A qualitative case study was presented in order to explore an inquiry-based learning approach to teaching risk in two different grade 11 mathematics classes in an urban centre in Canada. The first class was in an all-boys independent school (23 boys) and the second class was in a publicly funded religious school (19 girls and 4 boys). The students were given an initial assessment in which they were asked about the safety of nuclear power plants and their knowledge of the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. Following the initial assessment, the students participated in an activity with the purpose of determining the empirical probability of a nuclear power plant accident based on the authentic data found online. The second activity was then presented in order to determine the impact of a nuclear power plant accident and compare it to a coal power plant accident. The findings provide evidence that the students possess intuitive knowledge that risk of an event should be assessed by both its likelihood and its impact. The study confirms the Levinson et al. (2012) pedagogic model of risk in which individuals’ values and prior experiences together with representations and judgments of probability play a role in the estimation of risk. The study also expands on this model by suggesting that pedagogy of risk should include five components, namely: 1) knowledge, beliefs, and values, 2) judgment of impact, 3) judgment of probability, 4) representations, and 5) estimation of risk. These ii components do not necessarily appear in the instruction or students’ decision making in a chronological order; furthermore, they influence each other. For example, judgments about impact (deciding not to consider accidents with low impact into calculations) may influence the judgments about probability. The implication for mathematics education is that a meaningful instruction about risk should go beyond mathematical representations and reasoning and include other components of the pedagogy of risk. The study also illustrates the importance of reasoning about rational numbers (rates, ratios, and fractions) and their critical interpretation in the pedagogy of risk. Finally, the curricular expectations relevant to the pedagogy of risk from the Ontario secondary curriculum are identified.

A qualitative case study was presented in order to explore an inquiry-based learning approach to teaching risk in two different grade 11 mathematics classes in an urban centre in Canada. The first class was in an all-boys independent school (23 boys) and the second class was in a publicly funded religious school (19 girls and 4 boys). The students were given an initial assessment in which they were asked about the safety of nuclear power plants and their knowledge of the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. Following the initial assessment, the students participated in an activity with the purpose of determining the empirical probability of a nuclear power plant accident based on the authentic data found online. The second activity was then presented in order to determine the impact of a nuclear power plant accident and compare it to a coal power plant accident. The findings provide evidence that the students possess intuitive knowledge that risk of an event should be assessed by both its likelihood and its impact. The study confirms the Levinson et al. (2012) pedagogic model of risk in which individuals’ values and prior experiences together with representations and judgments of probability play a role in the estimation of risk. The study also expands on this model by suggesting that pedagogy of risk should include five components, namely: 1) knowledge, beliefs, and values, 2) judgment of impact, 3) judgment of probability, 4) representations, and 5) estimation of risk. These ii components do not necessarily appear in the instruction or students’ decision making in a chronological order; furthermore, they influence each other. For example, judgments about impact (deciding not to consider accidents with low impact into calculations) may influence the judgments about probability. The implication for mathematics education is that a meaningful instruction about risk should go beyond mathematical representations and reasoning and include other components of the pedagogy of risk. The study also illustrates the importance of reasoning about rational numbers (rates, ratios, and fractions) and their critical interpretation in the pedagogy of risk. Finally, the curricular expectations relevant to the pedagogy of risk from the Ontario secondary curriculum are identified.

Lack of patient adherence with medication results in health care costs and adverse clinical outcomes. Although fear of side effects can contribute to non-adherence, being informed about them can actually improve matters. Nonetheless, questions persist as to the most efficient way to convey that type of information to patients for a given medication. Information on side effects is largely limited to a simple list in medication leaflets, often without frequency data (that is, lacking detail as to how often they might occur). The decision-making literature suggests that the interpretation of information varies depending on the presentation format or the frame used. This study examined the impact of providing numerical information for side effect frequency, levels of illness severity, and side effect framing on the likelihood of taking an OTC medicine.<p> Participants received a headache scenario with three drug options (X, Y and Z) to consider for use. These painkillers had three levels of potency (defined as 50, 75, and 100% effective) and were accompanied with three levels of side effects (two, four, and six items). When considering their drug choice for the headaches, participants received drug information written without side effect frequency data, then again with side effect frequency data. Subjects rated their likelihood of taking Drug X, Y and Z on a scale of 1 (very unlikely) to 100 (very likely). Participants were also asked to show their likelihood of taking a different set of two medications for headaches (coined Drug N and P) based on positively-slanted or negatively-slanted wording in relation to chances of experiencing a side effect (heartburn).<p> Thirty subjects from Saskatoon over 50 years of age participated. The average age was 66.6 years and 63.3 percent of participants were female. Less than half of participants (n=11) had previous experience with side effects. Most participants were using at least one medicine (whether OTC or prescribed) and described themselves as knowledgeable or somewhat knowledgeable.<p> Participants were more likely to take the hypothetical drugs in the situations described when they received frequency data for side effects (p<0.05). Also, there was a significant higher mean likelihood of use when the drug was framed positively (p<0.01).<p> When considering decisions involving drug effectiveness and their side effects, the provision of frequency data increased patient likelihood of use. Framing the context in positive format also increased patient likelihood to use a medicine. This information could be important for pharmacists counseling on medication side effects, especially for those patients with medication adherence problems.

Lack of patient adherence with medication results in health care costs and adverse clinical outcomes. Although fear of side effects can contribute to non-adherence, being informed about them can actually improve matters. Nonetheless, questions persist as to the most efficient way to convey that type of information to patients for a given medication. Information on side effects is largely limited to a simple list in medication leaflets, often without frequency data (that is, lacking detail as to how often they might occur). The decision-making literature suggests that the interpretation of information varies depending on the presentation format or the frame used. This study examined the impact of providing numerical information for side effect frequency, levels of illness severity, and side effect framing on the likelihood of taking an OTC medicine.<p> Participants received a headache scenario with three drug options (X, Y and Z) to consider for use. These painkillers had three levels of potency (defined as 50, 75, and 100% effective) and were accompanied with three levels of side effects (two, four, and six items). When considering their drug choice for the headaches, participants received drug information written without side effect frequency data, then again with side effect frequency data. Subjects rated their likelihood of taking Drug X, Y and Z on a scale of 1 (very unlikely) to 100 (very likely). Participants were also asked to show their likelihood of taking a different set of two medications for headaches (coined Drug N and P) based on positively-slanted or negatively-slanted wording in relation to chances of experiencing a side effect (heartburn).<p> Thirty subjects from Saskatoon over 50 years of age participated. The average age was 66.6 years and 63.3 percent of participants were female. Less than half of participants (n=11) had previous experience with side effects. Most participants were using at least one medicine (whether OTC or prescribed) and described themselves as knowledgeable or somewhat knowledgeable.<p> Participants were more likely to take the hypothetical drugs in the situations described when they received frequency data for side effects (p<0.05). Also, there was a significant higher mean likelihood of use when the drug was framed positively (p<0.01).<p> When considering decisions involving drug effectiveness and their side effects, the provision of frequency data increased patient likelihood of use. Framing the context in positive format also increased patient likelihood to use a medicine. This information could be important for pharmacists counseling on medication side effects, especially for those patients with medication adherence problems.

This dissertation is an empirical study of the scientific literacy of 28 young adults (aged 18-26 years) in the context of their decision making about the health risks of mobile phones. The issue of possible health effects is one of a number of socioscientific issues now confronting adults in the 'knowledge/risk' society where scientific knowledge plays an increasingly significant role in people's lives. The focus of interest is the young people's responses to the uncertain science of 'science in the making' (Latour, 1987) and their positioning of this scientific knowledge in their risk assessments. The study is based on an interactive model of the public understanding of science and applies a critical realist and moderate social constructionist methodology. Data construction included focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews. The stimulus for discussion in the focus groups was a recent television news report presenting contradictory scientific research findings about whether mobile phones pose significant health risks. In the individual interviews understanding of the nature of science and risk judgments were explored. Data analysis involved a coding of the discourse in terms of themes and issues and interpretation of these in terms of the theoretical framework of the thesis. A major finding was that these young people interpreted the uncertainty of the scientific knowledge mainly in social terms and with limited understanding of the role of theory in interpreting data. They talked spontaneously of risk but did not draw on scientific knowledge or risk estimates in their judgment about mobile phone safety. Findings have important implications for science education and suggest a broadened conception of scientific literacy which includes critical dimensions and risk literacy. It is argued that this functional scientific literacy is essential for effective citizenship in contemporary society.