Strategies for construction hazard recognition
Download 2.75 Mb. View original pdf
|
- Navigate this page:
- Cognitive retrieval mnemonics and collaborative learning
| Model content Following the creation of the model structure, we asked the domain experts to add to the model content. Using the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) we asked experts to identify practices for each criterion that represent typical performance of a mature crew (i.e., best practices, better than average crew (i.e., less mature, and worse than average crew (i.e., least mature. The NGT technique provides a quick process to accumulate information, which is essential when obtaining information from an expert panel with other commitments (Forsyth 2013). The responses were then aggregated and shared with the expert panel. Through the course of two focus group sessions conducted via teleconference, the experts refined and agreed upon the content of the tool resulting in the data shown in the Appendix. The experts agreed that each criterion should receive equal weight when used in a maturity model and that a score of mature fora particular criterion should receive a score of 3 while scores of less mature and least mature should receive scores of 2 and 1, respectively. Therefore, since there are 9 dimensions in the SMQM model, a crew could receive a score between 9 and 27. This score allows work-crews to self-regulate their performance in hazard recognition and communication and provides feedback on areas of strength and concern for subsequent improvement. The expert panel believed that this form of an intervention had great potential because it encourages worker engagement (Valtanen and Sihvonen 2008), self-regulation Latham 2012), feedback process (Renn and Fedor 2001) and promotes goal setting (Cameron and Duff 2007), which has shown to significantly improved performance. Additionally, the experts believed that the strategy was participant-centric, feasible for field implementation, adaptable for diverse work scenarios, and can be easily integrated with existing work practices. 87 Cognitive retrieval mnemonics and collaborative learning To reinforce hazard recognition skills during the plan section, the research team recognized the need to incorporate the principles of cognitive retrieval mnemonics to assist in hazard recognition. This is a technique that is independent from the SMQM in which information is translated or organized in a specific fashion based on the learner’s existing knowledge to help the human brain better retrieve the information when needed (Scruggs TE. et al. 2010; Scruggs and Mastropieri 1990). Such an approach has been empirically shown to effectively improve both memory and learning by several researchers (Eslinger 2002; Levin 1993; Mastropieri and Scruggs 1991). This process involves structurally transforming information into mental cues through a reliable encoding process which allows the information to be stored and retrieved from long term memory as required (Cook 1989; Mastropieri and Scruggs 1998). Several organizational mnemonics have been discussed in literature, such as acronym mnemonics Wilson 1987) and story mnemonics (Herrmann et al. 1973), and simple rhymes (Worthen and Hunt 2011) to assist in the retrieval process. Our goal in integrating mnemonics was to provide workers with cognitive cues which would assist workers to identify hazards associated with work-tasks and the work-environment. In determining the appropriate cognitive cues to be incorporated for the hazard identification process, the recent work of Fleming (2008) that categorizes hazards based on the primary energy source that could cause injury was used as a primer. The underlying theory is that all incidents are caused by specific energy sources (e.g., motion, gravity, radiation, etc, which can be identified before work begins. These energy sources, if released contrary to the operational objectives of work-tasks being performed may cause loss-of-control, with the potential for on- 88 the-job injuries or illness. The expert team predefined and operationalized the definitions of 10 energy sources that are relevant to construction operations to serve as cognitive cues. These definitions are summarized in Table 1. Apart from serving as cognitive cues for hazard identification, the energy sources also provided a unified framework for workers to review each energy type and discuss relevant hazards. Download 2.75 Mb. Share with your friends:
|