1

LEARNING ABOUT RISKTHE CHALLENGE FOR TEACHERS

www.RISKatIOE.org

Towards a Pedagogy of RiskDave Pratt, Ralph Levinson, Phillip Kent, Ramesh Kapadia, Cristina Yogui

Sub-brand to go here

4

Promoting Teachers’ Understanding of Risk in Socio-Scientific Issues

A research project funded by the Wellcome Trust

September 2008 – May 2010

TURS

5

Contents

1 Setting the scene

2 TURS: Promoting Teachers’ Understanding of Risk in Socio-Scientific Issues

3 Implications for Research and Teaching

6

Setting the scene

•Risk (in) Society, Risk in Education•Communicating and educating about risk: The 'Riskometer'•The complexity of risk•Curriculum responses to the need for risk education•Key problems for teaching and learning

1 Setting the scene

7

Risk has come to permeate decision making for individuals, families, institutions, governments.

Social theorists have prophesied the rise of the Risk Society.

Scientists and technologists were in the past the broadly trusted managers of society's risks. As risk has become a pervasive concern, this trust has eroded – science is perceived as part of the problem, not part of the solution.

We briefly review the recent history of risk in society and the role of science.

Curiously, school mathematics has had a very quiet role, although statistics and statisticians have been central to much of the debate.

1 Setting the scene

Risk (in) Society, Risk in Education

8

There is a diversity of interpretations and definitions.

Mathematical 'risk theory' has has been around since the 1700s, and is central to specialist practices of actuarial science, financial mathematics, etc.

In this view ['utility theory'], the risk of a hazardous situation or event is the product of the likelihood of the hazard, and the impact it would have on the individual or group involved, if it occurred. Then, the rational decision is given by choosing the set of options which minimise the total sum of all the risks involved. (Note: Impact can be both negative, a 'risk', and positive, a benefit.)

Surprisingly, the idea of risk that dominates nearly all public discourse, and much professional discourse, equates risk just with likelihood of a hazard. The following is an example.

1 Setting the scene

Defining risk

9

This idea was promoted in 96/97 by some influential people (Chief Medical Officer, Royal Statistical Society) as a public communication tool for risk. People's perceptions of unfamiliar risks (such as arise through major emergencies) should be made more accurate by locating them against a scale of familiar risks...

The idea had very limited success. The effectiveness of the riskometer was critically limited by only modelling the likelihood of hazards, as the complexity of public reactions to risk lies precisely in coordinating likelihood with impact and other 'dimensions' of risk.

1 Setting the scene

Communicating and educating about risk: The 'Riskometer'

10 1 Setting the scene

Communicating and educating about risk: The 'Riskometer'

11 1 Setting the scene

The complexity of risk[AUDIO: Today programme – 'School run' vs. 'School walk']

Likelihood is not enough.

Hazards are differently inter-related for every individual, likelihoods are 'weighted' by subjective impacts

How would one locate 'positive risk-taking' on a riskometer scale? (extreme sports....)

12 1 Setting the scene

The complexity of riskEven likelihoods are hard to calculate:the problem of averaging across heterogeneous populations (eg. car drivers do differ significantly in the riskiness of their driving), the problem of key factors that are hard (or expensive) to measure (eg. the hazard of jet engines flying through volcanic ash), the problem of biased intuitions about likelihoods (Kahneman, Tversky et al).

13 1 Setting the scene

Curriculum responses to the need for risk education : Science

Significantly developed to give greater emphasis to understanding science as a social practice ('How Science Works'), and understanding how judgements about science in society are socio-scientific (blending of scientific and other forms of argument and decision-making).

Several examples of widely-used curriculum schemes at GCSE and A level.

14 1 Setting the scene

Curriculum responses to the need for risk education : Mathematics

A slow and limited response: 'Risk and probability' are since 2008 specified in the curriculum statementsRisk is proposed as a key real world application of probability and statistics.

So far, few examples of how these revised curriculum targets should be tackled in the classroom.

15 1 Setting the scene

Curriculum responses to the need for risk education : PSHE/Citizenship

PSHE education will become a statutory part of the curriculum in September 2011.

PSHE Association suggests lesson activities on risk: “Risk-Taking introduces for students the distinctions between positive and negative risk; likelihood and severity… and risk perception… legal and illegal drugs, sex, gambling and anti-social behaviour.”

16 1 Setting the scene

Key problems for teaching and learning

Risk is accepted as a key aspect of learning for young people. It is multi-dimensional, and cross-curricular.

Developments in curricula have not been based on any research-based pedagogy for risk.

17 1 Setting the scene

Key problems for teaching and learning

There is clear potential for science and maths teachers to work together on teaching risk, with mutual benefits. (General motivation also coming from the STEM initiative.)We perceive unexploited opportunities to 'mathematise' the teaching of risk.

These are the broad issues which our research project set out to address...

18

Promoting Teachers’ Understanding of Risk in Socio-Scientific IssuesAim

To support and enhance the teaching of the core idea of risk:• By engaging Mathematics and Science teachers in modelling socio-

scientific issues using new technological tools;• So that they interact more deeply with interdisciplinary knowledge and

become empowered to enthuse their students in meaningful activity around the use of risk.

TURS

19

Research questions

Teachers’ knowledge about risk

What is the nature of teachers’ knowledge about risk?

How do teachers think about the teaching and learning of risk?

Pedagogy

What are the principles that should underpin a pedagogy of risk?

TURS

20

Approach

Co-design

Co-design a computer-based microworld in which teachers can explore and interrogate their knowledge of risk, including pedagogical knowledge, in socio-scientific issues:• By engaging Mathematics and Science teachers have modelled socio-

scientific issues using new technological tools;• Teachers generated models that embrace a pedagogy of risk in diverse

contexts.

TURS

21

Method

Design research

Iterative design, seeking to successively to:• Perturb teachers’ thinking to gain a window on their thinking-in-change

about risk and its pedagogy;• Embed conjectures about pedagogy into new designs of the tools.

The teachers• Three pairs of teachers;• 1 Mathematics and 1 Science teacher from each of 3 London schools.

TURS

22

Pedagogic Theory Components

Principle 1

From our early discussions with the teachers, it soon became clear that:• Risk is a multi-disciplinary topic that can be addressed within conventional

school structures;• With the aspect of likelihood important to Mathematics teachers; and• The context of the socio-scientific issues as important to Science teachers.

TURS

23

Outputs

Three outputs:

Health Warnings

Read all about it!

Deborah’s Dilemma

TURS

24

Health warnings

<Insert picture here>

A picture for Health Warnings. Something that illustrates the business of licensing medicines.

TURS

25

Read all about it!

TURS

26

Deborah’s Dilemma

TURS

27

Pedagogic Theory Components

Principle 2

From our reading of the literature and our early discussions with the teachers, it soon became clear that:• Risk is multi-dimensional, embracing at least the elements of likelihood,

impact and value-laden ethical considerations.• We conjectured that recognition of the various dimensions might be

stimulated by engaging with specific contextualised socio-scientific dilemmas and discussing the multi-faceted nature of the dilemma.

TURS

28

Deborah’s Dilemma: A rich and complex scenarioInformation

We provided information that:• Was intentionally complex to provide authenticity;• Offered richness by covered many aspects of the scenario such as

Deborah’s suffering, her favourite activities, her work, the condition itself and the operation;

• Was often conflicting such as different opinions of doctors and evidence from personal research.

!!Two audio files of those being captured to illustrate the information in Deborah’s Dilemma and show the complexity and richness of the information.!!!

TURS

29

Pedagogic Theory Components

Principle 3

From our interactions with teachers, we learned that:• A modelling approach that encourages making explicit the dimensions of

specific contextualised socio-scientific dilemmas in executable models supports recognition of and discussion about those dimensions;

• As well as awareness of the consequences of their characterisation of the dilemma.

TURS

30

The probability simulator

TURS

!!!A link to the pre-set file and the file itself as used in York

31

The life-style modeller

TURS

A link to the pre-set file and the file itself as used in York

32

Pedagogic Theory Components

Principle 4

From our interactions with teachers, we learned that:• Expressive tools can be designed that support the co-ordination of the

dimensions of risk.

TURS

33

The mapping tool

TURS

Ditto for the mapping tool or alternatively one based on David Nutt’s example or on the Today programme.

34

Expressive tools

Ideas for the future

The mapping tool is our first expressive tool but we do not regard it as sufficient. Other ideas might involve:• Listing of hazards;• Ordering according to likelihood and/or impact;• Prioritising risks;• Quantifying risks;• All within a framework that embraces consideration of ethics and values.

TURS

35

Linda and Adrian

They began with a focus on the operation and by creating models with probabilities. The tendency was to note that failures were relatively rare and complications even more so. The operation seemed quite safe and they adopted a pro-operation stance.

When attention changed to the lifestyle modelling, Linda and Adrian began to see making lifestyle changes as less threatening.

The shifting of position seemed to relate to where their attention was directed, often by affective reactions to the context of the scenario at any particular point in time.

TURS

36

Linda and Adrian

TURS

[INSERT: Audio from two teachers. Just a few minutes that gives the listener a sense of what went on. The more it can capture of slides 24-30 the better but not essential it does it all.]

37

Mathematical/statistical understandingCo-ordinating impact and likelihood seemed a considerable challenge

The teachers often flipped from consideration of impact to consideration of likelihood.• Mechanisms for trading off one with the other were needed;• For this reason, we designed the mapping tool;• And adopted fuzzy quantifications.

TURS

38

Mathematical/statistical understandingThe reliability of data was a regular concern.

The teachers often referred to whether the data could be taken as reliable.• The source of data was important to them.• The amount of data was occasionally salient to them.• A common strategy in the face of uncertainty was to take the view of

whichever source was regarded as the most authoritative.

TURS

39

Understanding the problem contextThe teachers drew extensively on their knowledge about the problem context

Knowledge of the context enabled the teachers to draw inferences.• Draw inferences;• Empathise with Deborah.

Knowledge of the context is not however unproblematic as students might:• Be unable to distance themselves to make analytical judgements;• Appreciate the rules of the game that might suggest when it is inappropriate

to make use of contextual knowledge and how to handle personal experience.

TURS

40

Affective responsesThe teachers often reacted with emotion to Deborah’s predicament

Affective responses seemed often to be a way of gauging the size of the impact. Perhaps this is essential in the absence of clear numerical quantifications.

TURS

41

ConclusionsFour pedagogic theory components

1. Risk is a multi-disciplinary topic that can be addressed within conventional school structures;

2. Risk is multi-dimensional, embracing at least the elements of likelihood, impact and value-laden ethical considerations.

3. A modelling approach that encourages making explicit the dimensions of specific contextualised socio-scientific dilemmas in executable models supports recognition of and discussion about those dimensions, as well as awareness of the consequences of their characterisation of the dilemma;

4. Expressive tools can be designed that support the co-ordination of the dimensions of risk.

TURS

42

ConclusionsFurther observations

The coordination of the dimensions of risk is non-trivial and needs the further development of expressive tools.

Quantification may support co-ordination but value-based judgements must not be marginalised if the modelling of the problem is to seem authentic

Tasks must be designed so that they are not only relevant to the curriculum but also to the interests and experience of the students.

TURS

43

Implications for research and teaching•Support for teachers•Transformation of pedagogic tools into student-oriented tools•Curriculum•Cross-disciplinary opportunities•Emergence of new research possibilities•New emphases for public policy and risk

Implications

44

Support for teachers

•Tasks framed within recognizable contexts incorporating personal values •Tools for simulation and modeling•Teaching and learning of probability and statistics•Co-ordinating personal and social heuristics with statistical understanding •Resources for teachers to see the possibilities of each others’ subjects

Implications

45

Transformation of pedagogic principles into student-oriented tools•Capacity of students to work in adult contexts•Recognizing subjectivity of students [their own experiences, attitudes...]•Promoting the development of statistical literacy through scientific and other contexts, e.g. financial•Research in co-designing materials with science and maths teachers

Implications

46

Curriculum

•Research shows that science and maths teachers bring different pedagogic experiences to understanding of risk

•Socio-scientific contexts already in use as rich contexts, e.g. genetic testing, nanotechnology, radiation from mobile phones

Implications

47

Cross-disciplinary opportunities

Implications

• Building on extant cross-curricular teacher groups • Trials as models for future cross-collaboration• Awarding bodies to recognize opportunities for co-ordination • Importance of working within a citizenship/PSHE context as well

48

Emergence of new research possibilities

Implications

•Contextualisation in schools of TURS research

•Models to map broader narratives of young people’s responses to ‘risky’ situations

49

Panel discussion

Chair: Dr Ralph Levinson

Panel• Professor Priscilla Alderson• Professor Robin Millar• Professor David Nutt• Professor Dave Pratt Institute of Education

University of London20 Bedford WayLondon WC1H 0AL

Tel +44 (0)20 7612 6000Fax +44 (0)20 7612 6126Email info@ioe.ac.ukWeb www.ioe.ac.uk