Radiation

Module description

In this module, students are invited to explore: falsify ("bust") or confirm common myths about radiation. In our everyday life circulate many deep-rooted fears, misconceptions, and conspiracy theories concerning the causes and effects of radiation. Chernobyl (also known as Chornobyl) catastrophe happened more than 35 years ago, but it still echoing and strongly influences current debates about Nuclear Power. Some conspiracy theorists state that "Chernobyl" was not caused by a combination of technical and human failures but was "organised" to accelerate the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Our students are often not well informed about different forms of radiation and their impacts on the human body. Practical activities concerning the effects of radiation (especially ionising radiation) usually are excluded from science classrooms for safety reasons, and corresponding experiment materials are not available in schools. Eventually, smartphones and other mobile devices can open new opportunities for conducting qualitative electromagnetic radiation experiments. Therefore, we leave it to the teacher possibility to choose to do experiments depending on pre-conditions for such activities. Otherwise, suggesting evidence collection through reliable sources of scientific and professional information. Students can also use more than one of these methods, applying the so-called triangulation principle – increasing validity through the convergence of information from different sources.

In the introductory video, some misconceptions and myths are brought up, which are further discussed in groups. Group discussions lead to a myth-busting activity of evidence collection where students are looking for data allowing them to falsify or confirm a chosen myth.

The biological effects of low-dose radiation will probably attract the students' attention. However, this issue still has some scientific controversies, and studies often rely on statistical evidence from long-time observations. Therefore, based on the nature of this topic, activities suggested in this module will rely heavily on secondary evidence gathered through literature searches and data collected from the internet. Through these activities, students learn to assess the reliability of information sources and make evidence-based arguments. After making conclusions, students prepare to present their findings to their classmates (or other audiences) in a relevant and convincing manner (e.g. video posts). The module is finished with a debate game where students can make socio-scientific decisions using their scientific knowledge while incorporating it with personal and social values.

The module consists of teacher material (teaching suggestions, science background information) and student material (introductory video, interactive worksheets, fact videos, and a video tutorial).

Learning objectives targeted by the module

• Citizenship competence: develop students' knowledge and attitudes toward making responsible decisions about radiation's advantages and risks.
• Media competence:
  • develop students' skills in assessing the reliability of the information, presenting the information in a manner relevant to a given audience;
  • reacting adequately and responsibly to fake news and conspiracy theories presented in (social)media.
• Digital competence: develop students' skills in using digital media while presenting their inquiry results to the other groups.
• Science competence:
  • develop students' understanding of the ways how science knowledge is generated and why we should trust science;
  • develop further students' knowledge about the risks of different forms of radiation and protection;
  • develop their ability to plan and devise procedures for testing the myth and interpreting the findings.
• Social competence: develop students' argumentation skills and skills when finding group consensus on controversial radiation-related issues.

Expected prior knowledge about radiation

• Basic knowledge of electricity and magnetism
• Properties of waves
• Light as a form of energy from the sun
• Natural and artificial radiation sources
• Structure of an atom
• Basic knowledge about national policy on the use of nuclear energy

Potential obstacles to consider

The concept of radiation might have negative psychological connotations for students. It could be related to the perceived danger of nuclear weapons and direct health risks associated with radiation exposure that leads to an increased risk for cancer and, possibly, additional ill-defined non-cancer risks, including atherosclerotic, cardiovascular, and neurodegenerative effects.

It is expected that students have the experience to evaluate the reliability of information sources on the Internet. Otherwise, it might take extra teaching time to work on this issue.

Module structure

This module consists of 6 activities. The sequence of activities is given in Figure 1 and Table 1 (see below).

Table 1. Learning activities of the radiation module

Requirements for physical environment

Smartphone, computer, internet, display equipment for demonstrating videos.

Assessment

Students can be assessed differently throughout the module, including science process skills, general competencies, argumentation skills, and topic-related content knowledge. Assessments that could be applied in this module:

formative:

• Oral/written feedback from the teacher (based on observations, questions asked, etc.) throughout the module, during the experiments, and in other formats of individual/group work.
• Peer feedback (on the group presentation using the following tool and self-assessment after the final debate game).

Summative:

• Grades assigned by the teacher on the group presentation (based on the students’ video product and its performance and students’ ability to provide relevant answers/comments).
• Grades are assigned by the teacher on group or individual worksheets.

Teaching suggestions

Work with this module can be structured in two parts. The first part (Activities 1-5) is mainly related to work with specific radiation myths identified in the Introductory video, recalled by the students, or suggested by the teacher. The second part (Activity 6) focuses on work with the socio-acute topic of Nuclear Power that is summed up with the help of a debate game / role-play (see student material).

The module starts with an introductory video for raising some issues and revealing fears, myths, or misconceptions about radiation, for example:

• Mobile phones emit dangerous electromagnetic radiation
• 5G is not safe
• Rubber gloves can protect from electromagnetic radiation emitted by mobile phones
• Electromagnetic radiation (radio waves) can be “frozen” at low temperature
• It can be effectively stopped by the walls of a refrigerator
• Plastic and aluminium foil can block electromagnetic waves
• Electric cables emit dangerous electromagnetic radiation
• Sun sends dangerous radiation

The introductory video aims to raise questions and stimulate reflections rather than give students immediate answers. It is expected that after watching the video (Activity 1), students will get motivated to examine one of the identified myths related to different sources of electromagnetic radiation and explore common fears. Myths and fears can vary between different countries and age groups. Teachers could encourage students to find their ‘own’ myths.

The teacher can introduce an expanded view of the radiation spectrum that includes ionising components – from ultraviolet emitted by our Sun to the shorter wavelength and high-energy particles. The intention is to broaden students’ views on the physics of radiation and its applications and attract their attention to some myths related to the different effects of radiation. Students are also encouraged to recall their prior knowledge, including existing understandings in everyday life among people they know, family, and friends, and to share their conceptions and views with peers (Activity 2). The “fact videos” can be demonstrated in this step to highlight and broaden radiation-related topics, concepts, and principles. Selected chapters from scientific background information can recur when necessary.

Activity 2 should help students narrow down their chosen myth into a hypothesis/research question that can be confirmed/answered (Activity 3). Further, this step can be enacted in the following two ways:

1. Students can choose a myth that can be tested experimentally, collecting evidence through simple qualitative experiments. For example, the level of electromagnetic radiation exposure could be measured with the help of a free smartphone app, e.g. ElectroSmart or similar. ElectroSmart is a Radiofrequency Electromagnetic-Field (EMF) detector (see Figure 2).

   

   This app allows measurement of a current exposure using the ElectroSmart Index, indicating if exposure is suiting most people (low or moderate level) or high, that eventually needs some measures to be taken for its reduction. Students can see that increasing distance to the source can decrease (in square rate) the level of exposure. They can also try to use a shield of aluminium foil (on their smartphone) to see a decrease in exposure by shielding. For a variation of this test, see also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asmbgAeJqis.

   If you have access to a simple analogue or digital physics tool - an EMF measuring device (see Figure 3), it is possible to measure the radiation emanating from each of your chosen electronic devices: laptop computer, tablet device, smartphone, printer, speakers, TV, remote control, lamp, refrigerator, modem and compare the amounts of radiation from each device.

   

   If more advanced (and expensive) EMF measuring tools are available, more sophisticated measurements could be done; see for inspiration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKPw-dnxZTo

2. However, radiation-related myths can often not be busted (debunked) experimentally in the classroom. Therefore, students are expected to gather evidence from secondary sources to confirm or falsify their hypothesis/answer to their research question. By juxtaposing media/data sources and their content, students critically analyse their reliability and make justified conclusions based on the evidence found. As reliability assessment can be a real challenge for students, the material is supplied with a tool for searching and analysing the information. It would be good if the teacher could explain its use by demonstrating and analysing both reliable and less reliable sources as examples before the students implement this tool on their own.

In order to communicate their findings, students are guided to produce a visual presentation of their conclusions (Activity 4). Video could be an exciting option. For this purpose, students can use a video tutorial. Also, student material is provided with criteria the video should fulfil when ready. These criteria can be used formatively for self-assessment during the process and peer assessment when presenting the video and answering the questions of their peers and the teacher (Activity 5). Students can use the following assessment tool to give feedback to, or get it from, the other groups.

In the last activity (Activity 6), socially-acute issues related to ionising radiation and nuclear energy will be debated. Suggested debate role-play is presented in the student material. It can be adapted freely to a particular educational context. Teachers can decide what kind of assessment to use or not to encourage the free expression of students' ideas and arguments. Based on the lessons learned from the earlier stages, students can juxtapose and reflect on their science knowledge and personal and social values.

We suggest using a specific topic, "Nuclear Power," currently focused on public attention and actively debated in many European countries. Almost every country has its own, more or less specific, "nuclear energy" debate. Teachers could encourage students to follow the debate in their own country. Often there are also apparent fears, misconceptions, and myths that could be identified related to this specific topic, such as….

• Myth 1: Nuclear energy is not safe.
• Myth 2: Nuclear energy contributes to carbon emissions and thus leads to atmospheric pollution and global warming.
• Myth 3: Nuclear waste needs to be stored for 100,000 years.
• Myth 4: Nuclear plants emit dangerous amounts of radiation.
• Myth 5: Radiation exposure only occurs from a nuclear power station.
• Myth 6: We do not need nuclear power in the EU.
• Myth 7: Nuclear plants are ageing and inefficient.
• Myth 8: Nuclear power plants can explode.
• Myth 9: Nuclear waste cannot be safely transported.
• Myth 10: Nuclear plant workers are radioactive themselves.

Facts related to these myths about nuclear energy are presented in the Scientific background information.

Teachers should be aware of historical and social aspects leading to nuclear radiation fears. Some ideas related to this issue are also highlighted in the Scientific background information. There, teachers can get a quick overview of the science concepts and facts covered by the Radiation module and related areas that students can be curious about.