John the Employee

JOHN THE EMPLOYEE-JOHN THE EMPLOYEE- RESEARCH ANDRESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT REGARDING A SAFETY ANDDEVELOPMENT REGARDING A SAFETY AND
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AVATAR AS AN IOCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AVATAR AS AN I..TT..
COMPANION FOR EMPLOYEES IN AN OPTIMALCOMPANION FOR EMPLOYEES IN AN OPTIMAL
SAFETY CULTURESAFETY CULTURE
JOHN THE EMPLOYEE-JOHN THE EMPLOYEE- RESEARCH ANDRESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT REGARDING A SAFETY ANDDEVELOPMENT REGARDING A SAFETY AND
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AVATAR AS AN IOCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AVATAR AS AN I..TT..
COMPANION FOR EMPLOYEES IN AN OPTIMALCOMPANION FOR EMPLOYEES IN AN OPTIMAL
SAFETY CULTURESAFETY CULTURE
Ph.D.Stefan Gabriel Kovacs, INCDPM ”Alexandru
Darabont”,Bucharest
Ph.D.Eugenie Posdărăscu, Hyperion University,Bucharest
Research included in the Erasmus + Project ”Mind your safety! Safety matters”

About the project(About the project(Data regarding the project inside this research was done)Data regarding the project inside this research was done)
• Name of the project:Mind Safety- Safety Matters!
• Supporter entity :INCDPM ”Alexandru Darabont”
• Project goals: ''Mind Safety'' - Safety Matters
( MS-SM) aims to improve and innovate
methods of teaching safety and health
issues in the classroom, motivating and
preparing young people to work in safe
conditions, living and learning to be
responsible citizens after leaving school.

• Partners:
o Coordinator: Autoridade para as Condições do Trabalho
o UNIVERSIDADE DE AVEIRO
o AFTEBI - Associação para a Formação Tecnológica e Profissional da Beira Interior
o INCDPM ”Alexandru Darabont”
o Výzkumný ústav bezpečnosti práce Praha
o TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITEIT DELFT
o UNIVERSITAT DE GIRONA
• Description of outputs: The output presented here is an IT
instrument that will be used in order to improve safety
learning.
• Target groups:
o a) European teachers of Secondary students
o b) European students: Students from Secondary education level will be the main
target for the booklet testing (for some countries as Portugal, those are included in
compulsory education programme)
o c) European teachers of blind students and with low vision
o d) European blind students and with low vision

• The expected results:The main results expected during
the project will be generated around the development
of O1. OSH Teacher Education Reference Guide,, O2.
OSH! What a bright idea! - Practical Guide for teachers
and O3. OSH! What a bright idea! - Booklet for students
and other educational content. O1 will be designed and
produced to be used by teachers. It will consist in a
document to provide Guidelines and a framework of
processes and learning contexts, methodological and
pedagogical techniques, objectives and inclusive
pedagogical practices of evaluation. The presented
output is part of these expected results.

Essential thingsEssential things
• The idea of this research came to us when we
analysed the user feedback from our safety classes.
While positive in principle, this feedback also
showed us incredible boringness and lack of interest
sometimes, especially towards the end of the
classes.
• Our approach tried to “spice up” a little the training
process, using elements from the theory of learning
and also new IT tools. The obtained result can be
used at the class or by an individual user which
could be also off-line (downloading the application
on a mobile- for example).
• So, here is John...

Would that
be of any
interest on
you ?

• The main steps of the research and development
that was done are:
o Design and development of a reusable framework (with a story) that can
serve in order to disseminate safety through users(students) that have not
much time to learn and a very unstable interest in focusing on a normal
safety class;
o Design of safety lessons having in mind optimisation and increasing of
efficiency (implemented through specific KPI in order to improve
continuously the training process);
o Design and develop scenarios that can be implemented using the
framework;
o Test;
o Implement;
o Tell about;

The connexion between the
reusable frame and the expert
system helps the developers of
safety lessons in improving
them –adding interactivity and a
hands on approach and also
contributes to the rising interest
of the user.

Models of safety learningModels of safety learning
The Safety Teacher Model.The
model is centred on the Safety
Teacher. He educates his pupils
using an uni-directional channel of
communication. The quality of
education depends only on the
quality of work done by the safety
teacher.

The Trilateral Model. The
community together with the Safety
Teacher are assuring the safety input
on a limited number of things- that
are of interest for the community at a
specific moment. The users (students)
are being educated about the things
that are of immediate community
interest.

The Gatekeeper Model . In this
model,the Safety Teacher is a
gatekeeper that facilitates the access
to the safety knowledge- as needed by
the pupils. This is the model
implemented by John the Employee.

Our model of safetyOur model of safety
learninglearning

John, the avatarJohn, the avatar
• ” The term "avatar" has come to mean several
related but different things in the computing world.
In its broadest sense, an avatar is a computer user's
self-created visual representation of him or her. An
avatar can be a two-dimensional picture, a three-
dimensional animation, or a small icon.”
This is an
avatar.It could
be John.

John, the avatarJohn, the avatar

Starting pointsStarting points
Basis for the educational safety frame
A certain problem-
that could not be
solved by using
existing(former)
knowledge- had
arisen.
A solution is
needed(found and
shown to the
users) in order to
work in safety

Main
subject
Expert opinion Changes in
technology
Incidents/Accidents User/Trainer feedback
Add
new
content
Change
existing
content
Improve
existing
content
List the
main
changes
Lessons
learned
Procedur
es to be
improve
d
User
feedback
Trainer
feedback
Check
working
tools
No Yes - Visual
check
Hammers Yes No
Check
work
surface
s
Proce-
dure
No No Inspection - - Yes Yes
Knowledge elicitation form
Development of a normal safety class.Collecting knowledge.
-from bibliographical sources, from incidents and accidents
that are giving the lessons learned and also from the feedback
of former students and trainers and from expert opinion. All
the collection is done as an eliciting process using specific
software and based on frames like the one presented below.

In building up the lesson a distinct attention is given to the following points:
•The educational level of the target:
•The way of delivery.
•Easiness of learning- we are asking feedback from our students- on a 0-10
scale- where 10 is the ideal. Till now, our lessons are grouped around the
score 7.5-8.5 as a measure for the easiness of learning
•Time for training. There are situations in which training could be done just 5-
10 minutes /day. So a proper sequence would be needed- in order that the
employee should retain the former training and should enrich it with the
actual one.
•Definition and satisfaction by the developed lessons of a certain KPI- not
necessary for one lesson but for a module of lessons. This KPI could be a very
simple one (Understanding and acceptance of lessons) - measured after the
class or it could be a more complex one (percent of incident reduction after
training).
•The resulting imprint. We are glad if certain safety rules could be associated
with one of our avatars- so that the employee would remember that John
the avatar presented him a certain safety rule.

Our target is mainly composed of:
•Young workers- which are generally not very
sensible to the old forms of training;
•Workers that have no sufficient time to assist
normal classes;
•Communities- which have no safety experience-
but are interested in implementing such experience
through non-working members;
•SME-s where the safety training should be specific
and considering the time and resources restrictions;
•Second grade pupils that will enter into the
workplace at a certain time;

The educational level of our learning targets goes
between:
-medium general education ( first years of high
school (secondary school-key stage 3 and 4 in UK);
-technical college;
We start supposing that they have a minimal
technical education that should be the foundation of
our teaching.
Also we consider that a minimum of safety
education was allready done.

The way of delivery could be:
•Classic- our John being a supplement (or
individual activity) to a canonical safety class;
•Blended learning;
•On-line at work;
•On-line at home- without any organised learning
event;
•On-line at work and home- inside an organised
learning event that is not requiring physical
presence and is ending with an individual project
and a certificate;

Easiness of learning involves (in our concept):
•Quick understanding;
•Ability to do it by themselves in a short time;
•Imprinting the lesson learned for mid and long-
time;
•Ability to explain the learned lesson to others
using your words;
•Ability to use the learned lesson (s) in order to do
by themselves an individual project (generally at
the end of the course or of the module);

In our lessons , knowledge inside the content could be
changed by:
•The opinion of an existing expert (generally we are using
three expert panels in order to judge) regarding the
existing knowledge or the necessity of a new lesson. The
expert should tell:
o if there is need for new knowledge- together with the change of technology or
work procedures or;
o if there is a need to change/improve the existing knowledge;
•Relevant incidents/accidents happened recently- that
could be transformed into lessons learned or will lead to
improved best practice procedures;
•User/Trainer feedback. Users generally tell when there are
parts of knowledge that they could not understand, that
are insufficiently explicated, etc.

The opinion of
an existing expert
.

Relevant incidents/
accidents happened recently-
Ways of processing

User feedback could be:
-negative- involving changes;
-positive- involving add-ons and
upgrades;

Design and development ofDesign and development of the safety oriented,the safety oriented,
reusable frameworkreusable framework
• The framework should implement the following
minimal conditions:
o Development of a generic story (one or more avatars that are working,
could be accidented and tell us their stories focusing on Do/Don t,
Learned Lessons and Best Practice Safety Procedures);
o Introduction of one or more specific avatars that have complementary
qualities and defects.
o Possibility to define one or more stability points.
o Possibility to load on the framework safety lessons developed in
PowerPoint.
o Facility of goal oriented/target oriented scenario development inside the
framework- scenarios that could be considered as specific instances of
the framework;
o Points for analysis and validation.
o Points for en passant upgrade

• The framework is constructed
using two specific instruments:
o A frontware instrument- that gives us the
avatars, the context, the interaction
possibility; the frontware instrument could be
used (in the worst case) with a lesson
uploader like PowerPoint or with other
authorware like Lectora or ToolBook.
o An expert system – that gives us the
possibility to use and add heuristic expertise
expressed by production rules –this expertise
could be used as a supplement to the lesson
or independently.

The coupling of the frontware
instrument with the expert
systems assures an optimal
framework. This framework is
uploaded by the lesson
developer (in PowerPoint for
example) if the developers are
trainers without IT knowledge
or could be transformed
directly by the particularisation
of the framework if there is no
need to have a PowerPoint
referential.

The frontware instrument is
controled directly only by experts.
The request for specific lessons
would come from various
employers (mostly SME s) and is
completed by the user feedback. If
there is no need for scenarios and
high-tech - this turns into an
improved safety lesson
presentation.

• The expert system turns the heuristic experience into
production rules like:
o IF <you have no protection gloves> AND <you are handling a dangerous
substance that could spill> THEN <you shall find gloves before starting the
work >.
Such rules are included in Logic Blocs- that are
keeping such chunks of knowledge together.
Practically, handling the expert system in order to
generate , test and implement new production
rules and logic blocs is a knowledge engineering
work with a logical support.

Why do we need expert systems and its
production rules ?
Having the safety lesson about a certain subject,
the expert approach teaches the student a best
practice safety procedure step by step. For
example:
1.Check the cleanliness of your working place;
2.Have you opened the window today ? If not,
please open the window and let the fresh air enter
– at least 10 minutes before your work starts;
3.Have you checked your working tools ? If not,
please do so.
4.Have you all the materials needed for a day
work ?

• Actually, heuristic expertise is what remains in the
employee workplan. Such an expertise could be
generally obtained through trial and error- which is
a costly way of learning. The expert approach is
replacing trial and error with a more gentle way of
learning, without the risk of accidents during the
learning process. Heuristics should, on the other side
be developed and imprinted on an existing learning
support.

The structure for a
specific lesson is
designed taking into
account this framework

Here we have the transposal of the previous presented structure into
software building structure. The chapters of the framework are
turned into lesson indicators. Some image captures are given in the
next slides

Here John is introducing his work context. Bleah, he has not cleaned his
workplace recently.

I really hope that he will not kill Anna with that hammer (just
kidding) but will show her how to work with a hammer in safety

John presents the main elements that you must know when working
with a hammer.(how to hold the hammer, what to check upon, etc.)

The development cycle involving a
scenario is presented in this figure

The scenario
development process is
shown in the figure.

The expert systemThe expert system
The expert system adds heuristic expertise to
John abilities. It could be used as a hands on
complement to the educational part or as a
safety expert system by itself. The heuristic
expertise is processed as production rules that
could be called by an inference engine which is
activated by the specific interaction with the
avatar. A conclusive schema is given in the next
slide. The expert system was developed using
Exysis Corvid and is at this moment in a
prototype stage with more than 150 rules
implemented.

Generally, in an Expert
System the Human
(Safety) Expert is
giving specific
knowledge to the
Knowledge Engineer
which is processing it
and putting it in the
knowledge base as
production rules.

Here, the common interface is
assured by John the
Employee.Specific (and distinct)
development interfaces that are
not for the user access are
provided for the tutorial and
expert developers.

The variables screen. Here are defined the expert system intermediary and final
variables.

A specific (composed) production rule.
The IF part is complemented using an
AND operator.

A Logic Bloc is composed by production rules grouped together on
a specific goal.

This Logic Bloc is deriving the final variable.

Variable derivation is done generally by backward chaining. In our
prototype, the final goal is represented by the decision based on safety
aspects to enter or not at work.

The Command block is managing the production rules.

Example of a short test module forExample of a short test module for
the hammersthe hammers
Here you have the tree
of the module. As you
could see, the tree is
including 1 scene, a
character (that is doing
the entire job there, we
must pay her
sometimes) and slides.
Each slide could have a
message (prompt) and
two feedbacks, one for
the correct answer and
one for the wrong one.

The same tree opened just for the results slide

Here is a part of the
scenario. The pictograms
are really movements and
gestures done by the
character. The end arrow
tells the program to jump at
the next slide.

START-UP SCREEN

ConclusionsConclusions
• The build-up and implementation of John the avatar is
not a big thing by itself. There is another avatar, named
NAPO, developed by the EOSHA that has a lot of
movies- but it is not interactive. However, the
development of reusable safety frames and (in the next
phase) putting them on a server for free access – could
change a little the way in which safety training is done
today. The trainer could sketch its content and then go
to the server, take the most significant frames for his
subject and develop- without knowledge of a
programming language or of a movie making software-
a lesson in no more than 15-20 minutes. Once
developed, the lesson could be beta-tested on the
same server and then used locally or even on a larger
scale.Such a structure is shown next.

• We have implemented our lessons in a 300 employee
enterprise dedicated to the building of metal
constructions. Workers were allowed to access central
terminals (existing inside workplaces and also in the
administration building) and were also presented with
the software to be loaded on smartphones and tablets.
After OK-ing the whole procedure by the managers and
the supervisors of workplace together with the workers
representatives we have asked for a general feedback,
expressed freely (that was used to improve our product)
and for a quantitative feedback, using Likert scales and
expressed by the added values (as in two months they
have no incidents- so we have no objective measures).
The resulting average values of the quantitative
assessment are presented in the table

ConclusionsConclusionsTERMINAL VALUES INSTRUMENTAL VALUES
Value 1 2 3 4 5 Value 1 2 3 4 5
Safety
learning
X Logic X
Keeping
safety at
work
X Reliable X
Comfort
and well-
being at
work
X Self-
controlled
learning
X
Social
recognition
X Self-respect X
Optimality X
Sense of
belonging
X
Understanda
ble even for
those with
no specific
studies
X
Simplicity X
Helpful X

• Usage of the avatars together with a tool for
sentiment analysis could give something more
complex- like learned lessons for large companies.
We could assume – for example- that an employee
from a certain process industry- which has branches
in 10-15 countries- has the same safety experience
regarding a certain problem. Using the avatar
approach, a safety expert could formalise and
distribute this experience in order to act like a
learned lesson and also perhaps as a message
regarding the need for improvement- for the
management of the company.

• The main advantages of this approach are:
• more interest- from the learners- regarding the safety
training presented;
• a better imprint of the main points that should be
learned;
• usage of predefined, reusable dynamic frames that
could be easily filled with content;
• possibility of realisation of a link between lessons through
the figure of the avatar;
• possibility to realise an inter-cultural safety dialogue and
learning context- using the avatar;
• optimal transformation of content into the final lesson;
• easiness in usage;

• THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION !

John the Employee

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to John the Employee

Similar to John the Employee (20)

More from Stefan Kovacs

More from Stefan Kovacs (9)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

John the Employee