As with all professions, evidence-based practice is extremely important to the integrity of the profession. Therefore, knowing where to find evidence to support practice is valuable for improving human factors concerns that impact health and safety. This exercise is intended to help you practice your research skills and to give all students a brief overview of some of the research being conducted in the field of Human Factors (aka Ergonomics). Furthermore, this exercise may also serve as a useful starting point for the other assessments. Your task is to do the following:

1. Post a review of one (1) research article from a peer reviewed journal that no other student has reviewed (word limit 150) (16 marks)
2. Reply to at least three (3) of your colleagues to extend the discussion topic (word limit 100 each) (3 marks each)
3. Ensure you make one contribution in each of the four domain forums
4. In total, you will have made four (4) contributions, one in each domain forum
5. References (not included in the word count)

The four domain forums for this assessment item are:

• Physical Ergonomics
  
• Cognitive Ergonomics
• Organisational Ergonomics
• Environmental Ergonomics

Item 1. To post your research article review, start a new topic and provide the citation of the article in the topic header, e.g. (Smith 2018). This will make it easier to know which articles have been reviewed. Your post should include:

• The research article review (aim/problem, methods, results, conclusions)
• A complete reference and publication DOI number
• The attached article (pdf)

Item 2. The reply posts should meaningfully extend the topic. To do this you may:

• Relate a personal experience, or
• Relate another study, news story, or other source (cite and include references where appropriate).

NOTE: all reviewed articles must be published in a journal. Therefore, do not review chapters, books, white papers, conference papers, workbooks, handbooks, and the like for the review post (Item 1 above). However, these items are acceptable in a reply post where appropriate (Item 2 above).

The review post (16 marks):

1. Journal article is published and attached (1 mark)
2. The aim of the study/article (2 marks)
3. The human interaction problem being investigated/discussed (1 marks)
4. The research method used (4 marks)
5. The research findings and conclusions drawn (5 marks)
6. Reference and DOI number, word limit (3 marks)

The meaningful reply (3 marks each):

1. Adds meaningfully to the discussion (2 marks)
2. References included where appropriate (1 mark)

An important skill of safety science professionals is to identify work tasks that present Musculoskeletal Disorder (MSD) risks. This assignment is about developing your understanding of the principles of assessment for physical human-task interactions while at work. You are required to identify a manual handling task that involves a two-handed lift. You are required to conduct a hierarchical task analysis and then to assess the task being carried out using two different human factors analytical tools. You must use the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation and another suitable tool (e.g. RULA, REBA). From the findings of your analyses you are to offer redesign recommendations. Your work is to be presented in a scientific poster abstract format. The poster should incorporate design principles to achieve low cognitive load for the viewer. The poster is to be suitable for display at a conference to inform delegates of the physical task you have assessed.

Your poster should contain the following:

1. Describes the context of the workplace or other setting
2. Identifies who is at risk (stakeholders)
3. Describes the task being performed
4. Identifies the MSD risk and when it arises during the task
5. Discusses the significance of the risk
6. Redesigns the task to reduce the MSD risks found
7. Reference list contains scholarly articles that are appropriately referenced

Poster content:

1. Identifies context of workplace and/or other setting and people involved (2 marks)
2. Describes the task being assessed (2 marks)
3. Conducts a hierarchical task analysis (2 marks)
4. Assesses the MSD risk using two appropriate human factors analytical tools (6 marks)
5. Discusses the significance of the risk (2 marks)
6. Redesigns the task to reduce the MSD risks found (4 marks)
7. Reference list contains scholarly articles that are appropriately referenced (2 marks)

Poster design:

Utilises human factors design principles to enhance swift comprehension of the message portrayed (e.g. low cognitive load, colour, placement, imagery, etc.) (5 marks)

This project has three main objectives:

1. to develop leadership and project management skills relevant to design projects
2. to develop design thinking and the user-centred design process
3. to develop reflective practice

You are required to complete the following tasks:

1. Team project plan (10 marks)
2. Team concept proposal (30 marks)
3. Individual reflections (management of the team) (5 marks)
4. Self and peer review (member contribution) (5 marks)

Unless there are exceptional circumstances, all team members will receive the same grade for team submissions. It is up to the individual team members to negotiate how the final proposal will be written. Teams may choose to allocate different sections to each team member, or the team may allocate one member to write the report and each team member provides the relevant content to that member. It is strongly recommended that one team member be the coordinator of the final document.

1. Team Project Plan

As a team, you are to develop a team project plan to establish lines of communication and rules of process. Before developing the project plan, you are required to complete an individual team role test that is provided on our Moodle site. The results from this test will be used to form your team and help you build your team profile. Details about forming teams will be provided on the Moodle site. In 1000 to 1200 words, the project plan should contain:

• Team profile (team leader, roles, strengths & limitations)
• Communication details and arrangements
• Tentative schedule of milestones, dates and responsibilities
• Issues resolution plan (that all members agree to)

2. Team Concept Proposal

As a team, you are to prepare and submit online one Concept Proposal. Your task is to find a usability problem with a product (i.e. problematic human-machine interaction) and to apply human factors design principles and tools to assess the interaction problem. Based on analyses, your team is to propose redesign changes to the product to improve usability in the form of a Redesign Concept Proposal. In 3000 words, the proposal should include:

• Title page
• Executive summary
• Table of contents
• Significance of the usability problem
• Methods
• Results and Discussion
• Problem definition statement (and associated success criteria)
• Redesign options
• Justification and details of chosen concept (including: technical drawings and materials costing)
• References
• Appendices (if necessary)

The word limit excludes: title page, executive summary, table of contents, reference list, and appendices.

Proposal presentation layout:

• Single document
• Professional proposal format and headings
• 1.5 line spacing
• Word document
• Sketches and/or photos can be included but total file size cannot exceed 10MB.

3. Team management

• Individual Reflections

As individuals, you are required to reflect on your teamwork experience by answering two questions. Your reflections are to be completed on the Individual Reflections Form available on Moodle. Please submit online by the due date to avoid a late penalty. The total word range for reflections is 200 to 400 words. Your work will be marked on the quality of the writing and the depth of academic reflection about the learning experience during the development of the concept proposal project. Journal entries that reflect on the lessons learned during project completion will receive a higher grade than entries that simply list tasks performed.

The two questions to be answered relate to the management of the team:

1. What I did to help create a productive team effort?
2. What I will do differently in the future to make teamwork more productive?

• Self & Peer Review

In Week 11 you will be provided a link to an online survey via email. You will grade yourself using the set criteria, and then grade each of your fellow team members using the same criteria. To be fairly graded by fellow team members, you will need to let team members know exactly what has been done during the development of the project plan and concept proposal. If student work performance is poor, or communication skills are poor, the peer review mark will reflect this. This survey must be completed prior to the due date when it will close.

The Unit Coordinator will allocate a grade based on a combination of the self-assessment and the peer review mark allocated by fellow team members. If you believe that the peer assessment is unfair, you can make a case to the Unit Coordinator who will moderate the grade on a case-by-case basis.

Team Project Plan (10 marks)

1. Team profile (2 marks)
2. Communication details and arrangements (2 marks)
3. Tentative schedule of project stage completion, dates and responsibilities (3 marks)
4. Issues resolution plan (3 marks)

Team Concept Proposal (30 marks)

1. Integrates principles of human capability and limitations (physical and cognitive) (5 marks)
2. Analyses the usability problem including the environment of use (5 marks)
3. Develops a suitable problem definition statement and success criteria (5 marks)
4. Systematically evaluates potential concept solutions (5 marks)
5. Develops a redesign concept that meets the problem definition from a human and technical perspective (5 marks)
6. Format is consistent with a professional concept proposal in that it contains all relevant parts, is logically argued, structured appropriately, clearly expressed, and void of grammatical and referencing errors (5 marks)

Team management (10 marks)

1. Individual Reflections (5 marks)

• Assessed on depth of academic reflection about the learning experience of the project (5 marks)

NOTE: Journal entries that reflect on the lessons learned during project work will receive a higher grade than entries that simply list tasks performed

2. Self & Peer Review (5 marks)

• Average score from the self and peer review process (5 marks)