Duration
30h SEM, 4d FW
Number of credits
| Advanced Master in Risk and Disaster Management in the Anthropocene Era | 5 crédits |
Lecturer
Nicolas Antoine-Moussiaux, Florence De Longueville, Pierre Ozer, Dominique Perrin
Coordinator
Language(s) of instruction
French language
Organisation and examination
All year long, with partial in January
Schedule
Units courses prerequisite and corequisite
Prerequisite or corequisite units are presented within each program
Learning unit contents
External speakers are invited to lead seminars and feedback revolving around the theme of risk and disaster management and links with the Anthropocene. External speakers are experts from the North and/or South from NGOs, public services, administrations, institutions or the socio-cultural world.
Learning outcomes of the learning unit
- Knowledge relating to the practical application of risk and disaster management.
- Discovery, making contact and networking with stakeholders in risk and disaster management in Belgium and internationally (NGOs, South experts, development agencies, design offices, etc.).
- Know how to communicate descriptively and critically on risk and disaster management, individually and collectively.
Prerequisite knowledge and skills
None.
Planned learning activities and teaching methods
The learning activities and teaching methods planned as part of the teaching unit to achieve the outcomes/objectives are of various types:
Seminars (including specific webinars)
Conferences
Film debates and other enhanced socio-cultural activities
Serious games
etc.
Mode of delivery (face to face, distance learning, hybrid learning)
Face-to-face course
Further information:
The presence of students in the activities of this course is strictly obligatory.
Course materials and recommended or required readings
Platform(s) used for course materials:
- MyULiège
Further information:
Certain activities will be supported in advance by different media. Instructions will be given to students at the appropriate time.
Written work / report
Further information:
Written work / report
Further information:
Further information:
1. Evaluation methods The module evaluation format is an individual report written and sent on the date defined by the scientific coordinator of the module. The final report score is the average of 3 reviewers. In fact, the different reports will be evaluated by three people. The evaluation will take into account the criteria defined in point 2.5 of this document. 2. Report submission period The Risq2030-1 module is evaluated in term 2, precisely during the June exam session. Consequently, the scientific coordinator of the module sets the precise date for submission of reports within the deadline for the June session examinations each year. As such, Students are invited to refer to the report submission date mentioned under the CELCAT platform of the University of Liège. 3 Content of the report 3.1 Report format Each student's report must cover 2 to 3 activities (2 minimum and 3 maximum) in which the student participated during the two terms of the year. The choice of activities and their relevance will be motivated by the student (see section 2.3.2). The final report expected as part of this module must be synthetic and must not exceed 8 pages. It must be written in a scientific/academic style, with great attention to grammatical and spelling rules. It can be illustrated with a few images or photographs taken during the students' participation in the various academic activities chosen (colloquiums, conferences, screenings, seminars, etc.) falling within the framework of this module.
3.2 Background of the report Basically, the report should address the following elements: ? Introduction The introduction to the report should have a "funnel" structure in which the student recalls: i. the overall context in which the report is written (link with the Risq2030-1 module); ii. the issues raised by the various events in which he participated; iii. the objective of the report and a reminder of structuring (announcement of the plan). NB: IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE READER UNDERSTANDS FROM THE START THE GLOBAL ISSUES ON WHICH THE STUDENT WILL FOCUS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ITS REPORT. ? Themes and justifications In this section, it is important for the student to: i. Present the 2 or 3 activities on which he intends to work, he intends to work on, while evoking the themes that arise from them (. . .). ii. Justify the choice of these activities from an academic point of view and the links with the objectives of the Master.
? Thematic issues and dimensions In this part, the student must present: i. the major issues around the themes relating to the chosen activities, while explaining how the issues raised are relevant?. What are the activities about? What are the concerns raised by the themes? What are the dimensions of the problems (temporal, spatial, etc.)? For example: the issues may be questions of climate change, the crisis energy, social conflicts, crisis management, etc. having a global or local scope and defined in the short and/or long term, etc. ii. Furthermore, the student will discuss the dimensions (political, economic, social, environmental, etc.) and the actors (political, local, regional, elected officials, etc.) who are grafted around the issues raised by the themes. At this level, the knowledge acquired in the course "Seminar - Integrated approach to an environmental issue" must be used to highlight the actors and the different dimensions (table of actors and dimensions, mental map, etc.) . It is important to justify the choice of dimensions. iii. In addition, the student must present a contextualization of the issues in North-South relations. Are these problems that involve a relationship of domination? A cooperation North-South? A responsibility between North and South? etc. iv. Finally, the student will explain the link that exists between the themes, dimensions, issues and objectives of the Master. In other words, how are the elements mentioned useful for him in the context of his training?
? Reflective analysis In this section, the student must carry out a reflective analysis around the issues and dimensions of the problems mentioned in the previous section. It's about taking a step back to better analyze and understand the problems raised. It is important to use other sources of information to confirm or challenge the positions of the actors (speakers, directors, teachers, etc.) on certain positions. For more information on reflective analysis, see the article by Clerc and Agogué (2014) - [https ://www.cairn.info/revue-recherche-en-soins-entreprises-2014-3-page- 7.htm]. ATTENTION: IT IS NOT ABOUT JUDGING THE SPEAKERS BUT ABOUT HAVING A POSTURE CRITICISM OF THEIR POSITION ON THE SUBJECTS DEVELOPED. ? Conclusion The last part of the report is the conclusion which summarizes the work, but above all in which questions are raised around the issues addressed in the work. These questions present themselves as an opening that calls for continued reflection around the subject in order to explore other areas not addressed. 4. Evaluation criteria The evaluation of the final report will be carried out both on the form and on the substance of the document submitted by the student. Consequently, each student is invited to scrupulously respect the guidelines of the preparation of the report defined in this document. The evaluators will assess the different reports mainly on the following criteria: Compliance with the defined number of pages; The relevance of the themes addressed in the report; The spirit of synthesis and editorial style; The structuring of the report; The student's critical thinking on the topics covered and openness to questions in relation to the different themes developed (. . .); The contextualization of the issues raised by the subjects in North-South relations (. . .). A complete guide with expectations will be given to students at the start of training.
Work placement(s)
Organisational remarks and main changes to the course
Contacts
Pierre Ozer
pozer@uliege.be