Overview
Organisations have a responsibility to manage fatigue-related risk in their operations. This unit builds on your understanding of risk management and workplace health and safety concepts and allows you to apply them to the hazard of fatigue. You will identify and evaluate the causes and consequences of fatigue, and apply the scientific evidence in developing guidance for the management of the individual, organisational and community risks. You will also explore and evaluate current regulatory and legal frameworks relating to the management of fatigue related risk.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
There are no requisites for this unit.
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 2 - 2024
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes - in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Postgraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of 'pass' in order to pass the unit. If any 'pass/fail' tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully ('pass' grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the 'assessment task' section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University's Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure - Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure - International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback - Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Student evaluations and teaching team reflections
Assessment expectations and feedback
Record videos on each assessment to provide rationale for assessment, learning goals, and marking criteria.
- Explain the physiological and psychological effects of fatigue
- Compare and contrast how work and non-work factors mediate fatigue
- Assess fatigue related risks associated with different working time arrangements and tasks
- Critically evaluate a Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) identifying gaps and recommending enhancements reflecting scientific and regulatory best-practice.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Online discussion forum - 30% | ||||
| 2 - Annotated bibliography - 40% | ||||
| 3 - Report - 30% | ||||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Knowledge | ||||
| 2 - Communication | ||||
| 3 - Cognitive, technical and creative skills | ||||
| 4 - Research | ||||
| 5 - Self-management | ||||
| 6 - Ethical and Professional Responsibility | ||||
| 7 - Leadership | ||||
| 8 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | ||||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Harvard (author-date)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
sally.ferguson@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Welcome and introduction to the unit
Chapter
Noy et al (2011). Future directions in fatigue and safety research. Accident Analysis and Prevention 43 (2011): 495-497.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Drop-in session - see moodle for details
Module/Topic
Working hours and approaches to fatigue risk management
Chapter
Williamson et al. The link between fatigue and safety. Accident Analysis and Prevention 43 (2011): 498-515.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Quantifying fatigue-related risks
Chapter
Ferguson and Dawson (2012). 12-hour or 8-hour shifts? It depends. Sleep Medicine Reviews.16(6): 519-28.
Garde et al (2020). How to schedule night shift work in order to reduce health and safety risks. Scand J Work Environ Health, 46(6): 557-569.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Drop-in session - see moodle for details
Module/Topic
Examining the effects of fatigue
Chapter
Di Milia et al (2011). Demographic factors, fatigue, and driving accidents: An examination of the published literature. Accident Analysis and Prevention 43 (2011): 516-532.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Legal and political context of fatigue management
Chapter
Gartner et al (2019). Working Time Society consensus statements: Regulatory approaches to reduce risks associated with shift work—a global comparison, Industrial Health, 57 (2): 245-263.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Drop-in session - see moodle for details
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Elements of a fatigue risk management system
Chapter
Wong et al (2019). Working Time Society consensus statements: A multi-level approach to managing occupational sleep-related fatigue, Industrial Health, 57(2): 228-244
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
The Defences in Depth framework
Chapter
Lerman et al (2012). Fatigue Risk Management in the Workplace. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 54(2), 231–258.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Drop-in session - see moodle for details
Module/Topic
Predictive controls - Level 1
Chapter
Dawson et al (2011). Modelling fatigue and the use of fatigue models in work settings, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(2): 549-564
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Proactive controls - Level 2
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Drop-in session - see moodle for details
Online discussion forum Due: Week 9 Thursday (12 Sept 2024) 11:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Proactive controls - Level 3
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Reactive controls - Level 4
Chapter
Dawson et al (2018). Determining the likelihood that fatigue was present in a road accident: A theoretical review and suggested accident taxonomy, Sleep Medicine Reviews, 42: 202-210
Events and Submissions/Topic
Drop-in session - see moodle for details
Module/Topic
Reactive controls - Level 5
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Online discussion forum
The online discussion forum assessment requires you to write SIX posts. TWO original posts (one on each of the discussion topics) and FOUR response posts.
Your original posts will be a discussion of Topic 1 and Topic 2 that integrates your personal or professional experience together with relevant peer-reviewed and grey literature. You should include a bibliography.
Your response posts will be a review of TWO of your peers posts in BOTH topics. Your response posts will review your peers' posts and extend or counter their argument. Your will again bring your own experience or perspective, together with relevant literature. You should include a bibliography.
You can write your original posts at any time. You will not be able to see posts from other students on a given topic until 15 minutes after posting your own. You have until Week 10 to complete all SIX posts. Each original and response post should be 400-600 words not including bibliography.
Topic 1 - Your organisation has adopted a shared responsibility model for fatigue and is planning to use a fitness for duty assessment to manage fatigue. Drawing from the literature and your professional or personal experience, discuss the legitimacy of this approach and provide a personal perspective as an employee.
Topic 2 - The focus of fatigue risk management has traditionally been on reducing errors and incidents in the workplace but research shows that shift work impacts health outcomes as well. Drawing from the literature and your professional or personal experience, make an evidence-based case for how you as an employee would like to see risk managed for one health outcome.
Week 9 Thursday (12 Sept 2024) 11:00 pm AEST
Online via moodle
Week 11 Thursday (26 Sept 2024)
You will be assessed on:
knowledge of, and engagement with the topic demonstrated through integration of scientific and grey literature.
the quality of scientific evidence provided in support of your argument,
clear and concise communication, including consistency of voice and language.
A rubric will be provided on the moodle site.
- Explain the physiological and psychological effects of fatigue
- Compare and contrast how work and non-work factors mediate fatigue
- Assess fatigue related risks associated with different working time arrangements and tasks
- Critically evaluate a Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) identifying gaps and recommending enhancements reflecting scientific and regulatory best-practice.
2 Annotated bibliography
Fatigue impacts physiological and psychological performance that in turn can impact workplace safety and long-term health and well-being. Choose a specific work context (such as control room monitoring, cabin crew, or something from your own experience) and identify FOUR work or non-work related factors that can contribute to increased fatigue likelihood.
For each factor, find a relevant scientific journal article, and describe what the article means in terms of the impacts of fatigue on the chosen work task, and/or potential strategies to reduce fatigue-related risk for that work task. Synthesis the evidence from your review of the articles into specific recommendations to the organisation for managing risks of fatigue in that work context.
Your annotated bibliography should be approximately 2000 words not including the full citations.
Week 6 Thursday (22 Aug 2024) 11:00 pm AEST
Online via moodle
Week 8 Thursday (5 Sept 2024)
You will be assessed on:
your knowledge of the topic including identification of factors that contribute to fatigue,
quality of scientific evidence sourced in support of argument,
ability to critically analyse literature and apply to real-world contexts,
clarity and consistency of communication.
The rubric will be available on moodle.
- Explain the physiological and psychological effects of fatigue
- Compare and contrast how work and non-work factors mediate fatigue
3 Report
A Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) enables an organisation to identify the risks that fatigue presents to its workers’ health and safety, and put in place strategies to mitigate those risks. In this assignment you will review a FRMS policy and provide recommendations for revisions.
You will be required to: 1) evaluate the FRMS in terms of its specific processes for hazard identification and risk mitigation; 2) identify gaps in the FRMS; and 3) suggest improvements to the FRMS based on the understanding of scientific and regulatory best- practice you have developed in this course.
Your report should be approximately 2000 words (not including your bibliography).
Week 12 Thursday (3 Oct 2024) 11:00 pm AEST
Exam Week Thursday (17 Oct 2024)
You will be assessed based on
knowledge of science underpinning fatigue risk and application of key safety management principles,
detailed analysis of gaps and suggested revisions,
concise, clear and consistent communication.
The rubric will be available on moodle.
- Assess fatigue related risks associated with different working time arrangements and tasks
- Critically evaluate a Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) identifying gaps and recommending enhancements reflecting scientific and regulatory best-practice.
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
