Overview
Students are provided with the opportunity to become a 'real world' investigator during this foundation unit. Through engagement with peers, lecturing staff and the socio-technical world around them, students will develop base skills in investigation ethics and philosophy, evidence-based practice in investigation forensics, and begin to understand the nature of accidents and disasters, and latent pathogens in socio-technical systems.
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 1 - 2026
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 Undergraduate 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 SUTE Unit Comments
The unit was well delivered and generally challenged students' preexisting notions of the topic.
It is recommended to keep the delivery style of the unit and continue to challenge students' notions of the topic throughout the unit.
Feedback from SUTE Unit Comments
Students reported the unit was an incredibly enriching experience and enjoyed the well-structured and comprehensive material covered.
It is recommended to keep the content and structure of the unit for the next offering.
Feedback from SUTE Unit Comments
Students liked the real-world scenarios and the hands-on approach to the assignments which gave them direct relevance and a practical utility to the unit.
It is recommended to keep using real world scenarios and the practical application of knowledge in the assessment tasks.
Feedback from Unit Evaluation Data
The student feedback for Useful Learning Materials and Clear Unit Requirements need improvement being at 75% for the last two years.
It is recommended to review how Useful Learning Materials and Clear Unit Requirements can be enhanced for the next offering in order to improve the student evaluation data.
- Recognise that events can be analysed and interpreted in different contexts (e.g. disciplinary, socio-technical, cultural).
- Construct an argument based on classic logical form.
- Explain the principles of evidence-based practice.
- Describe the role of investigation in socio-technical contexts.
- Discuss the ethical implications of observed events.
- Recognise basic accident pathogen.
- Conduct a basic analysis of accident causation.
- Employ effective communication strategies appropriate to real world investigations.
- Demonstrate reflective skills appropriate to the development of the beginning practitioner.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
| 1 - Group Discussion - 10% | |||||||||
| 2 - Portfolio - 30% | |||||||||
| 3 - Written Assessment - 30% | |||||||||
| 4 - Written Assessment - 30% | |||||||||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
| 1 - Communication | |||||||||
| 2 - Problem Solving | |||||||||
| 3 - Critical Thinking | |||||||||
| 4 - Information Literacy | |||||||||
| 5 - Team Work | |||||||||
| 6 - Information Technology Competence | |||||||||
| 7 - Cross Cultural Competence | |||||||||
| 8 - Ethical practice | |||||||||
| 9 - Social Innovation | |||||||||
| 10 - First Nations Knowledges | |||||||||
| 11 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | |||||||||
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes
| Assessment Tasks | Graduate Attributes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | |
| 1 - Group Discussion - 10% | |||||||||||
| 2 - Portfolio - 30% | |||||||||||
| 3 - Written Assessment - 30% | |||||||||||
| 4 - Written Assessment - 30% | |||||||||||
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.
k.klockner@cqu.edu.au
Week 1
Begin Date: 09 Mar 2026Module/Topic
Overview of unit
Introduction to Moodle, the unit, concepts and the assessments
Chapter
All readings are supplied via the Moodle site
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Week 2
Begin Date: 16 Mar 2026Module/Topic
Module 1 - The Reflective Investigator
Gibbs Model of Reflection
The 5 Whys
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Week 3
Begin Date: 23 Mar 2026Module/Topic
Module 1 - The Reflective Investigator
Complex Sociotechnical Systems of Work
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Moodle Reflection Due: Week 3 Monday (23 Mar 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Week 4
Begin Date: 30 Mar 2026Module/Topic
Module 2 - Identifying Accident Contributing Factors
The Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety (CFF-RS)
Chapter
Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety (2009) Manual
Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety (2009) Framework
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Week 5
Begin Date: 06 Apr 2026Module/Topic
Module 2 - Identifying Accident Contributing Factors
The Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety (CFF-RS)
Chapter
Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety (2009) Manual
Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety (2009) Framework
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
The Reflective Investigator Due: Week 5 Friday (10 Apr 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Week 6
Begin Date: 13 Apr 2026Module/Topic
Module 3 - Investigation Methods and Models
AcciMap
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Vacation Week
Begin Date: 20 Apr 2026Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Week 7
Begin Date: 27 Apr 2026Module/Topic
Module 3 - Investigation Methods and Models
AcciMap
Fishbone
Bow Tie
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Week 8
Begin Date: 04 May 2026Module/Topic
Module 4 - Accident Pathogens & Causation
The Contributing Factors Framework - Maritime Safety (CFF-MS)
Chapter
Contributing Factors Framework - Maritime Safety (2021) Paper
Contributing Factors Framework - Maritime Safety (2021) Framework
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety and AcciMap Due: Week 8 Friday (8 May 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Week 9
Begin Date: 11 May 2026Module/Topic
Module 4 - Accident Pathogens & Causation
The Contributing Factors Framework - Maritime Safety (CFF-MS)
Chapter
Contributing Factors Framework - Maritime Safety (2021) Paper
Contributing Factors Framework - Maritime Safety (2021) Framework
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Week 10
Begin Date: 18 May 2026Module/Topic
Module 5 - Accident Investigation Reports
Reflecting on Investigation Reports
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Week 11
Begin Date: 25 May 2026Module/Topic
Module 5 - Investigation Reports
Evidence in Investigation
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Week 12
Begin Date: 01 Jun 2026Module/Topic
Unit Review - Assessment Help
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Lecture
Contributing Factor Framework - Maritime Safety and AcciMap Due: Week 12 Friday (5 June 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Exam Week
Begin Date: 08 Jun 2026Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Permission to use Generative AI is given for limited purposes, please see the 'Permission to Use AI' sheet on the Moodle site.
Please refer to the CQUniversity guideline on AI Awareness for Academic Integrity as it relates to plagiarism.
1 Group Discussion
In this task students will gain an understanding of the different backgrounds, contexts and cultures from which investigators come from, as well as the differences in skills and knowledge which each person brings to their real-world experience.
As a first-year student it is also very important that you begin to get to know your peers, some of whom you will be studying with for the next few years and develop a community of practice within the Safety Sciences. Therefore, you should know how to connect to your peers via the Moodle site and be familiar with how to network with others.
You are therefore required to log in to the Moodle site and complete the following activity by the end of Week 3 of term:
Moodle Reflection Activity
Find the Assessment 1 Moodle Reflection forum in the Assessment tile or access assessment 1 from the Assessment tab at the top of the Moodle site.
You are then required to post a discussion to the class cohort, and this must be a new post that shows your reflection of yourself as an accident investigator.
You must reflect on and discuss the following information:
(a) Your knowledge and education related to being an accident investigator.
(b) Your skills and experience as they relate to being an accident investigator.
(c) Your personal traits and job fit factors as they relate to an accident investigator.
(d) As an accident investigation student, what you expect to learn in this unit in order to fill any identified gaps in your capabilities for undertaking an accident investigation role.
Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 1: You must not use AI at any point during the assessment. You must demonstrate your core skills and knowledge.
Week 3 Monday (23 Mar 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Week 5 Monday (6 Apr 2026)
This assessment will be marked online within the Moodle environment using the tracking statistics available to lecturers. Therefore, you DO NOT have to upload anything to the assessment area as the lecturer will mark your discussion post from the Assessment 1 area. The key assessment criteria used will be your 'genuine participation' within the learning environment.
Your investigation of yourself via your General Discussion post will be marked out of 10 as follows: -
(a) Your knowledge and education related to being an accident investigator (2 marks)
(b) Your skills and experience as they relate to being an accident investigator (2 marks)
(c) Your personal traits and job fit factors as they relate to an accident investigator (2 marks)
(d) As an accident investigation student, what you expect to learn in this unit in order to fill any identified gaps in your capabilities for undertaking an accident investigation role (4 marks)
- Recognise that events can be analysed and interpreted in different contexts (e.g. disciplinary, socio-technical, cultural).
- Construct an argument based on classic logical form.
- Recognise basic accident pathogen.
- Conduct a basic analysis of accident causation.
- Employ effective communication strategies appropriate to real world investigations.
- Demonstrate reflective skills appropriate to the development of the beginning practitioner.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
- Team Work
- Information Technology Competence
- Cross Cultural Competence
- Ethical practice
2 Portfolio
In this assessment you will be asked to reflect and investigate an incident or event in your own life. You should pick an event on which you can reflect using the Gibbs Model of Reflection and a 5 Why's analysis.
The tasks include 3 steps:
- Completing a Gibbs Model of Reflection;
- Completing a 5 Why's Fish Bone Analysis;
- Comparing the Gibbs Model of Reflection to the 5 Why's Analysis.
Step 1 - Reflect and write about something significant that has happened in your life (it might be something related to university, home, work or your social environment) and apply the Gibbs Model of Reflection. Prepare a written report which examines and presents an argument on your logic of the event including: -
- Description - What happened?
- Feelings - What were you thinking and feeling?
- Evaluation - What was good and bad about the experience?
- Analysis - What sense can you make of the situation?
- Conclusion - What else could you have done?
- Action Plan - If it arose again, what would you do? Here you might consider how you could get a different outcome if it happened again.
Step 2 - Then present a 5 Why's Fish Bone analysis to examine and present an argument based on your logic of what might have led to the event or contributed to the event.
Step 3 - Then compare the two reflective methods you used and reflect on which tool (Gibbs or the 5 Why's) gave you better insights as an accident investigator and why.
Your two-page report (usually a maximum 2 pages) should demonstration your ability to both investigate what happened to you and why, but also your deeper reflection on the event, your role in the event and any lessons learnt.
You should submit your assessment as a Word document only, no pdf.
Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.
Week 5 Friday (10 Apr 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Week 7 Friday (1 May 2026)
The following assessment criteria will be used:
1. Gibbs Model of Reflection (10 Marks)
- Evidence of development of skills for reflective practice
2. 5 Why's Analysis (10 Marks)
- Demonstrates the ability to conduct basic analysis of event causation.
3. Gibbs vs 5 Why's Fish Bone comparison (10 Marks)
- Demonstrates the ability to compare the two models and methods.
A detailed marking matrix will be provided via the Moodle site.
- Construct an argument based on classic logical form.
- Explain the principles of evidence-based practice.
- Describe the role of investigation in socio-technical contexts.
- Recognise basic accident pathogen.
- Conduct a basic analysis of accident causation.
- Employ effective communication strategies appropriate to real world investigations.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
- Information Technology Competence
3 Written Assessment
This assessment task requires you to present your logic and understanding of how accident contributing/causal factors can be interpreted across the themes of Individual/Team actions, Technical Failures and Local Conditions & Organisational Factors and present an AcciMap showing their connectedness in complex socio-technical systems.
You will be presented a short list of findings from a rail safety accident investigation report.
You will use your understanding of socio-technical systems to develop both a Contributing Factors Framework - Rail Safety (CFF-RS), an AcciMap and a short report of the accident. You are required to map the contributing factors from the report into a CFF-RS table. You are then required you to develop a AcciMap of the accident which mirrors your CFF-RS table items and demonstrates your understanding of complex social-technical systems of work. Your final submission will be in the form of a short report which presents and includes: -
1. A CFF-RS table using the three main headings of Individual/Team actions, Technical Failures, Local Conditions & Organisational Factors and showing the sub-headings and keywords (2-3 pages);
2. An AcciMap showing how the factors you identified in the CFF-RS can be presented as a model of the accident and which shows how the contributing factors are interconnected from a socio-technical systems point of view (1 page).
3. A short report (no more than 10 pages in total including references) which showcases your understanding and applies the investigative principles that you have learnt over the course of the term to the 'real world' case study. Include in your report the following details: -
- Title page (1 page)
- Contents page (1 page)
- Describe what happened (describe the circumstances and what happened) (1 page)
- Describe the socio-technical findings as detailed in your CFF-RS and AcciMap (identify the accident pathogens and how they relate together) (1 page)
- Conclude with your major learnings from the accident (1 page)
- Include formal intext referencing to support your work and a reference list as per Harvard Style referencing (1 page)
- Include your Contributing Factors Framework tables as an appendix (2-3 pages)
- Include your AcciMap as an appendix or separate document (1 page)
Submission instructions: - Word document only for the report and CFF table and/or pdf of the AcciMap if done in software other than Word (separate document lodgment is allowed if needed).
Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.
Week 8 Friday (8 May 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Week 10 Friday (22 May 2026)
The marking criteria will be out of 30 marks and will be awarded against: -
1. The use of the CFF-RS and ability to identify contributing factors as per the CFF-RS framework including Individual & Team Actions (3 Marks); Technical Failures (3 Marks) and Local Conditions & Organisational Factors (3 marks) - Total Marks = 9
2. Present an AcciMap showing how the factors you identified in the CFF-RS can be presented as a model of the accident and which also shows the contributing factors interconnectedness from a socio-technical systems point of view - Total Marks = 9
3. A short report (no more than 10 pages in total including references) which showcases your understanding and applies the investigative principles that you have learnt over the course of the term to the 'real world' case study. Include in the final report the following details: -
- Title page (1 page)
- Contents page (1 page) (1 mark)
- What happened (describe the circumstances and what happened) (1 page) (3 marks)
- Describe the socio-technical findings as detailed in your CFF-RS and AcciMap (identify the accident pathogens and how they relate together) (1 page) (3 marks)
- Conclude with the major learnings from the accident (1 page) (3 marks)
- Include formal intext referencing and reference list as per Harvard Style Referencing (1 page) (2 marks)
- Include your Contributing Factors Framework tables as an appendix (2-3 pages)
- Include your AcciMap as an appendix (1 page)
Total Report Marks = 12
A detailed marking matrix will be presented via the Moodle site.
- Recognise that events can be analysed and interpreted in different contexts (e.g. disciplinary, socio-technical, cultural).
- Construct an argument based on classic logical form.
- Discuss the ethical implications of observed events.
- Recognise basic accident pathogen.
- Conduct a basic analysis of accident causation.
- Employ effective communication strategies appropriate to real world investigations.
- Demonstrate reflective skills appropriate to the development of the beginning practitioner.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
- Information Technology Competence
- Cross Cultural Competence
- Ethical practice
4 Written Assessment
This assessment task will now advance your ability to present your logic and understanding of how accident contributing factors in socio-technical systems can be interpreted across the themes of Individual/Team actions, Technical Failures and Local Conditions & Organisational Factors using the Contributing Factors Framework - Maritime Safety (CFF-MS) and AcciMap frameworks.
In this assessment you will examine the maritime accident investigation report related to the ‘Herald of Free Enterprise’ ferry accident from which you must identify the contributing factors to the accident.
You will be asked to complete the following 3 tasks: -
1. Using the Herald of Free Enterprise ferry accident investigation report (provided in Moodle), identify the contributing factors involved. Then using the CFF-MS framework for Individual/Team Actions, Technical Failures and Local Conditions & Organisational Factors present your findings using the CFF-MS table, across the main headings, sub-headings and keywords you have identified from the accident investigation report. A CFF-MS proforma response table will be provided.
2. Prepare a AcciMap showing how the factors you identified in the CFF-MS can be presented as a model of the accident and which also shows their interconnectedness from a socio-technical systems point of view.
3. Prepare a short report (no more than 10 pages in total including references) which showcases your understanding and applies the investigative principles that you have learnt over the course of the term to the 'real world' case study. Include in the final report the following details: -
- Title page (1 page)
- Contents page (1 page)
- What happened (describe the circumstances and what happened) (1 page)
- Describe the socio-technical findings as detailed in your CFF-RS and AcciMap (identify the accident pathogens and how they relate together) (1 page)
- Conclude with the major learnings from the accident (1 page)
- Include formal intext referencing and a reference list as per Harvard Style Referencing (1 page)
- Include your Contributing Factors Framework tables as an appendix (2-3 pages)
- Include your AcciMap as an appendix or separate document (1 page)
Submission instructions: Word document only for the report and CFF tables and/or pdf of the AcciMap if done in software other than Word (separate document lodgment is allowed if needed).
More information will be given via the Moodle site and formal lectures.
Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.
Week 12 Friday (5 June 2026) 11:45 pm AEST
Exam Week Friday (12 June 2026)
The marking criteria will be out of 30 marks and will be awarded against: -
1. The use of the CFF-MS and ability to identify contributing factors as per the CFF-MS framework including Individual & Team Actions (3 Marks); Technical Failures (3 Marks) and Local Conditions & Organisational Factors (3 marks) - Total Marks = 9
2. Present an AcciMap showing how the factors you identified in the CFF-MS can be presented as a model of the accident and which also shows the contributing factors interconnectedness from a socio-technical systems point of view - Total Marks = 9
3. A short report (no more than 10 pages in total including references) which showcases your understanding and applies the investigative principles that you have learnt over the course of the term to the 'real world' case study. Include in the final report the following details: -
- Title page (1 page)
- Contents page (1 page) (1 mark)
- What happened (describe the circumstances and what happened) (1 page) (3 marks)
- Describe the socio-technical findings as detailed in your CFF-MS and AcciMap (identify the accident pathogens and how they relate together) (1 page) (3 marks)
- Conclude with the major learnings from the accident (1 page) (3 marks)
- Include formal referencing and reference list as per Harvard Style Referencing (1 page) (2 marks)
- Include your Contributing Factors Framework (CFF-MS) sheets as an appendix (2-3 pages)
- Include your AcciMap as an appendix (1 page)
Total Report Marks = 12
A detailed marking matrix will be presented via the Moodle site.
- Recognise basic accident pathogen.
- Conduct a basic analysis of accident causation.
- Employ effective communication strategies appropriate to real world investigations.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Information Literacy
- Team Work
- Information Technology Competence
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?
