Print View: ENGG7020 - Sem 2 2008 - St Lucia

1. General Course Information

1.1 Course Details

Course Code: ENGG7020 Course Title: Systems Safety Engineering
Coordinating Unit: School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering
Semester: Semester 2, 2008 Mode: Internal
Level: Postgraduate Coursework
Location: St Lucia
Number of Units: 2 Contact Hours Per Week: 2C - intensive
Pre-Requisites: Admission to ME suite

Course Description: Intensive course covering hazard identification and risk analysis, safe system design, safety analysis techniques, safe software engineering, system hazard analysis, safety cases, & human factors. Techniques covered include: Hazard and Operability Studies (HAZOP) & Computer Hazard and Operability Studies (CHAZOP), Fault Tree analysis (FTA), Event Tree Analysis (ETA), and Failure Modes & Effects Analysis (FMEA) & Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA).

Assumed Background:

Desirable: ENGG7000

1.2 Course Introduction

Safety is a whole life cycle issue that relates to all aspects of the system. Hardware, software, operating procedures, planning, development, testing, maintenance, installation, commissioning, decommissioning, disposal and other aspects are considered in a safety program.

For most safety-critical systems, the system must be shown to be acceptably safe. The acceptance of a safety case forms an important part of such a product. Early identification of safety issues and assessment of the safety-criticality of a system are valuable in preventing costly mitigations and rework being used to produce an acceptably safe product. A number of disasters have shown that for many organisations, the entire process of analysing, specifying, developing and deploying safety-critical systems needs improvement.

The lecture component of this course explains the principles and practice of safety management and engineering and the unique challenges of computer-based systems. The content blends discussion of management and development issues with practical experience in safety analysis techniques. Topics covered include: hazard identification and risk analysis, safe system design, safety analysis techniques, safe software engineering, system hazard analysis, safety cases, safety management and human factors. Techniques covered include: Hazard and Operability Studies (HAZOP) and Computer Hazard and Operability Studies (CHAZOP), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Event Tree Analysis (ETA), Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA), and Goal Structured Notation (GSN).

The course will be delivered in intensive mode: that is, all of the course lectures will be delivered in 3 full days. The lectures are compulsory and students should ensure that they keep those 3 days clear of other obligations. The 3-day course is also being offered as a public course to industry, and it is anticipated that industry practitioners will attend the lectures.

Session outlines

Concepts and terminology

Safety, hazards and risks
Example: Warsaw Airbus crash
System effects
Reliability vs safety
Safety lifecycle
Safety Cases

Hazard identification

Hazard and Risk Analysis process
Preliminary Hazard Identification
Preliminary Hazard Analysis
Functional hazard identification techniques
- Functional Failure Analysis
- Hazard and Operability Studies (HAZOP)
- Computer HAZOP (CHAZOP)
Hazard Log

Risk analysis

Risk analysis process
Acceptability of risks
- ALARP and classification of risks
Severity analysis
Frequency analysis
- Accident sequences
- Event Tree Analysis
Setting risk targets
- safety requirements
- Safety Integrity Levels

Design

Risk reduction procedures
Hazard Elimination
Nature and treatment of failures
Hazard Reduction
Hazard Control
Damage Limitation
Coping with COTS

System hazard analysis

System hazard analysis process
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
Fault Tree Analysis
- FTA exercise
- Reliability block diagrams
Quantitative Analysis
Common cause analysis

Human factors

The role of humans in safety-critical systems
Human Reliability Analysis
- task analysis
- human error identification
- Reason's model of human error
- human reliability quantification
- mitigating human error
Safe user interface design

Software

Nature of software
Qualitative software integrity
Software safety requirements analysis
Software specification
Software design
Software coding
Reviews and analyses
Software Fault Tree Analysis
Testing
Independent assessment

Formal methods

Introduction to formal methods
Example: requirements analysis for a critical system
Introduction to Z notation
System modelling
- Static aspects
- Dynamic aspects
Validation by proof and animation
Architectural design

Management and safety cases

Safety Culture
Safety Management Systems
Safety Organisations
Functional Safety Assessment / Evaluation
Safety Planning
Safety Cases
- high level reasoning and supporting evidence
- consistency and completeness
- maintenance
- tool support
Other essential ingredients

Case studies

This session will cover various accident case studies, including presentation of the technical nature of the events leading up to and following the incident. This session is designed to be discussion based, with an emphasis on covering issues that have been raised during other sessions.

The lectures will be supplemented by prac sessions and assignment work, which will run for the entirety of 2^nd semester starting in week 2 (see below). The prac sessions and assignment work will enable students to develop their skills in system safety engineering on a realistic case study throughout the semester.

1.3 Course Staff

Course Coordinator: Dr Graeme Smith
Phone: 3365 1625 Email: smith@itee.uq.edu.au
Campus: St Lucia Building: General Purpose South (Map) Room: 315
Consultation: 2-3pm Mondays

Lecturer: Dr Ariel Liebman
Phone: 3365 1623 Email: a.liebman@uq.edu.au
Campus: St Lucia Building: General Purpose South (Map) Room: 414
Consultation: Monday 1-2pm (Prac. session and assignment related questions)

Guest Lecturer: Dr Mark Bofinger Email: bof@savive.com

1.4 Timetable

Timetables are available on mySI-net.

5. Assessment

5.1 Assessment Summary

This is a summary of the assessment in the course. For detailed information on each assessment, see 5.5 Assessment Detail below.

Assessment Task	Due Date	Weighting	Learning Objectives
Paper Assignment 1. Lit review	Due 5.00 pm Friday 15 August.	20%	1, 2, 5
Practical Assignment 2. Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)	Due 5.00 pm Friday 29 August.	25%	3, 4
Practical Assignment 3. System Hazard Analysis (SHA)	Due 5.00 pm Friday 19 September.	25%	3, 4
Paper Assignment 4. Lit review	Due 5.00 pm Friday 17 October.	30%	1, 2

5.2 Course Grading

Grade 1, Fail: Fails to demonstrate most or all of the basic requirements of the course: 0-19%

Grade 2, Fail: Demonstrates clear deficiencies in understanding and applying fundamental concepts; communicates information or ideas in ways that are frequently incomplete or confusing and give little attention to the conventions of the discipline: 20-44%

Grade 3, Fail: Demonstrates superficial or partial or faulty understanding of the fundamental concepts of the field of study and limited ability to apply these concepts; presents undeveloped or inappropriate or unsupported arguments; communicates information or ideas with lack of clarity and inconsistent adherence to the conventions of the discipline: 45-49%

Grade 4, Pass: Demonstrates adequate understanding and application of the fundamental concepts of the field of study; develops routine arguments or decisions and provides acceptable justification; communicates information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline: 50-64%

Grade 5, Credit: Demonstrates substantial understanding of fundamental concepts of the field of study and ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; develops or adapts convincing arguments and provides coherent justification; communicates information and ideas clearly and fluently in terms of the conventions of the discipline: 65-74%

Grade 6, Distinction: As for 5, with frequent evidence of originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and in creating solutions; uses a level, style and means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience: 75-84%

Grade 7, High Distinction: As for 6, with consistent evidence of substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critically evaluates problems, their solutions and implications: 85-100%

5.3 Late Submission

A penalty of 20% of the maximum mark for a written assignment will be deducted for each day late unless an acceptable explanation is provided to the course coordinator.

Requests for extensions will only be considered under exceptional circumstances, and only if submitted in writing in advance of the due date and accompanied by documentary evidence of extenuating circumstances (e.g. medical certificate).

5.4 Other Assessment Information

Determination of Final Grade

This course will use criterion-referenced marking, meaning that students can determine their final grade from their component marks (without worrying about any “grading curves” being applied to normalise the collective results). At the discretion of the Lecturer, final grades may be scaled upwards but not downwards. The final grade is calculated from the total marks for the 4 assignments.

5.5 Assessment Detail

Assignment 1. Lit review

Type: Paper
Learning Objectives Assessed: 1, 2, 5
Due Date:
Due 5.00 pm Friday 15 August.
Weight: 20%
Task Description:

Assignment type: individual

The assignment: Write a 5-8 page review of 3-4 system safety case studies and discuss recurring issues and lessons learnt.

A reading list will be available in week 1, including pointers to where students can find relevant literature.

Learning objectives: familiarity with real-life system safety issues, report writing, written communication

Criteria & Marking:

Criterion	Mark	Standard
Presentation (5 marks): Readability, layout, structure, spelling, grammar.	5	Highly professional report
	3-4	Consistently high standard of presentation
	1-2	Good presentation with some presentation faults
	0	Poorly prepared work with major presentation faults

Description of case studies (5 marks): Sufficient description of system design and operating context for safety issues to be understood.	5	Excellent summary of the system safety case studies; concise & to the point
	3-4	Good descriptions of case studies
	1-2	Generally good description of case studies with significant deficiencies
	0	Seriously inadequate description of case studies

Description of lessons learnt (5 marks): Lessons learnt from the case studies are clearly articulated: eg missing design features; undesired functionality; problems with the development process; management issues.	5	Excellent summary of the lessons learnt; excellent coverage of issues; clear & to the point
	3-4	Good descriptions of lessons learnt
	1-2	Generally good description of lessons learnt with significant deficiencies
	0	Seriously inadequate description of lessons learnt

Use of references (5 marks): Breadth & depth of reading clearly demonstrated through use of references and citations.	5	Excellent use of citations to support lit review conclusions; full bibliographic details given, in appropriate format; initiative shown in selection of additional references
	3-4	Good use of references
	1-2	Significant deficiencies in use of references and/or no evidence that additional references were consulted
	0	Seriously inadequate evidence of use of references

Assignment 2. Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)

Type: Practical
Learning Objectives Assessed: 3, 4
Due Date:
Due 5.00 pm Friday 29 August.
Weight: 25%
Task Description:

Assignment type: team

The assignment: Undertake and prepare a report on the PHA for the case study.

Learning objectives: hazard identification, accident sequences, event trees, functional failure analysis, industry-style report writing

Criteria & Marking:

Criterion	Mark	Standard
Presentation (5 marks): Readability, layout, structure, spelling, grammar.	5	Highly professional report
	3-4	Consistently high standard of presentation
	1-2	Good presentation with some presentation faults
	0	Poorly prepared work with major presentation faults

Accident identification
(3 marks):

All major potential accidents identified

Good coverage of possible accident types

1-2

Generally good coverage of possible accident types with some omissions and/or lack of clarity

Major omissions

Criterion	Mark	Standard
Functional Failure Analysis (4 marks): FFA table for specified function shows good understanding of FFA	4	Good examples of functional failures for each of the 3 cases
	2-3	Good examples for some cases but not for others
	0-1	Major deficiencies

System hazards & system safety requirements (6 marks): Hazards are identified and expressed in a clear but general form; corresponding safety requirements are expressed in a clear but general form	6	Good coverage of system hazards, with corresponding system safety requirements expressed well
	4-5	Generally good coverage, with some omissions and/or lack of clarity or generality
	2-3	Big gaps in coverage
	0-1	Major deficiencies

Accident sequences/ coeffectors
(4 marks):

The circumstances under which hazards become accidents are clearly identified

The conditions under which a hazard can lead to an accident are noted for each hazard

2-3

Generally good coverage of coeffectors with some omissions and/or lack of clarity

0-1

Major omissions

Event Tree Analysis (3 marks): Event tree shows good understanding of ETA	3	The event tree shows good understanding of ETA, and identifies appropriate protective measures and/or mitigations
	1-2	Good attempt at event tree, but protective measures/mitigations missing or inappropriate, or event tree inappropriate
	0	Major deficiencies

Assignment 3. System Hazard Analysis (SHA)

Type: Practical
Learning Objectives Assessed: 3, 4
Due Date:
Due 5.00 pm Friday 19 September.
Weight: 25%
Task Description:

Assignment type: team

The assignment: Undertake and prepare a report on the SHA for part of the case study.

Learning objectives: system safety requirements review, FMEA, FTA, HAZOP, industry-style report writing

Criteria & Marking:

Criterion	Mark	Standard
Presentation (4 marks): Format, readability, layout, structure, spelling, grammar.	4	Highly professional report
	3	Consistently high standard of presentation
	1-2	Good presentation with some presentation faults
	0	Poorly prepared work with major presentation faults

Failure mode identification
(4 marks):

Plausible failure mode identified for each AETU component

3-4

Highly plausible failure modes chosen for each of the 9 components, with clear explanation of how they could arise

1-2

Generally good coverage of failure modes for components, with some omissions and/or lack of clarity

Major omissions

FMEA
(3 marks):

Plausible effect noted for each failure mode

Good examples of associated hazards for each of the 9 cases

1-2

Good examples for some cases but not for others

0-1

Major deficiencies

CHAZOP guideword interpretation
(3 marks):

Plausible interpretations of the given guidewords

Appropriate choice of interpretations for guidewords, giving good coverage of possible deviations for this flow

1-2

Gaps in coverage or insufficient explanation

Major deficiencies

HAZOP
(5 marks):

Plausible causes & effects are noted for each deviation, and resulting safety requirements are identified

4-5

Good examples of possible causes & effects of deviations, with appropriate system safety requirements clearly identified

2-3

Generally good coverage with some omissions and/or lack of clarity

0-1

Major omissions

Fault Tree Analysis (6 marks): Fault tree developed for the given event	6	The fault tree shows good understanding of FTA
	4-5	Generally good coverage, with some omissions and/or lack of clarity or generality, or issues with structure
	2-3	Big gaps in coverage, or poor structure or documentation
	0-1	Major deficiencies

Assignment 4. Lit review

Type: Paper
Learning Objectives Assessed: 1, 2
Due Date:
Due 5.00 pm Friday 17 October.
Weight: 30%
Task Description:

Assignment type: individual

The assignment: Write a 5-8 page review of 3-4 strategies for dealing with safety in one of the following areas: (a) design, (b) human factors or (c) software, and discuss the factors influencing the use of these strategies in general, and with respect to the case study.

Learning objectives: familiarity with strategies for development of safety-critical systems, report writing, written communication

Criteria & Marking:

Criterion	Mark	Standard
Presentation (5 marks): Readability, layout, structure, spelling, grammar.	5	Highly professional report
	3-4	Consistently high standard of presentation
	1-2	Good presentation with some presentation faults
	0	Poorly prepared work with major presentation faults

Description of techniques (6 marks): Sufficient description of the techniques to be readily understood.	6	Excellent summary of the relevant techniques; concise & to the point; showing depth of understanding
	5	Good descriptions of techniques; showing depth of understanding
	3-4	Good descriptions of techniques
	1-2	Generally good description of techniques with significant deficiencies
	0	Seriously inadequate description of techniques

Description of factors affecting the use of techniques (6 marks): Factors influencing the use of the techniques described are clearly articulated.	6	Excellent summary of the factors affecting the use of the techniques described; excellent coverage of issues; clear & to the point
	5	Good descriptions of factors; excellent coverage of issues
	3-4	Good descriptions of factors
	1-2	Generally good description of factors with significant deficiencies
	0	Seriously inadequate description of factors

Discussion of suitability of techniques for the AETU system (6 marks): Suitability of each of the techniques for the AETU system is clearly articulated.	6	Excellent summary of the suitability of the techniques for the AETU system; excellent coverage of issues; clear & to the point
	5	Good discussion of suitability of techniques; excellent coverage of issues
	3-4	Good discussion of suitability of techniques
	1-2	Generally good discussion of suitability of techniques with significant deficiencies
	0	Seriously inadequate discussion of suitability of techniques

Use of references (7 marks): Breadth & depth of reading clearly demonstrated through use of references and citations.	7	Excellent use of citations to support lit review; full bibliographic details given, in appropriate format; initiative shown in selection of additional references; evidence of breadth and depth of reading clear
	5-6	Good use of references; evidence of breadth and depth of reading clear
	3-4	Good use of references
	1-2	Significant deficiencies in use of references and/or no evidence of breadth and depth of reading
	0	Seriously inadequate evidence of use of references

6. Policies & Guidelines

This section contains the details of and links to the most relevant policies and course guidelines. For further details on University Policies please visit myAdvisor and the University Handbook of Policies and Procedures.

6.1 Assessment Related Policies and Guidelines

University Policies & Guidelines

An overview of the University’s assessment-related policies can be found on myAdvisor (http://www.uq.edu.au/myadvisor/index.html?page=2910).

Academic Integrity
It is the University's task to encourage ethical scholarship and to inform students and staff about the institutional standards of academic behaviour expected of them in learning, teaching and research. Students have a responsibility to maintain the highest standards of academic integrity in their work. Students must not cheat in examinations or other forms of assessment and must ensure they do not plagiarise.

Plagiarism
The University has adopted the following definition of plagiarism:

Plagiarism is the act of misrepresenting as one's own original work the ideas, interpretations, words or creative works of another. These include published and unpublished documents, designs, music, sounds, images, photographs, computer codes and ideas gained through working in a group. These ideas, interpretations, words or works may be found in print and/or electronic media.

Students are encouraged to read the UQ Academic Integrity and Plagiarism policy (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25128) which makes a comprehensive statement about the University's approach to plagiarism, including the approved use of plagiarism detection software, the consequences of plagiarism and the principles associated with preventing plagiarism.

Feedback on Assessment
Feedback is essential to effective learning and students can expect to receive appropriate and timely feedback on all assessment. For a detailed explanation of the feedback you are entitled to, you should consult the policy on Student Access to Feedback on Assessment. (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25109)

As a student you have a responsibility to incorporate feedback into your learning; make use of the assessment criteria that you are given; be aware of the rules, policies and other documents related to assessment; and provide teachers with feedback on their assessment practices.

There are certain steps you can take if you feel your result does not reflect your performance. Please refer to the myAdvisor web site. (http://www.uq.edu.au/myadvisor/index.html?page=2953)

School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering Assessment Guidelines

Misconduct

Further to the statement on academic integrity and plagiarism above, students are required to read and understand the ITEE policy on Student Misconduct (http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/about_ITEE/policies/student-misconduct.html).

Late Arrival or Non-attendance at Examinations

The policy and procedure for late arrival or non-attendance at centrally controlled examinations is set out in the University's Examinations policy (HUPP 3.30.5), sections 8 and 10.2.

The way in which late arrival at a School-controlled examination is dealt with will be at the discretion of the course coordinator, who may be guided by the policy for centrally controlled exams.

In the case that a student requests a special exam for a School-controlled exam, the request will be considered and, if allowed, the timing shall be determined by the course coordinator, in consultation with the School's Chief Examiner where necessary, and in accordance with HUPP 3.30.5. Unless otherwise indicated in the Course Profile, applications must be made in writing to the Head of School no later than one week after the exam. Late applications will not be accepted.

Examination Feedback

In addition to the advice above, students wishing to view examination answer scripts and/or question papers should consult with the School office (Room 217, General Purpose South Building [78], St Lucia; Room 218, Building 1, Ipswich) regarding arrangements. The ITEE policy on exam script viewing is available at http://study.itee.uq.edu.au/current_students/exam_script_viewing.html.

Supplementary Assessment

If you fail this course you may be eligible for supplementary assessment - see the general award rules and/or your program rules for details. You should note that even though you may be eligible for supplementary assessment under these rules, in some circumstances there may be no practical assessment that can be offered to allow you to meet the minimum passing requirements. These circumstances may include failure based on:

group or team based assessment;
attendance or class participation requirements;
laboratory-based assessment, where laboratories can't practically be made available after classes have finished;
project or thesis-based assessment, where a significant period of time would be required to undertake supplementary assessment;
progressive assessment, where subsequent assessment items build on earlier assessment items; or
multiple assessment items, where it is impractical to offer multiple supplementary assessment items.

If the course coordinator determines that there is no practical supplementary assessment that can be offered to allow you to improve your grade, then you will not be offered supplementary assessment and your grade will remain unchanged.

6.2 Other Policies and Guidelines

University Policies and Guidelines

Placement Courses
Students on a placement course – also known as a work placement, internship, industry study, industry experience, clinical practice, clinical placement, practical work, practicum, fieldwork, teaching practice – should refer to the University policy, Placement Courses (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25120) for detailed information.

Working with Children
Students whose studies include a professional/work placement, internship, clinical practice, teaching practice or other similar activity which involves them in regular contact with children should refer to the University policy, Working with Children Check - "blue card" (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25004) to find out how to apply for a ‘blue card’.

Students with a Disability
Any student with a disability who may require alternative academic arrangements, including assessment, in the course/program is encouraged to seek advice at the commencement of the semester from a Disability Adviser at Student Support Services. Refer to the University policy, Students with a Disability (Disability Action Plan) (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25122) and to the policy on Special Arrangements for Examinations for Students with a Disability (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25111

Where an adjustment is made to an accredited program, it is the responsibility of the relevant Faculty to liaise with professional and registration bodies regarding the acceptability of the change/s.

Occupational Health and Safety
Undergraduate Students (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25055) and Postgraduate Students (http://www.uq.edu.au/hupp/index.html?page=25057) should be familiar with the University policies on occupational health and safety in the laboratory.

Other School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering Guidelines

Ethical Clearance

If your course involves assignment or project work involving human subjects or human-related materials, you must investigate the need for ethical clearance and obtain it when required. Information on ethical clearance can be found at http://www.uq.edu.au/research/orps/index.html?page=5064&pid=5256.

Learning Summary

Below is a table showing the relationship between the learning objectives for this course and the broader graduate attributes developed, the learning activities used to develop each objective and the assessment task used to assess each objective.

Learning Objectives

After successfully completing this course you should be able to:

1  understand basic system safety principles and the purpose and structure of safety cases and hazard logs
2  be familiar with the role & responsibilities of Safety Engineers
3  know how to apply key SSE practices including hazard analysis, risk assessment, FMEA, ETA, FTA, HAZOP & GSN
4  have experience applying safety analysis techniques
5  be familiar with key industry system safety standards

Assessment & Learning Activities

	Learning Objectives
	1	2	3	4	5
Learning Activities
Prac Session (Practical)
Lecture (Lecture)
Assessment Tasks
Assignment 1. Lit review
Assignment 2. Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
Assignment 3. System Hazard Analysis (SHA)
Assignment 4. Lit review

Graduate Attributes

Successfully completing this course will contribute to the recognition of your attainment of the following UQ (Postgrad Coursework) graduate attributes:

	Learning Objectives
	1	2	3	4	5
Graduate Attributes
*A IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIELD OF STUDY*
A2. A broad understanding of the field of study, including how other disciplines relate to the field of study.
A3. A comprehensive and in-depth knowledge in the field of study.
A5. An international perspective on the field of study.
A7. An appreciation of the link between theory and practice.
*B EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION*
B1. The ability to collect, analyse and organise information and ideas and to convey those ideas clearly and fluently, in both written and spoken forms.
B2. The ability to interact effectively with others in order to work towards a common outcome.
B3. The ability to select and use the appropriate level, style and means of communication.
B4. The ability to engage effectively and appropriately with information and communication technologies.
B5. The ability to practise as part of an interdisciplinary team.
*C INDEPENDENCE AND CREATIVITY*
C2. The ability to work and learn independently and effectively.
C3. The ability to generate ideas and adapt innovatively to changing environments.
C5. The ability to formulate and investigate problems, create solutions, innovate and improve current practices.

GRADUATE ATTRIBUTE	LEARNING OBJECTIVES
*A. IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIELD OF STUDY*
A2. A broad understanding of the field of study, including how other disciplines relate to the field of study.	1, 3, 4, 5
A3. A comprehensive and in-depth knowledge in the field of study.	1, 3, 5
A5. An international perspective on the field of study.	1, 3, 4, 5
A7. An appreciation of the link between theory and practice.
*B. EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION*
B1. The ability to collect, analyse and organise information and ideas and to convey those ideas clearly and fluently, in both written and spoken forms.	1, 3, 4
B2. The ability to interact effectively with others in order to work towards a common outcome.	3, 5
B3. The ability to select and use the appropriate level, style and means of communication.	1, 3, 4
B4. The ability to engage effectively and appropriately with information and communication technologies.	3
B5. The ability to practise as part of an interdisciplinary team.	1, 3, 4
*C. INDEPENDENCE AND CREATIVITY*
C2. The ability to work and learn independently and effectively.	1, 3
C3. The ability to generate ideas and adapt innovatively to changing environments.	3
C5. The ability to formulate and investigate problems, create solutions, innovate and improve current practices.	1
C6. The abilities and skills that provide a foundation for future leadership roles.
*D. CRITICAL JUDGEMENT*
D2. The ability to apply critical reasoning to issues through independent thought and informed judgement.	1, 2, 3, 4
D4. The ability to process material and to critically analyse and integrate information from a wide range of sources.	4
D5. The ability to evaluate opinions, make decisions and to reflect critically on the justifications for decisions using an evidence-based approach.	1, 4
*E. ETHICAL AND SOCIAL UNDERSTANDING*
E1. An understanding of social and civic responsibility.	1, 2, 4
E3. An appreciation of the philosophical and social contexts of a discipline.	2
E4. A knowledge and respect of ethics and ethical standards in relation to a major area of study.	1, 2
E5. A knowledge of other cultures and times and an appreciation of cultural diversity.
E7. The ability to work effectively and sensitively across all areas of society.	2
E8. An understanding of and respect for the roles and expertise of associated disciplines.

ENGG7020 - Sem 2 2008 - St Lucia - Internal

1. General Course Information

1.1 Course Details

1.2 Course Introduction

Session outlines

1.3 Course Staff

1.4 Timetable

2. Aims, Objectives & Graduate Attributes

2.1 Course Aims

2.2 Learning Objectives

2.3. Graduate Attributes

3. Learning Resources

3.2 Recommended Resources

3.3 University Learning Resources

3.4 School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering Learning Resources

3.5 Other Learning Resources & Information

4. Teaching & Learning Activities

4.1 Learning Activities

4.2 Other Teaching and Learning Activities Information

5. Assessment

5.1 Assessment Summary

5.2 Course Grading

5.3 Late Submission

5.4 Other Assessment Information

Determination of Final Grade

5.5 Assessment Detail

6. Policies & Guidelines

6.1 Assessment Related Policies and Guidelines

University Policies & Guidelines

School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering Assessment Guidelines

6.2 Other Policies and Guidelines

University Policies and Guidelines

Other School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering Guidelines

Learning Summary

Learning Objectives

Assessment & Learning Activities

Graduate Attributes

Nancy Leveson. Safeware: system safety and computers. Addison-Wesley, 1995.

Neil Storey. Safety-critical computer systems. Addison-Wesley, 1996.