Hands-on earthquake program boosts seismic awareness among Colombian students
image: Diagram showing the three sequential phases of the LEAP program: Phase 1 – Theoretical Introduction (active and visual learning, including interactive presentation on seismic context and vulnerability, and hands-on demonstrations with 3D-printed models and shake tables); Phase 2 – Educational Game (experiential and collaborative learning, including team-based structural reinforcement, resource management, a wheel of events, and earthquake simulations on shake tables); and Phase 3 – Data Collection through Surveys (assessment of active/experiential learning, including pre- and post-surveys and learning outcomes assessment).
Credit: Melo, D.A.; Gomez, D.; Villamizar, S.; Castañeda, G.; Garcia-Troncoso, N. The Learning Experience for Earthquake Awareness Program (LEAP): An Experiential Approach to Seismic Design for Young Students. Sustainability 2026, 18, 1233. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18031233
The statistical analysis, based on the Wilcoxon test with a significance level of p < 0.05, confirmed substantial improvements across all participant groups. Overall, the ability to distinguish between hypocenter and epicenter increased by 45.39%; understanding of seismic magnitude improved by 39.01%; and the visual identification of structural vulnerabilities increased between 25% and 38%, with moderate to large effect sizes.
High school students showed the greatest conceptual gains, with improvements of up to 68% in concepts they had been completely unfamiliar with before the activity. In the two participating universities, where civil engineering, architecture, and construction students took part in the sessions, the results revealed an equally valuable pattern: although prior knowledge was higher, LEAP strengthened the applied and visual understanding of concepts that university curricula often address only theoretically. In particular, the ability to recognize vertical geometric irregularities in images of real buildings increased by more than 57 percentage points among university students, demonstrating that even technically trained students benefit from direct experience with physical models and seismic simulations.
Straws, cardboard, and awareness: the key lies in accessible materials
One of LEAP’s most remarkable features is its low-cost and highly replicable nature. The materials used—straws, recycled cardboard, adhesive tape, and 3D-printed PLA models—can easily be replaced with wooden sticks, clay, or handmade sliding surfaces without affecting the learning objectives. The approximate cost per session ranges between 20 and 40 dollars, depending on group size, while preparing the space requires only 20 to 30 minutes. The full activity can be completed in approximately 90 minutes, making it compatible with a standard classroom period.
This accessibility makes LEAP especially relevant for countries across Latin America and the Caribbean, where seismic hazard is high and specialized educational resources are often limited. The program’s cost-effectiveness is particularly noteworthy: with minimal investment, students not only learn to identify weaknesses in a straw structure, but also begin to look differently at the buildings where they live, study, and work. Understanding why, for example, a soft story makes a building dangerous is knowledge that can eventually translate into more informed construction decisions and greater public demand for compliance with seismic regulations.
From a curricular perspective, the program can be easily integrated into physics, technology, earth sciences, or disaster risk management courses at both secondary and university levels. Its modular structure and low logistical requirements allow implementation without specialized infrastructure, advanced laboratories, or extensive technical training for teachers.
Beyond the statistical indicators, LEAP demonstrates that it is possible to cultivate a culture of seismic resilience starting in the classroom. When a young person learns to recognize a short column, an irregular floor plan, or a weak connection—not from a manual, but from a model they built with their own hands and tested on a shaking table—that knowledge stops being abstract. It becomes part of how they understand the spaces they inhabit.
The next step is to adapt LEAP to community-based contexts, where its impact could extend beyond students to families and neighborhoods where informal construction remains the norm.
The study’s central message is clear: reducing seismic risk is not only a technical challenge. It is also an educational challenge. And that challenge can begin with a very small budget and a simple but powerful question: would your building resist an earthquake?