ. of Educational Technology, Vol.29, No.3, pp. 197-205, 2006 (inJapanese).
[26] T. Inagaki and K. Suzuki, “Class Design Manual Ver.2 – Instructional Design for Teachers,” Kitaohji Shobo, 2015 (in Japanese).
[27] R. M. Gagné et al. (K. Suzuki and S. Iwasaki [Supervisor of Translation]), “Principles of Instructional Design,” Kitaohji Shobo, 2007
(in Japanese).
[28] R. Kimura et al., “Systematization and Sharing of Disaster Management Literacy by DMLH,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.9, No.2, pp. 176187, 2014.
[29] T. Higashino and N. Yoshimoto, “Creating an e-Learning Course
for Elementary School Teachers on Cloud Observations,” JSSE Research Report, Vol.33, No.7, pp. 33-36, 2019 (in Japanese).
[30] M. Ikeda et al., “Development of Disaster Management Education
Program to Enhance Disaster Response Capabilities of Schoolchildren During Heavy Rainfall – Implementation at Elementary School
in Nagaoka City, Niigata Prefecture, a Disaster-Stricken Area,” J.
Disaster Res., Vol.16, No.7, pp. 1121-1136, 2021.
[31] A. Umeno and Y. Asada, “Reviewing the Wide-scale Disaster
Simulation Training to Improve Using an Instructional Design,”
Japanese J. of Occupational Medicine and Traumatology, Vol.63,
No.6, pp. 378-384, 2015 (in Japanese).
[32] T. Ogasawara, “Support of learning by Instructional Design: Effective and Efficient and Attractive Learning Environment Development,” J. of Assisting Dialogue and Communication Studies, Vol.4,
pp. 75-87, 2017 (in Japanese).
[33] K. Ishii, M. Nakano, and M. Mizutani, “Development of Management and Career Design Program in a Liberal Arts Curriculum,” J.
of JSEE, Vol.65, No.2, pp. 21-25, 2017 (in Japanese).
[34] T. Nagata and R. Kimura, “Case Study Research in Disaster Management Education to Develop ‘a Zest for Life’ of Children Using
Earthquake Early Warning System – The Way of the Cooperation of
Local Meteorological Observatory –,” J. of Social Safety Science,
No.21, pp. 81-88, 2013 (in Japanese).
[35] T. Nagata and R. Kimura, “Proposing A Multi-Hazard Approach
to Disaster Management Education to Enhance Children’s ‘Zest forLife’: Development of Disaster Management Education Programs
to Be Practiced by Teachers,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.12, No.1, pp. 1741, 2017.
[36] Japan Meteorological Agency, “Tsunami Disaster Prevention
Awareness Video ‘Dodging Tsunamis’,” https://www.jma.go.jp/
jma/kishou/books/tsunami dvd/index.html (in Japanese) [accessed
March 1, 2022][37] Sendai Regional Headquaters, Japan Meteorological Agency,“Disaster Prevention Education Page,” https://www.jma-net.go.jp/
sendai/index.html (in Japanese) [accessed March 1, 2022]

1012

Name:
Toshimitsu Nagata

Affiliation:
Senior Coordinator for Regional Disaster Prevention, Niigata Local Meteorological Office,Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA)

Address:
1-2-1 Misaki-cho, Chuo-ku, Niigata, Niigata 950-0954, Japan

Brief Career:
1985-1988 Toyama Local Meteorological Office, JMA
1995-1999 Observation Department, JMA
2010-2014 Kumagaya Local Meteorological Office, JMA
2014-2019 Senior Scientific Officer, Utsunomiya Local Meteorological
Office, JMA
2019-2020 Senior Scientific Officer for Weather Information, Niigata
Local Meteorological Office, JMA

Selected Publications:• “Case Study Research in Disaster Management Education to Develop ‘a
Zest for Life’ of Children Using Earthquake Early Warning System – The
Way of the Cooperation of Local Meteorological Observatory –,” J. of
Social Safety Science, Vol.21, pp. 81-88, 2013 (in Japanese).
• “Suggestion for Disaster Management Education Program to Develop
Students’ ‘Zest for Lives’ Clarifying their Disaster Responses at the
Tornado – A Case Study for Saitama Tornado Disaster on September 2ndin 2013 –,” J. of Social Safety Science, Vol.24, pp. 161-169, 2014 (inJapanese).
• “An Attempt of Developing the Tornado Disaster Management Education
Program Based on the Knowledge and Lessons of the Tornado-affected
School and Applying them to Schools out of the Affected Area,” J. of
Social Safety Science, Vol.28, pp. 117-126, 2016 (in Japanese).
• “Development of Disaster Management Education Program to Build
Competency in Students’ ‘Zest for Lives’ against Volcanic Disaster,” J. of
Social Safety Science, Vol.29, pp. 175-184, 2016 (in Japanese).
• “Proposing A Multi-Hazard Approach to Disaster Management
Education to Enhance Children’s ‘Zest for Life’: Development of Disaster
Management Education Programs to Be Practiced by Teachers,” J. DisasterRes., Vol.12, No.1, pp. 17-41, 2017.
• “A Development of the Disaster Management Education and Trainings
Program for Students with Visually Impaired to Improve ‘Zest for Life’ inthe Event of a Disaster – A Case Study on Tochigi Prefectural Special
School for the Visually Impaired –,” J. of Social Safety Science, No.33,
pp. 115-125, 2018 (in Japanese).
• “Developing a Disaster Management Education and Training Programfor Children with Intellectual Disabilities to Improve ‘Zest for Life’ in the
Event of a Disaster – A Case Study on Tochigi Prefectural Imaichi Special
School for the Intellectually Disabled –,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.15, No.1,
pp. 20-40, 2020.

Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Institute of Social Safety Science (ISSS)• Japanese Association of Safety Education (JASE)

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

Development of Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Education Programfor Children with No Experience of Earthquake Disaster

Name:

Name:

Masaki Ikeda

Reo Kimura

Affiliation:

Affiliation:

Technical Staff, National Research Institute for
Earth Science and Disaster Resilience (NIED)

Professor, Faculty and Graduate School of Human Science and Environment, University of
Hyogo

Address:

Address:

3-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0006, Japan

1-1-12 Shinzaike-honcho, Himeji, Hyogo 670-0092, Japan

Brief Career:

Brief Career:

2012-2014 Master Course Student, Tohoku University
2016- NIED
2020- Doctor Course Student, Tohoku University

1994-1998 School of Human Science, Waseda University
1998-2003 Graduate School of Informatics, Kyoto University
2003-2009 Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Environmental
Studies, Nagoya University
2009-2011 Associate Professor, Graduate School of Environmental andDisaster Research, Fuji Tokoha University
2011-2019 Associate Professor, Graduate School of Human Science andEnvironment, University of Hyogo

Selected Publications:• “Analysis of Current Disaster Prevention Education Materials Developedin Japan – The Future of Disaster Prevention Education in relation to the
Courses of Study,” J. of Social Safety Science, Vol.39, pp. 103-111, 2021.
• “Development of Disaster Management Education Program to Enhance
Disaster Response Capabilities of Schoolchildren During Heavy Rainfall –Implementation at Elementary School in Nagaoka City, Niigata Prefecture,a Disaster-Stricken Area,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.16, No.7, pp. 1121-1136,
2021.

Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Institute of Social Safety Science (ISSS)• Tohoku Geographical Association (TGA)• Association of Japan Geographers (AJG)

Selected Publications:• “Recovery and Reconstruction Calendar,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.2, No.6,
pp. 465-474, 2007.
• “Implementation and Operation of a Cloud-Based Participatory Damage
Recognition System to Obtain a Common Operational Picture that
Supports a Quick Disaster Response,” Int. J. for Infonomics, Vol.1,
Issue 1, pp. 860-866, 2013.
• “Current Status and Issues of Life Recovery Process Three Years Afterthe Great East Japan Earthquake Questionnaire Based on Subjective
Estimate of Victims Using Life Recovery Calendar Method,” J. DisasterRes., Vol.9, No.7, pp. 673-689, 2014.
• “Comparison Between the Life Recovery Processes After the
Mid-Niigata Earthquake and the Chuetsu-Oki Earthquake – Results of a
Random Sampled Social Survey Using the Life Recovery Calendar and
GIS-Based Spatiotemporal Analysis,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.10, No.2,
pp. 196-203, 2015.
• “Issues Facing Voluntary Evacuees from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear
Power Plant Accident Based on the Collection and Analysis of Cases of
Voluntary Evacuation,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.10, No.sp, pp. 755-769, 2015.
• “Development of a ‘Disaster Management Literacy Hub’ for Collecting,
Creating, and Transmitting Disaster Management Content to Increase
Disaster Management Literacy,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.12, No.1, pp. 42-56,
2017.
• “A Study on the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake: Citizen’s Evaluation ofEarthquake Information and Their Evacuation and Sheltering Behaviors,”
J. Disaster Res., Vol.12, No.6, pp. 1117-1138, 2017.
• “The Earthquake in Ōsaka-Fu Hokubu on 18 June 2018 and its EnsuingDisaster,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.13, No.4, pp. 813-816, 2018.
• “The 2018 Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake and its Aftermath,” J.
Disaster Res., Vol.14, Scientific Communication Online, sc20190112,
2019.
• “Developing a Disaster Management Education and Training Programfor Children with Intellectual Disabilities to Improve ‘Zest for Life’ in the
Event of a Disaster – A Case Study on Tochigi Prefectural Imaichi Special
School for the Intellectually Disabled –,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.15, No.1,
pp. 20-40, 2020.
• “Research for Contributing to the Field of Disaster Science: A Review,”
J. Disaster Res., Vol.15, No.2, pp. 152-164, 2020.
• “The Determinants of Residents’ Evacuation Behavior in the Torrential
Rain in Western Japan in 2018: Examination of Survey Data of Victims in
Okayama Prefecture,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.15, No.7, pp. 1011-1024, 2020.

Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Institute of Social Safety Science (ISSS)• Japan Society for Natural Disaster Science (JSNDS)• Japanese Psychological Association (JPA)• Japanese Society of Social Psychology (JSSP)• Japan Sociological Society (JSS)• Seismological Society of Japan (SSJ)• Japan Society of Civil Engineering (JSCE)

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022

1013

Nagata, T. et al.

Name:Takashi Oda

Affiliation:
Deputy Director and Associate Professor, 311
Disaster Risk Reduction Learning Institute for
Educators (311DRR-LIFE), Miyagi Universityof Education

Address:
149 Aramaki-aza-aoba, Sendai, Miyagi 980-0845, Japan

Brief Career:
2005-2008 Advisor, Consulate-General of Japan at San Francisco
2008-2009 Fulbright Scholar, University of California, Berkeley
2010-2012 JSPS Research Fellow, Ochanomizu University
2012-2013 Assistant Professor, Ochanomizu University

Selected Publications:• “Schools, Teachers, and Training in Risk Reduction After the 2011
Tohoku Disaster,” K. Shiwaku, A. Sakurai, and R. Shaw (Eds.), “Disaster
Resilience of Education Systems: Experiences from Japan,” pp. 53-71,
Springer, 2016.
• “Bridging Multi-Stakeholders for Disaster Risk Reduction Through
Education for Sustainable Development into the Post-2015 Framework,” J.
Disaster Res., Vol.11, No.3, pp. 387-393, 2016.

Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Japanese Association of Safety Education (JASE), Board Member• Association of Japanese Geographers (AJG)• Tohoku Geographical Association (TGA)

1014

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.17 No.6, 2022