Aug - Oct 2014

Examiners Report NEBOSH International Certificate in Construction Health and Safety (ICC1)

Examiners’ Report NEBOSH INTERNATIONAL CERTIFICATE IN CONSTRUCTION HEALTH AND SAFETY UNIT ICC1: MANAGING AND CONTROLLING HAZARDS IN INTERNATIONAL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES

AUGUST – OCTOBER 2014

CONTENTS Introduction 2 General comments 3 Candidate performance 4 Learning outcomes 4 Examination technique 6 Command words 7 Conclusion 8

2015 NEBOSH, Dominus Way, Meridian Business Park, Leicester LE19 1QW tel: 0116 263 4700 fax: 0116 282 4000 email: info@nebosh.org.uk website: www.nebosh.org.uk The National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health is a registered charity, number 1010444

Introduction NEBOSH (The National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health) was formed in 1979 as an independent examining board and awarding body with charitable status. We offer a comprehensive range of globally-recognised, vocationally-related qualifications designed to meet the health, safety, environmental and risk management needs of all places of work in both the private and public sectors. Courses leading to NEBOSH qualifications attract around 50,000 candidates annually and are offered by over 600 course providers, with examinations taken in over 110 countries around the world. Our qualifications are recognised by the relevant professional membership bodies including the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) and the International Institute of Risk and Safety Management (IIRSM). NEBOSH is an awarding body that applies best practice setting, assessment and marking and applies to Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) regulatory requirements. This report provides guidance for candidates which it is hoped will be useful to candidates and tutors in preparation for future examinations. It is intended to be constructive and informative and to promote better understanding of the syllabus content and the application of assessment criteria. © NEBOSH 2015 Any enquiries about this report publication should be addressed to: NEBOSH Dominus Way Meridian Business Park Leicester LE19 1QW tel: 0116 263 4700 fax: 0116 282 4000 email: info@nebosh.org.uk

2

General comments Many candidates are well prepared for this unit assessment and provide comprehensive and relevant answers in response to the demands of the question paper. This includes the ability to demonstrate understanding of knowledge by applying it to workplace situations. There are other candidates, however, who appear to be unprepared for the unit assessment and who show both a lack of knowledge of the syllabus content and a lack of understanding of how key concepts should be applied to workplace situations. This report has been prepared to provide feedback on standard date and on-demand ICC1 examinations sat between August and October 2014. Feedback is presented in these key areas; examination technique, command words and learning outcomes and is designed to assist candidates and course providers to prepare for future assessments in this unit. Candidates and course providers will also benefit from use of the ‘Guide to the NEBOSH International Certificate in Construction Health and Safety’ which is available via the NEBOSH website. In particular, the guide sets out in detail the syllabus content for ICC1 and tutor reference documents for each Element. Additional guidance on command words is provided in ‘Guidance on command words used in learning outcomes and question papers’ which is also available via the NEBOSH website. Candidates and course providers should also make reference to the ICC1 ‘Example question paper and Examiners’ feedback on expected answers’ which provides example questions and details Examiners’ expectations and typical areas of underperformance.

3

Candidate performance This report covers all examinations, both standard and on-demand examination sittings during August to October 2014. Learning outcomes Candidates performed well in these areas of the syllabus: 4.3 Explain the hazards and control measures to reduce the risk in the use of lifting and

moving equipment with specific reference to manual and mechanically operated load moving equipment

Due to the amount of manual handling carried out on construction sites, most candidates were able to relate to the topic matter from their own experience. It was noted that most answers concentrated on hazards with suggestions of control measures not moving very far from elimination or training. 12.1 Identify the main hazards of demolition and deconstruction work Candidates have traditionally answered questions relating to demolition hazards reasonably well. This was also the case in this period and candidates were able to find enough breadth in their answers to attract good marks. The following learning outcomes have been identified as being the most challenging area of the syllabus for candidates in this period: 1.3 Outline key aspects for the successful management of safe construction activities Questions that required candidates to provide details of the roles of the parties involved in the management of construction projects were not well answered. There was evidence in some responses of the duties of these parties in line with the UK Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM). Candidates should be aware that reference to these regulations should only be made when the regulations are referred to in the question. Candidates should also note the difference between roles and duties to ensure they don’t misinterpret the question. The syllabus makes reference to the ILO code of practice, convention and recommendations that details the roles. 3.1 Explain the hazards and control measures for the safe movement of vehicles and plant

within a construction environment, including when using the public highways as a workplace

In this area of the syllabus, candidates should be able to explain the hazards relating to vehicle and plant movement such as loss of control, overturning of vehicles, collisions with other vehicles, pedestrians and structures, loading and unloading issues and coupling and maintenance work. The candidate must also explain the relevant control measures such as suitable traffic routes and traffic management arrangements, segregation and separation. One question used a low loader as the basis of the scenario and it was clear from the outset that many candidates did not know what was meant by this term. They could also not relate the loading of an earth mover onto the low loader involved. As a result, many answers discussed lifting operations and the hazards associated with that activity.

Unit ICC1 Managing and controlling hazards in international construction activities

4

Course providers must ensure that candidates are exposed to a wide range and variety of equipment during their studies. This will ensure that candidates are able to operate competently in an international work environment. 5.3 Describe the main mechanical and non-mechanical hazards of machinery

The syllabus requires candidates to describe the mechanical and non-mechanical hazards defined in BS EN ISO 12100-1 in relation to a range of office, workshop and site machinery. The first challenge for course providers is to ensure that candidates are clear with regard to the difference between mechanical and non-mechanical hazards in order that they can answer a question that relates to them in separate parts of the question with accuracy. Many candidates mix the two categories and therefore do not demonstrate to Examiners that they have the required level of knowledge. There was also a reliance on single-word, often bullet-pointed, lists to provide the depth of answer required. This is a common weakness detailed later in this report and NEBOSH would refer course providers and candidates to this advice.

5

Examination technique The following examination techniques were identified as the main areas of improvement for candidates: Candidates did not respond effectively to the command word By far the examination technique that challenged candidates the most was reported by Examiners as ‘candidates did not respond effectively to the command word’. It is not only a requirement to answer the question correctly but also to provide the depth of response indicated by the command word to maximise the number of marks that can be awarded. Some candidates could clearly differentiate between the command words and provided responses of the appropriate length. However, the general approach by many candidates was to provide responses of two or three paragraphs in length with multiple answers contained within the paragraphs. This style of response leads to repetitions of the same point and can lead to wasting time during the examination. Without sufficient breadth to the answer, candidates were often not awarded the full marks available. The level of such detail is indicated by the command word of which more detail is provided below. This clearly gave insufficient scope and depth for answers to questions where the command word requires an outline. Candidates’ handwriting was illegible There were reports that Examiners had difficulty in reading the handwriting of some candidates. Although allowances are made for candidates under the pressure of an examination, course providers must remind candidates that their writing needs to be legible or valuable marks may not be gained during marking. There is a minimum literacy requirement for candidates on NEBOSH qualifications. Course providers are reminded that they must ensure that these standards are satisfied or additional tuition provided to ensure accessible and inclusive lifelong learning. Lack of knowledge Although considerable resource is allocated to the compilation of examinations to ensure their relevance to the qualification and the requirements of the syllabus, it is evident that some candidates have a limited knowledge of common construction activities. Although some candidates achieved reasonable marks for the examination, a high number of candidates provided responses that demonstrated a low level of understanding of the topics. While appearing to have correctly read and understood the question, the responses were of insufficient depth to gain the full marks available. The qualification is designed to reflect current construction practice in an international arena. However, some candidates could not identify or relate to common site equipment, plant and practice. This would appear to be an area that course providers should concentrate on to prepare candidates for the scope and depth of knowledge required by the syllabus to demonstrate the level required for a successful award. Candidates misread/misinterpreted the question Responses to questions by some candidates did relate to the relevant general syllabus area and topic matter but did not answer the question. This may indicate that some candidates had prepared for the examination with previously used items and were using rote-learning as a learning style. With the previous experience of Examiners, this style of preparation is self-evident and can only demonstrate a lack of knowledge on the part of the candidate or poor teaching technique on the part of the course provider.

6

Command words The following command words are listed in the order identified as being the most challenging for candidates: Describe The command word ‘describe’ was by far the most challenging for candidates this quarter. The detail expected in an answer qualified by the command word ‘describe’ should be reasonably obvious as a description is required. The NEBOSH guidance on command words gives the meaning of ‘describe’ as “a detailed written account of the distinctive features of a subject”. There were reports that candidates seemed to ignore the detail required by the command word and offer little more than an elongated list without the required description in their answers and therefore did not attract the marks available. Outline Traditionally, candidates find the command word ‘outline’ difficult to interpret. Candidates should be directed to the NEBOSH guidance on command words available on the NEBOSH website, ‘outline’ means “to indicate the principal features or different parts of”. Generally, candidates fail to give sufficient detail in order to warrant an outline answer. The NEBOSH guidance on command word states that: “an exhaustive description is not required. What is sought is a brief summary of the major aspects of whatever is stated in the question”. Therefore if a question asks for an outline of the hazards of an excavation, referring to underground services and falling objects would not be sufficient on their own to gain the marks available. An outline will be required that will include a little more relevant information for each of the points raised. Identify To identify something will require reference to an item, which could be its name or title. Therefore when the command word ‘identify’ is used in a question the answer can be brief, usually limited to one or two words. There were no reports of candidates having problems with ‘identify’ type questions. Give Give is usually used in a question together with a further requirement, such as ‘give the meaning of’ or ‘give an example in EACH case’. Candidates tend to answer such questions satisfactorily, especially where a question might ask to ‘identify’ something and then ‘give’ an example. The candidate who can answer the first part, invariable has little difficulty in giving the example. Course providers need to ensure that candidates are prepared for their examinations and reference should be made, reinforced and practised in line with guidance available. For additional guidance, please see NEBOSH’s ‘Guidance on command words used in learning outcomes and question papers’ document, which is available on our website: www.nebosh.org.uk/students/default.asp?cref=1345&ct=2.

7

Conclusion The feedback from Examiners highlighted that candidates taking the ICC1 examinations between August and October 2014 needed most improvement in the areas of construction management (learning outcome 1.3), vehicle and plant movements (learning outcome 3.1), musculoskeletal – hazards and controls (specifically learning outcomes 4.3) and work equipment – hazards and risk controls (learning outcome 5.3). It was identified that candidates were well prepared for learning outcomes 4.3, hazards and control measures in manual handling activities, and 12.1 demolition and deconstruction – hazards and risk controls. We can assume that course providers are covering these areas of the syllabus well and should apply the teaching methodology of this area to the areas that are highlighted as challenging for candidates. In regard to examination technique, candidates should take care to read the question, respond to the command word stated. Course providers must prepare candidates to ensure that they can write legibly, interpret the questions correctly to ensure that the responses provided by candidates reflect their knowledge in the topic matter and meet the requirements of this award.

8

The National ExaminationBoard in OccupationalSafety and Health

Dominus WayMeridian Business ParkLeicester LE19 1QW

telephone +44 (0)116 2634700fax +44 (0)116 2824000www.nebosh.org.uk