Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 9

December 2012

Examiners Report NEBOSH International General Certificate in Occupational Health and Safety (IGC2)

Examiners Report
NEBOSH INTERNATIONAL GENERAL CERTIFICATE IN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY UNIT IGC2: CONTROL OF INTERNATIONAL WORKPLACE HAZARDS DECEMBER 2012

CONTENTS

Introduction

General comments

Comments on individual questions

2013 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
EXTERNAL

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 35,000 candidates annually and are offered by over 500 course providers, with exams taken in over 100 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 to be recognised and regulated by the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA). Where appropriate, NEBOSH follows the latest version of the GCSE, GCE, Principal Learning and Project Code of Practice published by the regulatory authorities in relation to examination setting and marking. While not obliged to adhere to this code, NEBOSH regards it as best practice to do so. Candidates scripts are marked by a team of Examiners appointed by NEBOSH on the basis of their qualifications and experience. The standard of the qualification is determined by NEBOSH, which is overseen by the NEBOSH Council comprising nominees from, amongst others, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH). Representatives of course providers, from both the public and private sectors, are elected to the NEBOSH Council. This report on the examination provides information on the performance of 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 2013

Any enquiries about this report publication should be addressed to: NEBOSH Dominus Way Meridian Business Park Leicester LE19 1QW tell: 0116 263 4700 fax: 0116 282 4000 email: info@nebosh.org.uk

EXTERNAL

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 always some 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. In order to meet the pass standard for this assessment, acquisition of knowledge and understanding across the syllabus are prerequisites. However, candidates need to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding in answering the questions set. Referral of candidates in this unit is invariably because they are unable to write a full, well-informed answer to one or more of the questions asked. Some candidates find it difficult to relate their learning to the questions and as a result offer responses reliant on recalled knowledge and conjecture and fail to demonstrate a sufficient degree of understanding. Candidates should prepare themselves for this vocational examination by ensuring their understanding, not rote-learning pre-prepared answers. Candidates should therefore note that Examiners Reports are not written to provide sample answers but to give examples of what Examiners were expecting and more specifically to highlight areas of underperformance. Common pitfalls It is recognised that many candidates are well prepared for their assessments. However, recurrent issues, as outlined below, continue to prevent some candidates reaching their full potential in the assessment. Many candidates fail to apply the basic principles of examination technique and for some candidates this means the difference between a pass and a referral. In some instances, candidates do not attempt all the required questions or are failing to provide complete answers. Candidates are advised to always attempt an answer to a compulsory question, even when the mind goes blank. Applying basic health and safety management principles can generate credit worthy points. Some candidates fail to answer the question set and instead provide information that may be relevant to the topic but is irrelevant to the question and cannot therefore be awarded marks. Many candidates fail to apply the command words (also known as action verbs, eg describe, outline, etc). Command words are the instructions that guide the candidate on the depth of answer required. If, for instance, a question asks the candidate to describe something, then few marks will be awarded to an answer that is an outline. Similarly the command word identify requires more information than a list. Some candidates fail to separate their answers into the different sub-sections of the questions. These candidates could gain marks for the different sections if they clearly indicated which part of the question they were answering (by using the numbering from the question in their answer, for example). Structuring their answers to address the different parts of the question can also help in logically drawing out the points to be made in response. Candidates need to plan their time effectively. Some candidates fail to make good use of their time and give excessive detail in some answers leaving insufficient time to address all of the questions. Candidates should also be aware that Examiners cannot award marks if handwriting is illegible. Candidates should note that it is not necessary to start a new page in their answer booklet for each section of a question. 3

EXTERNAL

Unit IGC2 Control of international workplace hazards


Question 1 Construction work is being undertaken on a multi-storey building. As part of these works, materials stored and used on-site include bricks, bags of cement, boxes, and large quantities of flammable substances. (a) Identify the hazards that workers could be exposed to during the work. Outline control measures for the safe stacking and storage of: (i) (ii) materials used on site; flammable substances used on-site. (5) (5)

(10)

(b)

This question related to Element 1.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 1.5: Outline the hazards and control measures for safe construction and demolition work. Particular emphasis was placed on the safe construction aspect. Overall, the question was reasonably well answered. Part (a) was better answered by candidates and it was positive to note that most were able to identify at least five different hazards that workers could be exposed to during this type of work. In relation to attention to the command words, in part (a) the application was good but in part (b) it was quite common that candidates failed to give the necessary depth for an outline requirement. In part (b)(i) the majority of candidates answers were generally limited and lacked both depth and in some cases breadth. Some candidates focused on the flammable substances in part (b)(i) which was not required and they were not able to secure marks. In addition, some discussed the practical considerations rather than focusing on the materials used on site such as ensuring that the ground conditions were suitable to withstand the weight and to ensure a level gradient. Part (b)(ii) was better answered, with most candidates obtaining satisfactory marks. Some candidates discussed displaying MSDS sheets in the area which was not relevant.

Question 2

Identify pre-use checks for electrical safety that should be carried out on a portable drill.

(8)

This question related to Element 4.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 4.2: Electrical checks / portable drill. Overall the topic was understood to a fairly reasonable standard. There were, however, some candidates who gave factors associated with general use in relation to the drill which was not required. Some candidates also did not grasp that this was a portable drill and thus did not include or identify the additional electrical pre-use checks required. Answers were generally above half marks which was good but again breadth was limited in some cases.

EXTERNAL

Question 3

Outline the requirements to help ensure the safe evacuation of persons from a building in the event of fire.

(8)

This question related to Element 5.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 5.5: Fire safe evacuation. This question was generally well answered by the majority of candidates. However, candidates did not pay sufficient attention to the command word 'outline'. This limited the breadth of their answer. A lot of candidates only listed requirements and were not able to secure full marks as a result. Improvements are required on the appreciation of the depth required to answers when an outline is requested.

Question 4

Outline basic design and use requirements for guards and safety devices fitted to machinery.

(8)

This question related to Element 4.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 4.4: Control measures reducing risk of mechanical hazards. The question was not well answered and many candidates misunderstood the question and discussed advantages and disadvantages of different types of guards. Those who did attempt the question posed focused their answers more on the use requirements. Very few candidates attempted to outline any basic design requirements. Overall, the answers were very limited in breadth. To summarise, it was felt that the topic was not very well understood. Question 5 (a) Identify FOUR site rules to be followed by pedestrians when working around moving vehicles. Identify factors to be considered when selecting a driver for a workplace vehicle.

(4)

(b)

(4)

This question related to Element 1.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 1.4: Movement of people and driver selection. This question was well answered. As the command word was identify, the question was well attempted with sufficient content and breadth given by the majority of candidates.

Question 6

Outline factors that could reduce the effectiveness of a local exhaust ventilation (LEV) system.

(8)

This question related to Element 6.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 6.5: LEV system effectiveness. This question was reasonably answered by the majority of candidates with a decent breadth to their answers. Some did not outline sufficiently and thus answers were in some cases fairly brief and limited in content. Some candidates attempted to draw and label the LEV system which could have lost them valuable time as the question was assessing the factors which could reduce its effectiveness of operation as opposed to the components parts of an LEV system.

EXTERNAL

Question 7

Outline prevention strategies that could be implemented by an employer in order to reduce work-related stress.

(8)

This question related to Element 7.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 7.6: Prevention strategies for dealing with stress. Some candidates misread the question and gave reasons of why and how workrelated stress can be caused in a workplace. Better answers demonstrated an underpinning knowledge and appreciation of the HSE Management Standards for stress. Where a logical approach had been adopted, as in thinking of prevention strategies under the relevant headings of demands, control etc, candidates did accrue good marks provided they gave sufficient depth and complied with command word.

Question 8

A recent increase in work-related ill-health has been noticed amongst workers who use a solvent for which a workplace exposure limit (WEL) has been set. (a) (b) Outline the purpose of a WEL. Give possible reasons for the increase in work-related ill-health amongst the workers. (2)

(6)

This question related to Element 6.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcomes 6.2 and 6.3: WEL means, assessing and health risks. Part (a) was not as well answered as part (b). Some candidates misinterpreted the question and gave a definition of a WEL as opposed to the purpose of a WEL. In addition, some candidates missed the word 'solvent' in the stem and digressed down physical agent routes such as noise, vibration etc, which was not relevant.

Question 9

(a)

Identify TWO types of: (i) (ii) ionising radiation; non-ionising radiation. (2) (2) (4)

(b)

Outline the potential health effects of exposure to ionising radiation.

This question related to Element 8.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcomes 8.3: Ionising and non-ionising radiation. In part (a), a large number of candidates were not specific in their given answers and omitted to state that certain types of ionising radiation are in the form of particles as opposed to a type of ray. They did not gain maximum marks as a result. In relation to non-ionising radiation, terms such as 'light' on its own was not sufficient and it needed to be prefixed with 'visible' in order to gain the mark. Another area of confusion was that some candidates discussed sources of radiation rather than types of radiation. In part (b), there was a lack of attention to the command verb 'outline' and thus answers were in some cases very brief and lacked sufficient depth along with required

EXTERNAL

breadth in their answers. leukaemia or skin ulcers.

Very few candidates referred to the development of

Question 10

(a)

Outline factors that could increase the occurrence of workrelated upper limb disorders (WRULDs) in a workplace. Outline control measures that could be introduced to reduce the risk of WRULDs developing.

(4)

(b)

(4)

This question related to Element 3.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcomes 3.1 WRULDs . When answering part (a), some candidates did not appear to be familiar with the phrase WRULDs and instead they considered tasks more associated with manual handling. Some candidates misread the question and outlined injuries and ill health associated with poor manual handling techniques. In part (a), factors such as the high repetitive nature of a task which involved twisting or turning would have secured a mark. Part (b) was answered to a reasonable standard.

Question 11

(a)

Identify FOUR hazards that can cause slips or trips in a workplace. Identify control measures that can be used to reduce the risk of slips or trips in a workplace.

(4)

(b)

(4)

This question related to Element 1.0 of the syllabus and assessed candidates knowledge of learning outcome 1.4: Hazards to pedestrians and controls. This question was well answered. One area to highlight in part (b) which was commonly omitted was the due consideration of maintenance of the floor and regular inspection / monitoring for defects. Candidates did provide sufficient depth for a question which used the identify command word.

EXTERNAL

The National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health Dominus Way Meridian Business Park Leicester LE19 1QW telephone +44 (0)116 2634700 fax +44 (0)116 2824000 email info@nebosh.org.uk www.nebosh.org.uk

Вам также может понравиться