Résultats de l'étude
In the first stage of our research, we consulted already existing literature review about children’s preparedness. We studied several topics such as:
- community preparedness to face risks
- the specificity of children’s development and the educational practices of adults
- the existing pedagogical tools for children’s risk education
Concerning community preparedness, it has been highlighted that the citizen’s preparedness at local level is important for several reasons:
- In order to take into account the specific needs of the citizens (in particular children’s needs)
- To reinforce the links between the different members of the community in the event of a disaster. Literary sources point out that citizens are expected to work together particularly during the response phase. In order to build the necessary trust between citizens so that they rely on each other, therefore, it is important to reinforce the links within the community between the elder and the younger generations before a disaster occurs.
There is also a clear indication that the communication about preparedness should not be based on fear appeal messages which could inhibit citizen’s motivation to prepare.
We found the following results concerning the specificity of children’s development and educational practices of the adults:
- Children do not have the same consciousness of dangers as adults because they do not assess the gravity of dangers the same way as the adults. It has been observed by some researchers that in daily life situations, children from 8 to 10 years old begin to develop preventive behaviours (to avoid risk situations and to protect themselves). However, under 16 years old they do not really assess the lethal consequences of an emergency situation.
- Their cognitive abilities play a role in the way they will perceive the risks. From 6 to 10 years old, children are able to produce a judgement about risks: they can make a connection between the causes and effects of a situation.
- When faced with emergency situation the protection of the adults turns out to be important for different reasons. From an emotional point of view, children are easily overwhelmed by their emotions. Furthermore, it is seen that certain external factors like social support, parenting and trust seem essential as well as internal factors to reinforce children’s coping abilities and resilience.
- It seems that accurate risk perception increases awareness and confidence in ability to cope while unrealistic risk perception seems to produce reduced risk protection awareness and a higher vulnerability perception.
- Children and adults do not necessarily have the same perception of risks. Adults may educate children to face certain kinds of risks but it will not be necessarily the ones children perceive for themselves. It is important then that children and adults can communicate about these questions and it seems that sensitive parenting is a kind of educational practice which allows the dialogue and the exchanges between children and parents.
We have observed that the existing pedagogical tools have certain characteristics:
- The majority of these tools focuses on a specific risk and tends to educate children to adopt the right behaviours when they have to face risk.
- The tools are addressed specifically to children, often ignoring that the children belong to a community.
- Preparedness is focused on individual skills and children’s interaction with the wider community is disregarded.
Literature review has shown us the importance of studying in depth the following questions:
- How do children and adults perceive risk?
- What are the educational practices of the adults concerning risks?
- What beliefs are related to children education?
In order to answer these questions we have developed some questionnaires for children, their parents, their grandparents and their teachers. The objective is to understand the links between risk perception and educational practices.
The dimensions analysed in these questionnaires are the following:
- Risks perception and practical knowledge related to risks
- The links between the different members of the community
- Educational practices
A study has been carried out in Belgium, Bulgaria and France. The Red Cross National Societies involved in the project are in contact with some schools of the respective countries.
The questionnaires have been filled in by pupils between 8 and 11 years old in class time, one questionnaire will be filled in by their parents and one by their grandparents. The teachers in charge of the children have also filled in one questionnaire.
The results of the study have been analysed by the University Paris 5 and showed that concerning risk representations:
- The population who answered the questionnaires had a very high risk perception regarding different types of situations: situations involving numerous dangers or situations involving very serious risks even situations where risks seemed to be less numerous or less serious have been recognized as risky situations.
- The practical knowledge of the grandparents about risks is under evaluated in all the countries where the study took place and for all the categories of participants. Only the grandparents consider that they can play a role in risk situation.
- The personal practical knowledge about risks seems to be less valuable for the respondents than to call for help especially for children. The participants of all the countries do not have the feeling to control risks and thus are more likely to call for help than to know how to deal with risks.
Concerning the links between the different members of the community, the study showed that:
- For all the countries participating to the study, the grandparents, the parents and the neighbours are considered by the adults who are parents or grandparents as more trustable than the teachers and the rescuers. The teachers don’t share this point of view and consider on the contrary that the teachers and the rescuers are more trustable than the others. Children consider also that the teachers and the rescuers are more trustable than their parents, grandparents and neighbours.
- This tendency is confirmed in France and in Belgium in the fact that French and Belgian parents and grandparents consider that children always have someone to talk to, but the teachers don’t seem to be for them a resource person for children. The teachers think the opposite and consider that children can talk to them more likely than to their parents or grandparents. In Bulgaria, parents seem to be less defiant regarding teachers even if teachers seem to be on the contrary defiant regarding parents.
- The need of children to be supervised in their daily activities has been confirmed by this study. In the three countries, children indeed consider that children can’t always help each other and that the help of an adult is necessary. The role of the grandparents in the supervision of children doesn’t seem to be clearly defined particularly in France and in Bulgaria.
Concerning people’s believes about education, this study showed that:
- In all the countries children’s need to be supervised, to have someone to listen to them, to be reassured and to be protected are recognized by the participants. Even if the need fro protection is a bit less recognized compared to the others needs.
- Fear does not seem to be for the adult respondents a good principle for education. Fear will not make people understand dangers nor making them change their behaviour. More children compared to the adults think that fear can make people acting differently.
These results show the importance to recreate trust within the community and to revaluate the role of the grandparents regarding risk education.
Finally these results seem to invalidate the theories linked to the fear appeal strategies.
