ASSESSMENT BRIEF 2023-2024

Programme: B.Sc(Hons.) Health and safety environment Management

Module Code/Module Title: OM2071 / Safety Technology

Module Tutor: Dr. Sreejaya

Assessment Title/ Number: Coursework 2 - Group project report

Date of Issue:11/02/24

Date of Submission: 16/05/24

(Tick in the appropriate box)

You are encouraged to word process your assessment, although hand

written work is acceptable.


You are required to word process this assessment.

You are required to submit this assessment electronically through Uclan 

Blackboard

Instructions:

 This paper contains 1 task.

 Answer the questions / complete the tasks fully with all possible evidence for
achieving the learning outcome/s.
Please do not submit this assessment brief with your work.

 This assessment is worth 60 % of the module mark.

 ASSESSMENT COVER SHEET 2023-2024

Programme: B.Sc(Hons.) Health and safety environment Management

Module Title/Module Code: OM2071 / Safety Technology
Student Name:
UCLan ID:
Assessment Title/ Number: Coursework 2 – Group project report
Date of Submission: 16/05/24
I confirm that this piece of work which I have Mark in
submitted is all my own work and that references Max. Percen
and quotations from both primary and secondary Question/ Task Mark tage
sources have been fully identified and properly
acknowledged. I am fully aware that plagiarism Introduction 10
and collusion are academic offences.
I also confirm that I have not used translation Mechanical Hazards 15
services or translation software in the production of
this assignment. Electrical Hazards 15
Student’s signature:
Ergonomic Hazards 15
Date:
Please note the following penalties for late Chemical Hazards 15
submission:
Date of Control measures of
each hazard using
Submission Maximum Mark
application of
1-5 working days 10
automation
late 40%
More than 5 Conclusion 10
working days late 0%
References 10

External Examiner
1st Marker 2nd Marker* UCLan Verification Initials
Name: Name: Name: Name:
Date: Date: Date: Date:
* 2nd Marking on sample basis. Please note that all marks are provisional subject to confirmation by the Module
Assessment Board of the University of Central Lancashire, UK.
Task

Assume you are working as the plant safety officer of an oil and gas company, where
the workers are working for installing an offshore platform. A lot of equipment, materials
and machineries are used for establishing the platform. The site facility can produce
several types of hazards.To ensure the safety of the plant, a five member group of
health and safety team was created and assume that you are part of that health and
safety team, and requested to prepare a 2500 words report covering the following
hazards and prevention measures using automation.

Report should include,

 Brief description of the company.

 explain the Hazards related to :
a. Mechanical Hazards
b. Electrical Hazards
c. Ergonomic Hazards and
d. Chemical Hazards
 Control measures of each hazard using application of automation.
 Conclusion.

Each Group having 5 members and requested to submit one group report of no more
than 2500 words.

Guidelines:
1. The report should normally contain an introduction and conclusion sections with
appropriate sections explaining the above details.

2. Use Microsoft Word for word processing.

3. Page setup margins normal. Use A4 paper size settings and use 2.5cm margins all
around, Leave the Gutter at 0 cm.

4. Body text is Arial 12 point, single-spaced with no paragraph spacing attached before
or after. Text is left justified. Leave one blank line between paragraphs.

5. The pages should be numbered consecutively, starting from introduction page;

however, the title page should not be numbered.
6. All symbols and abbreviations must be defined and used only when absolutely
necessary.

7. The number of words must be shown at the end of the work submitted. The title
page and contents page will not count; neither will the list of reference at the end of
the work.

8. As an indication, word count should not exceed the specified number.

9. Do not forget to reference your work properly; otherwise you will put yourself at the
risk of “PLAGIARISM”.

10. You are advised to different references to complete this assignment, some of which
need to be books.

11. Remember that the style of your work, and its language accuracy, are indicators of
how much care you have given to the assignment, and how capable are you in
expressing your thoughts in a presentable and professional way.

12. The piece of course work should be submitted using TurnitinUK in UCLan
blackboard.

13. The module tutor would take decision to evaluate your work based on the similarity
index from the Turnitin submissions, however there is no acceptable limit and it’s
based on the judgement.

14. There are nominal marks allotted for the document structure and format of the report
and it’s important to follow all the assessment instruction while preparing.

15. There is no possible extension allowed beyond the due date for submissions in the
blackboard Turnitin.

Referencing

(a) Absence of proper referencing will invite “plagiarism”.

(b) For citation and referencing follow the Harvard referencing system strictly and all
the written materials should be supported with proper citations and references in
the report and the presentation.
Academic Misconduct Definitions

 Cheating is any deliberate attempt to deceive and covers a range of offences

described in the ICEM Policy on Unfair Means to Enhance Performance.
 Plagiarism describes copying from the works of another person without suitably
attributing the published or unpublished works of others.
 Collusion is an attempt to deceive the examiners by disguising the true
authorship of an assignment by copying, or imitating in close detail another
student's work - this includes with the other student's consent and also when 2 or
more students divide the elements of an assignment amongst themselves and
copy one another's answers.
 Re-presentation is an attempt to gain credit twice for the same piece of work.
 Fabrication is making up research data or results and reporting the same.
 Falsification is manipulating the research data or results such that inaccurate
information is reported.

Accepted Similarity Index

 The College uses an online Assessment Tool called Turnitin. Students are
required to self-submit their own assignment on Turnitin and will be given access
to the Originality Reports arising from each submission.
 The accepted similarity percentage for an assessment is about 10%. However,
the case may still be reported for investigation if the similarity percentage is
below 10% subject to the Module Tutor's academic judgment.
 Similarity percentages above 10 % will be reported to the Unfair Means to
Enhance Performance Committee subject to the discussion with the Module
Tutor/justification from the Module Tutor. The case may or may not be formally
investigated.

Penalties of Academic Misconduct

 All instances or allegations of the use of unfair means within summative

assessment will be investigated in line with the college UMEP policy. If an
 allegation is found to be proven, then the appropriate penalty will be
implemented:
 For the first time: the penalty will be 0% for the element of assessment, the
plagiarized element of assessment must be resubmitted to the required standard
and the mark for the module following resubmission will be restricted to the
minimum pass mark (i.e. 40%).
 In the event of a repeat offence of cheating, plagiarism, collusion or re-
presentation on the same or any other module within the course; the appropriate
penalty will be 0% for the module with no opportunity for reassessment and you
being able to retake the module in a subsequent year.

Penalties for Over-length Assignments

 Assignment briefs will include clear instructions about word counts. Students are
expected to adhere to the word count requirements for each assessment. If
students exceed these word count limits, they may receive a reduction in marks
as follows.
 For written assignments that exceed a word count limit by
 0-10% - no penalty
 +>10.1% - 20% : 2.5% reduction in mark
 +>20.1% - 30% : 5% reduction in mark
 +>30.1% - 40% : 7.5% reduction in mark
 +>40.1% - 50% : 10% reduction in mark
 +>50.1% - 60% : 12.5% reduction in mark
 +>60.1% - 70% : 15% reduction in mark
 +>70.1% - 80% : 17.5% reduction in mark
 +>80.1% - 90% : 20% reduction in mark
 +>90.1% - 100% : 22.5% reduction in mark
 >100%: 25% reduction in mark but no student will fail an assessment because of
a penalty for exceeding the word limit.

Artificial Intelligence Guidance

Artificial Intelligence (AI) will breach the academic regulations when: “Using
technological aids and AI, including translation software, paraphrasing tools, text
generating software (essay bots), and tools to generate graphics or artworks, without
specific authorisation.” (source QAA April
 Initial Key Principles for Students on the use of Artificial Intelligence
 Using AI under the tutor’s guidance will be acceptable in certain situations but
students need to ensure that they comply with the academic regulations on
Academic Integrity.
 Ensure the use of the AI tool is in line with the assessment brief and any further
advice from the tutor setting the assignment.
 Do not rely solely on AI tools to complete assignments. Use AI tools to enhance
your work, not as a replacement for it.
 Acknowledge the extent to which AI has been used as part of referencing their
sources, clarifying the contribution of AI to make clear what is their own work.
Students have to cite AI tool they used (such as ChatGPT) and describe how
they used it.
 Avoid assuming that AI responses are always accurate. AI-generated information
may sometimes be inaccurate or misleading.
 Keep drafts to evidence the thinking and development of the work if requested.
 Students may be asked to respond to questions to test their knowledge of their
assessed work.
 Failure to follow this advice may lead to allegations of academic misconduct and
will impact students’ ability to defend themselves.

Marking Criteria

The course work will be assessed and graded on the overall report submitted and
weightage is indicative to knowledge, analysis, supporting evidences, presentation
of the overall piece of work. However, the more weightage of marks is allotted to the
main elements of the report as mentioned above.
 LEVEL FIVE
FIRST Written work is directly relevant to the title.
Knowledge and understanding is impressive and
(80-100%) reflects extensive reading. Citation and
referencing are impeccable. Theory and evidence
are invariably related. Argument is always
relevant and well sustained. The student
demonstrates a willingness to challenge received
wisdom and to sustain a dialogue in these terms.
Presentation is highly sophisticated and in an
appropriate format.
FIRST Written work is directly relevant to the title.
Knowledge and understanding is impressive and
(70-79%) reflects wide reading. Citation and referencing are
excellent. Theory and evidence are clearly
related. Argument is relevant and well sustained.
The student demonstrates a willingness to
challenge received wisdom and to sustain a
dialogue in these terms. Presentation is
sophisticated and in an appropriate format
UPPER SECOND Written work is directly relevant to the title. The
knowledge base is judged sound and relevant.
(60-69%) The student is judged to be developing an ability
to relate theory and evidence, concepts and
ideas. Content is always relevant and well
presented, and generally well focused, but can
lack breadth or depth. Material is well presented
and in an appropriate format. Citation and
referencing are very good.
LOWER SECOND Written work is predominantly directly relevant to
the title. Knowledge base is sound but
(50-59%) unimpressive. Occasional analysis but generally
cannot rise above well-articulated assertion.
Alternatively, some analysis but can lack clarity of
focus. Occasional grammatical lapses. Material is
well presented and in an acceptable format,
although a few deficiencies are apparent. Citation
and referencing are generally sound but may
contain some errors.
THIRD Written work is relevant but largely descriptive.
 LEVEL FIVE
Student appears not to grasp the difference
(40-49%) between assertion and analysis, or may see
nothing wrong on offering unjustified, perhaps
polemical assertions. Written work may contain
some analysis but is poorly expressed. Syntax
and grammar sometimes unsound. Competent
presentation and an acceptable format, although
deficiencies are clearly evident. Citation and
referencing are present but may contain quite a
few errors.
COMPENSATABLE At least 40% of material presented is relevant but
FAIL there may be limited reference to the question. A
generally poor but compensatable answer with
(35-39%) extensive errors and omissions, or a substantial
answer on the general topic in which the specific,
central question is misinterpreted or avoided, or a
very good essay in note form. Presentation is
poor and sometimes inarticulate. Limited
evidence of appropriate reading but citation and
referencing must be present, there may be a
substantial number of errors.
UNCOMPENSATABLE At least 40% of material presented is relevant but
FAIL there may be limited reference to the question. A
generally weak answer with extensive errors and
(30-34%) omissions, or a quite substantial answer on the
general topic in which the specific, central
question is misinterpreted or avoided.
Presentation is poor and often inarticulate. Little
evidence of appropriate reading but citation and
referencing must be present, there may be a
substantial number of errors.
FAIL Less than 40% of material presented is relevant.
A very weak answer with extensive errors and
(20-29%) omissions, or an insubstantial answer on the
general topic in which the specific, central
question is seriously misinterpreted or avoided, or
a good essay in note form. There is only partial
understanding demonstrated. Presentation is
poor, often inarticulate and sometimes
 LEVEL FIVE
incomprehensible. Very limited evidence of
background reading; citation and referencing may
be absent.
FAIL An exceptionally poor answer with extensive
errors and omissions and limited evidence of
(10-19%) relevant knowledge, or a weak essay in note
form, or an answer that ignores the question to an
extent that hardly any of the content can be
construed as being relevant to the general topic
of the question. Presentation is very poor, often
inarticulate and incomprehensible. No evidence of
background reading.
FAIL Answer not attempted, or limited to only a few
paragraphs, or a very weak answer in note form,
(0-9%) or of little or no relevance to the general topic of
the question. Zero is reserved for failure to
attempt an answer, or no, or late submission.