Search

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the alternative study load measures (dichotomous full-time/part-time classification and the number of units enrolled) and their association to student performance by using student data from a final year accounting unit in a large Australian university. Design/methodology/approach – Using regression analysis, the authors compare the two measures to ascertain the explanatory power of the two approaches in explaining student performance. Findings – A positive association is found between study loads and student performance when using the “number of units enrolled” measure. This relationship was not found when the dichotomous measure (full-time vs part-time) was used. The results suggest that a scaled measure of study loads is a better measure compared to a binary (dichotomous) measure. Research limitations/implications – The study will assist future researchers to better control for study loads, and also to gain a better understanding of the association between study loads and student performance. This may possibly assist educational institutions and academics to use a more appropriate pedagogical design in the structure of courses when determining study load allocations across the different cohorts. Practical implications – This study will help in methodology of future researchers controlling for study loads and student performance. Originality/value – The study adds to existing literature by providing an alternate study load measure in methodology for controlling for student performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Occupational health and safety incidents occurring in the military context are of great concern to personnel and commanders. Incidents such as "dangerous incidents", "exposures", and "near misses" (as distinct from injuries, illnesses, and fatalities) indicate serious health and safety risks faced by military personnel, even if they do not cause immediate harm. These risks may give rise to harm in the future, if not adequately addressed, and in some cases the incidents may cause latent harm. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the rates and patterns of incidents of these types reported by full time (ARA) and part time (ARES) Australian Army personnel. A retrospective cohort study was performed using self-reported incident data from the Workplace Health, Safety, Compensation and Reporting (WHSCAR) database over a two-year period. Data were analysed descriptively. Of 3791 such incidents, 3636 (96 percent) occurred in ARA and 155 (4 percent) in ARES personnel, somewhat consistent with the proportions of total army person-years served in each (ARA 93 percent; ARES 7 percent). In ARA, 84 percent of these incident types were exposures, 14 percent near misses, and 2 percent dangerous incidents. In ARES, 55 percent of incidents were exposures, 38 percent near misses, and 7 percent dangerous incidents. Soldiers at the rank of 'private' experienced the highest rates of these incident types, in both ARA and ARES. Driving gave rise to more near misses than any other activity, in both populations. Exposures to chemicals and sounds were more common in the ARA than ARES. The ARES reported higher proportions of vehicle near misses and multiple mechanism dangerous incidents than the ARA. The findings of this study can usefully inform development of risk mitigation strategies for dangerous incidents, exposures, and near misses in army personnel.