Safety culture construction teaching experiment research method and system

Abstract

The invention belongs to the field of safety culture education, and particularly discloses a safety culture construction teaching experiment research method and system. The system is based on a modular design framework, five core experiment modules are constructed around accident case analysis, safety culture similarity and similarity comparison, training design, carrier design and evaluation indexes, and functions of accident cause '2-4' model analysis, safety culture element diagnosis and improved strategy design are integrated. The system supports multi-level authority management, the learning depth is ensured through an experimental task point forced completion mechanism and page shortest dwell time limitation, and teaching closed-loop management and dynamic feedback are realized by combining automatic generation of an experimental report, intelligent scoring of after-class exercises and multi-dimensional data statistics of a teacher end. Through a mixed teaching mode and interactive task design, the internalization ability of students to the safety culture theory is effectively improved, the systematic analysis and practical innovation ability of enterprise safety culture construction is enhanced, and the cultivation of the practical innovation ability of the students is improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of safety culture education, and specifically relates to a teaching experiment research method and system for safety culture construction. Background Technology

[0002] Currently, safety culture construction, as a core pathway for optimizing enterprise accident prevention and safety management systems, has become a crucial strategy in the global industrial sector. Universities, as the source of talent for safety culture construction, directly determine the future workforce's ability to systematically promote safety culture development. However, my country's safety culture education still suffers from significant shortcomings: First, teaching content focuses on fragmented theories, lacking a systematic analysis of safety culture elements and a deep connection with accident cases; second, the teaching model is limited to classroom lectures, failing to construct a practical link of "case analysis - culture diagnosis - strategy design," making it difficult for students to grasp the dynamic construction logic of safety culture within enterprises; third, teaching resources are disconnected from real-world enterprise needs, lacking practical training tools that integrate national standards, thus hindering students' ability to solve complex safety culture problems. To address these issues, there is an urgent need to develop an experimental teaching system centered on safety culture construction. Through modular tasks such as accident root cause analysis, customized training programs, and innovative carrier design, this system can transform safety culture theory into actionable practical skills, supplying the industry with professionals capable of systematically building safety culture. Summary of the Invention

[0003] To address the shortcomings of existing technologies, this invention aims to provide a teaching and experimental research method for safety culture construction. Based on a modular framework, it integrates the "2-4" accident causation model analysis and improvement strategy design functions, combined with a blended learning model, to achieve a closed-loop teaching approach for safety culture: "analysis-improvement-evaluation." The system uses a case library and national standards to drive students to complete accident diagnosis, training design, and innovative carrier experiments, thereby enhancing their systematic construction and practical abilities in safety culture.

[0004] To achieve the above objectives, the technical solution adopted by the present invention is as follows:

[0005] A teaching experiment research method for building a safety culture includes the following steps:

[0006] S1. Analyze the causes of accidents through accident case studies to understand the role of safety culture;

[0007] S2. Compare the similarities and differences in corporate safety culture in different accident cases, compare the impact paths of safety culture in accident cases, and propose corresponding improvement measures for the problems existing in corporate safety culture;

[0008] S3. Based on a specific accident case, identify the training targets and training needs, design safety culture training content, develop a safety culture training plan, and complete the safety culture training design.

[0009] S4. Based on the needs of safety culture training, determine the theme, form, target audience, and display space of the safety culture carrier design, and complete the safety culture carrier design;

[0010] S5. Referring to relevant standards and combining the safety culture weaknesses and improvement plans identified in the previous analysis, we will then independently design safety culture evaluation indicators.

[0011] Furthermore, step S1 specifically includes:

[0012] S1-1. The "2-4" accident causation model is used as the analytical tool. Based on the Heinrich, Bird, and Loftus accident causation chains, this model applies organizational behavior principles and references the definitions of safety culture and management systems to propose a new accident causation chain. The specific steps are as follows:

[0013] S1-1-1. Determine the organization for accident analysis; multi-organization accidents should be analyzed separately within each organization, and then the control feedback relationships between organizations should be considered.

[0014] S1-1-2. Identify the direct event chain that led to the accident; these events include unsafe acts and unsafe conditions; identifying unsafe acts requires examining violations and dangerous behaviors of all members of the organization;

[0015] S1-1-3. Analyze individual safety capabilities, organizational management systems, and safety culture; safety capabilities include safety knowledge, safety awareness, safety habits, safety psychology, and safety physiology; organizational management systems include safety policies, organizational structure, staffing, and procedures; safety culture includes multiple safety culture elements;

[0016] S1-1-4. Analyze the behavioral pathways between causal factors in an organization;

[0017] S1-2. The operational procedure of the "2-4" accident causation model is as follows: Extract information from the accident report, identify the direct cause, indirect cause, root cause, and root cause, and mark the corresponding safety culture elements and provide explanations for the causes; then select two accidents from the accident case set, analyze them from the aspects of direct cause, indirect cause, root cause, and root cause, and find the safety culture elements in the case that reflect the lack of safety culture in the accident company according to the specific definition of the elements in the model, and explain the reasons;

[0018] S1-3. Analyze the selected accidents to obtain the event sequence diagram of the accidents. For each event, determine the cause, find the corresponding shortcomings in safety culture for each cause, form the safety culture cause action path, and synthesize all action paths to obtain the accident cause analysis diagram and the accident cause development path diagram.

[0019] S1-4. Based on the aforementioned accident cause development path diagram, calculate the deficiency degree of safety culture elements using an accident attribution path weighted algorithm; specifically including:

[0020] S1-4-1. Determine m accident causal development paths P i And according to the cause level described in steps S1-2, assign a cause level to each path P. i Assign path criticality weights W pi ;

[0021] S1-4-2. Based on the safety culture cause-effect path in step S1-3, construct path P. i With respect to the N safety culture elements e described in step S1-1-3 j The relationship between them R ij ;

[0022] S1-4-3. Calculate the j-th safety culture element e j Total Deficit Score D j The calculation formula is:

[0023]

[0024] Where N is the total number of safety culture elements in step S1-1-3; m is the total number of paths; W pi R represents the criticality weight of the i-th path; ij This represents the association between path i and element j, and its value is 1 or 0; i∈[1, m], j∈[1, N].

[0025] Furthermore, step S2 specifically includes:

[0026] S2-1. Based on the analysis results of the two selected typical accident cases, Accident A and Accident B, and combined with the safety culture element library in the case study database, compare the similarities and differences in their safety culture deficiencies to generate a safety culture element comparison table; specifically including:

[0027] Based on the total deficiency score D of safety culture elements for the two accidents calculated in steps S1-4 j Construct the deficiency vectors D for accidents B and B respectively. A and D B The similarity between the two vectors is calculated using the cosine similarity algorithm, and the formula is as follows:

[0028]

[0029] Among them, Sim(D A D B (D) This represents the similarity score of the safety culture deficiencies in the two accidents. A,j and D B,j These are the total deficiency scores calculated for the j-th element in each of the two accidents in steps S1-4.

[0030] S2-2. Using the behavioral path analysis tool of the "2-4" accident causation model, we analyzed the impact path of safety culture elements in the two accidents and marked the differences in key nodes;

[0031] S2-3. Propose improvement strategies to address the weaknesses in the safety culture of the company involved in the accident.

[0032] Furthermore, step S3 specifically includes:

[0033] S3-1. Understand the relevant knowledge of training needs surveys, compare the expected performance of employees with the actual situation, identify gaps, and the process by which enterprises and individual employees express their training needs and desires; the specific process includes five parts: training needs analysis, gap identification, analysis of the causes of the gaps, determination of measures to fill the gaps, and determination of training needs.

[0034] After understanding the relevant knowledge, based on the shortcomings of the safety culture of the company involved in one of the two selected accidents, the target group and training needs for safety culture training were determined.

[0035] S3-2. Design safety culture training content. After completing the training needs survey, it is usually found that the training needs of employees in different positions in the company are different. The training needs are extracted and summarized, and an effective training plan is designed.

[0036] S3-3. Based on the safety culture training plan and the identified safety culture training targets and needs, design specific training content from four aspects: safety culture deficiencies, training targets, training needs, and specific training content. For each safety culture deficiency, clearly define the training targets, training needs, learning objectives or outcomes, target learners, trainers and trainees, time allocation, specific training content, activity arrangements, auxiliary materials or equipment, training environment setup, preparatory work, how to evaluate training effectiveness, and how to ensure the application of training effectiveness. Then, integrate all deficiencies into a training plan table to complete the safety culture training design.

[0037] Furthermore, in step S3-1, the key target positions analyzed in the safety culture training are mainly those with frequent and numerous safety accidents; personnel analysis mainly involves analyzing the gap between the current status and the expected status of individual employees to determine the personnel who need and should receive training and the content of the training; the focus of the analysis is on the understanding of the basic core concepts of safety culture, safe behaviors in daily work, and violations. If the differences in behavior or performance are caused by employee non-cooperation, insufficient personal ability or skills, or lack of attention from management, training can eliminate the differences.

[0038] The procedure for developing a safety culture training plan in step S3-2 includes: clarifying training objectives, expected training outcomes, target audience, determining training content, determining training format and methods, selecting training instructors, choosing training time, determining training location, and preparing for quantitative measurement of safety culture.

[0039] Furthermore, step S4 specifically includes:

[0040] S4-1. Learn about the forms of safety culture carriers and their dissemination characteristics, and clarify the practical significance of carrier design in enhancing employees' safety awareness;

[0041] S4-2. Based on the missing safety culture elements in the accident cases, determine the form, content, target audience, display units, and space of the designed safety culture carrier; select 1-3 missing safety culture elements as the theme of the safety culture carrier design, and carry out the safety culture carrier design.

[0042] S4-3. Integrate safety culture content into the design of the carrier, and explain the design concept through a combination of text and graphics;

[0043] S4-4. Quantitatively score the completed safety culture carrier design; calculate the comprehensive score S of the carrier design using the safety culture carrier scoring algorithm. carrier The algorithm is based on p preset primary evaluation indicators I. k and its weight W k And for each primary indicator I k The secondary indicators are used to score the primary indicator S. k The first-level evaluation index I k It should include at least: design content, design structure, design artistry and creativity, and application;

[0044] Among them, the overall score of carrier design S carrier The calculation formula is:

[0045]

[0046] Where p is the total number of primary evaluation indicators; W k For the k-th primary indicator Ik The weights of S; k Let k be the score of the k-th primary indicator; k∈[1, p].

[0047] Furthermore, step S5 specifically includes:

[0048] S5-1. Distinguish between quantitative measurement and evaluation of safety culture, and clarify that the comprehensive evaluation of an enterprise's safety culture construction level is an evaluation of the level of the enterprise's safety culture itself and its effects; the results obtained from quantitative measurement of safety culture only reflect the level of the enterprise's safety culture itself, without considering the effects of safety culture.

[0049] S5-2. Learn the evaluation procedures and methods for safety culture construction; the evaluation procedures include: establishing an evaluation organization and implementation agency, formulating an evaluation work implementation plan, issuing task assignments, conducting research, collecting and verifying basic data, statistical analysis of data, writing an evaluation report, providing feedback to enterprises and soliciting opinions, submitting the evaluation report, and summarizing the evaluation work; and refer to relevant safety culture guidelines to learn the evaluation procedures and the shortcomings of existing indicators;

[0050] S5-3. Based on previous findings, independently design tiered evaluation indicators; specifically including:

[0051] The weights W of each tiered indicator are determined using the normalized weighting method. j This method uses importance scores S for each indicator. j The evaluation and normalization process yields W. j Finally, students need to submit a complete document outlining the tiered evaluation indicator system.

[0052] S5-4. Based on the aforementioned graded evaluation index system, calculate the overall score S of the enterprise's safety culture construction level. total The calculation formula is as follows:

[0053]

[0054] Where n is the total number of hierarchical evaluation indicators; W j The normalized weight of the j-th indicator satisfies Score j is the actual evaluation score of the j-th indicator.

[0055] Accordingly, based on the above-mentioned teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction, this invention also proposes a basic teaching experiment system for safety culture, which includes: an experiment task execution module, an access control module, a data statistics module, and a resource integration module.

[0056] The experimental task execution module is used for the entire process of safety culture construction experiments; it analyzes the safety culture deficiencies in accident cases based on the "2-4" accident causation model and generates a structured analysis report; it extracts common weaknesses and generates improvement strategies through a comparison tool; it designs targeted safety culture training programs and suitable carrier formats based on the analysis results; and finally, it constructs a graded evaluation index system based on national standards, outputs comprehensive evaluation results, and forms a closed-loop process of "analysis-improvement-design-evaluation".

[0057] The permission management module is used for multi-role collaboration and process control; it defines three levels of permissions for administrators, teachers, and students, and implements a mandatory task completion mechanism and page dwell time control.

[0058] The data statistics module is used for dynamic monitoring of teaching and learning behaviors; it collects data such as experiment duration, task completion rate, exercise accuracy, and report score in real time, and generates a class learning heatmap and a multi-dimensional analysis panel for teachers, supporting dynamic optimization of teaching strategies.

[0059] The resource extension module is used for system function integration with external data; it has a built-in national standard library and typical accident case library, and supports the import of external accidents and the addition of custom cases.

[0060] Furthermore, the system is divided into functional modules, including student terminals, teacher terminals, and management terminals;

[0061] On the student side, after students enter the learning interface through identity verification, they complete five experimental projects in sequence; each experimental project contains four core learning units: experimental introduction, experimental teaching, after-class exercises and experimental report; students can complete the entire process of knowledge internalization and practical operation under the intelligent guidance of the system;

[0062] The teacher's side provides a teaching platform for online classes, helping teachers better complete their teaching tasks related to safety culture. Designed using a system structure diagram, it decomposes the system's functions from top to bottom, meeting teachers' actual needs for online teaching and better assisting them in completing their tasks. Based on actual teaching needs and considering the overall teaching situation, the teacher's side functional modules are mainly divided into experiment management, question bank management, homework management, learning management, announcements, and system management.

[0063] The management terminal mainly considers the main problems and required functions encountered during the actual operation and maintenance of the system; relevant personnel are required to manage and maintain the system to ensure that students and teachers can complete their teaching tasks using this system platform and to ensure the smooth progress of various tasks; the management terminal functional modules specifically include experiment management, question bank management, notifications and announcements, and system management.

[0064] Furthermore, the system adopts a blended learning model framework, including a pre-class guidance stage, a classroom teaching stage, and a post-class consolidation stage;

[0065] During the pre-class guidance phase, teachers push pre-class resources and guidance tasks through the platform, students complete case studies, theoretical self-tests and submit questions, the platform synchronizes data and issues warnings for anomalies, laying the foundation for subsequent classroom teaching;

[0066] The classroom teaching phase primarily utilizes online interaction, combined with knowledge explanation, task practice, and dynamic guidance, supplemented by offline discussions and progress monitoring to facilitate students' completion of learning tasks.

[0067] The post-class consolidation phase involves online experiments, reflection reports, and Q&A discussions, combined with offline results optimization and scoring feedback, to deepen knowledge and expand abilities, ensuring that students complete knowledge consolidation and reflection.

[0068] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows:

[0069] 1. The teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction proposed in this invention uses a closed-loop experimental system of "accident cause analysis - safety culture diagnosis - improvement strategy design - carrier innovation - evaluation index construction" to guide students to extract deficient safety culture elements from accidents, dynamically generate tiered training plans, visualized safety carriers and graded evaluation indicators, and achieve seamless transformation of safety culture theory into enterprise practice.

[0070] 2. This invention also proposes a teaching and experimental research system for safety culture construction. This system optimizes teaching strategies in real time through a mandatory completion mechanism for experimental tasks and multi-dimensional data feedback, solving the problems of fragmented traditional teaching and results that are out of touch with enterprise needs. It provides an innovative solution for the systematic construction of safety culture that has both teaching value and industry application value. Attached Figure Description

[0071] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the method flow of the present invention;

[0072] Figure 2 This is a system functional block diagram of the present invention;

[0073] Figure 3 This is a framework diagram of the blended learning model of the present invention;

[0074] Figure 4 This is a system structure diagram of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0075] The principles and features of the present invention are described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. The examples given are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention.

[0076] like Figure 1 As shown, this invention proposes a teaching experiment research method for building a safety culture, including the following steps:

[0077] Step S1. Analyze the causes of accidents through case studies to understand the role of safety culture. This includes:

[0078] S1-1. The "2-4" accident causation model is used as the analytical tool. Based on the Heinrich, Bird, and Loftus accident causation chains, this model applies organizational behavior principles and references the definitions of safety culture and management systems to propose a new accident causation chain. The specific steps are as follows:

[0079] S1-1-1. Determine the organization for accident analysis; multi-organization accidents should be analyzed separately within each organization, and then the control feedback relationships between organizations should be considered.

[0080] S1-1-2. Identify the direct event chain that led to the accident; these events include unsafe acts and unsafe conditions; identifying unsafe acts requires examining violations and dangerous behaviors of all members of the organization;

[0081] S1-1-3. Analyze individual safety capabilities, organizational management systems, and safety culture; safety capabilities include safety knowledge, safety awareness, safety habits, safety psychology, and safety physiology; organizational management systems include safety policies, organizational structure, staffing, and procedures; safety culture includes multiple safety culture elements. Specific safety culture elements are shown in Table 1 below.

[0082] Table 1

[0083]

[0084] S1-1-4. Analyze the behavioral paths between causal factors in the organization. For example, deficiencies in the management system may be exposed by unsafe behaviors of management, which also reflects a lack of safety culture.

[0085] S1-2. This invention takes a thermal power plant explosion accident as a case study and applies the "2-4" accident causation model to the accident: extract information from the accident report, identify direct causes, indirect causes, root causes, and origin causes, and label the corresponding safety culture elements and provide explanations for the reasons; then select two accidents from the accident case set and analyze them from the aspects of direct causes, indirect causes, root causes, and origin causes; based on the specific definition of the elements in the model, identify the safety culture elements that are lacking in the accident company in the case study and explain the reasons.

[0086] S1-3. Analyze the selected accidents to obtain the event sequence diagram of the accidents. For each event, determine the cause, find the corresponding shortcomings in safety culture for each cause, form the safety culture cause action path, and synthesize all action paths to obtain the accident cause analysis diagram and the accident cause development path diagram.

[0087] S1-4. Based on the aforementioned accident cause development path diagram, calculate the deficiency degree of safety culture elements using an accident attribution path weighted algorithm. This step specifically includes:

[0088] S1-4-1. Determine m accident causal development paths P i (i=1...m), and based on the cause level (direct, indirect, fundamental, root cause) identified in steps S1-2, assign each path P i Assign “path criticality weight” W pi Assign a weight α, where α 根源 =1.0, α 根本 =0.8, α 间接 =0.5, α 直接 =0.2, W pi Take path P i The α value of the highest-level cause contained above;

[0089] S1-4-2. Based on the safety culture cause-effect path formed in step S1-3, construct path P. i With respect to the j-th safety culture element e described in Table 1 j The path-element association R between (j=1...32) ij If path P i The formation of element e j If the deficiency is related, then R ij =1, otherwise R ij =0.

[0090] S1-4-3. Calculate the j-th safety culture element e j The "Total Deficit Score" D j The calculation formula is:

[0091]

[0092] Among them, D j The total deficiency score for the j-th safety culture element; N is the total number of safety culture elements mentioned in step S1-1-3; m is the total number of paths; W pi R represents the criticality weight of the i-th path; ij This represents the association between path i and element j (with a value of 1 or 0).

[0093] Step S2. Compare the similarities and differences in corporate safety cultures across different accident cases, compare the impact paths of safety cultures in the accident cases, and propose corresponding improvement measures to address the problems in corporate safety cultures. Specifically, this includes:

[0094] S2-1. Based on the analysis results of the two selected typical accident cases, and combined with the safety culture element library in the case study database, compare the similarities and differences in the deficient safety culture elements to generate a comparison table of safety culture elements. This step specifically includes:

[0095] To achieve quantitative comparison, the "total deficiency score" D calculated in steps S1-4 for the two accidents (denoted as accident A and accident B) is used. j Construct the deficiency vector D for each of the two accidents. A and D B .

[0096] D A = (D A,1 D A,2, ..., D A,32 ), D B = (D B,1 D B,2 , ..., D B,32 ), where D A,j and D B,j These are the total deficiency scores corresponding to the j-th element (j∈[1, 32]) in Table 1 for the two accidents. The similarity Sim(D) between the two vectors is calculated using the cosine similarity algorithm. A D B To quantify the similarity between the two accidents in terms of their safety culture causes:

[0097]

[0098] In the formula, Sim(D A D B The similarity score for safety culture deficiencies between the two accidents is denoted as ), with the value closer to 1 indicating a greater similarity in the causes of safety culture deficiencies between the two accidents; N is the total number of safety culture elements mentioned in step S1-1-3; j is the element number (j∈[1, N]); D A,j and D B,j These are the total deficiency scores of the j-th element in the two accidents (Accident A and Accident B).

[0099] S2-2. Using the behavioral path analysis tool of the "2-4" accident causation model, we analyzed the impact path of safety culture elements in the two accidents and marked the differences in key nodes;

[0100] S2-3. Propose improvement strategies to address the weaknesses in the safety culture of the company involved in the accident.

[0101] Safety culture development aims to improve organizational members' understanding and application of safety culture elements. Analyzing the deficiencies in safety culture elements found in companies involved in accidents reveals shortcomings in their safety culture development. This paper proposes improvement strategies based on the problems identified in the safety culture of the companies analyzed in the two accident cases.

[0102] Step S3. For a specific accident case, identify the training target and training needs, design safety culture training content, develop a safety culture training plan, and complete the safety culture training design. This specifically includes:

[0103] S3-1. Understand the relevant knowledge of training needs surveys, compare the expected performance of employees with the actual situation, identify gaps, and the process by which enterprises and individual employees express their training needs and desires; the specific process includes five parts: training needs analysis, gap identification, analysis of the causes of the gaps, determination of measures to fill the gaps, and determination of training needs.

[0104] Safety culture training focuses on analyzing positions with frequent and high rates of safety accidents. Personnel analysis primarily examines the gap between the current and expected conditions of individual employees to identify those who need and should receive training, as well as the training content. The analysis emphasizes understanding the core concepts of safety culture, safe behaviors in daily work, and violations. If differences in behavior or performance are caused by employee non-cooperation, insufficient personal ability or skills, or lack of attention from management, training can eliminate these differences.

[0105] After understanding the relevant knowledge, based on the shortcomings of the safety culture of the company involved in one of the two selected accidents, the target group and training needs for safety culture training were determined.

[0106] S3-2. Design safety culture training content. After completing the training needs survey, it is usually found that the training needs of employees in different positions in the company are different. The more detailed the needs survey, the more problems are found. Therefore, it is necessary to refine and summarize the training needs and design an effective training plan.

[0107] A standardized, practical, and detailed safety culture training plan is crucial for ensuring the smooth implementation of training and improving its quality. This invention outlines the procedures for developing a safety culture training plan, including nine steps: defining training objectives, expected training outcomes, target audience, determining training content, determining training format and methods, selecting instructors, choosing training time, determining training location, and preparing for quantitative measurement of safety culture.

[0108] To facilitate the verification of design compliance, the basic characteristics of a safety culture training program have been summarized. The specific basic characteristics of a safety culture training program are shown in Table 2 below.

[0109] Table 2

[0110]

[0111] This invention takes into account that most students lack practical experience in setting up training venues, and summarizes the details that organizations should consider when setting up training venues to ensure that the designed safety culture training is relevant to actual conditions. Specific details regarding training venue setup are shown in Table 3 below.

[0112] Table 3

[0113]

[0114] S3-3. Based on the safety culture training plan and the identified safety culture training targets and needs, design specific training content from four aspects: safety culture deficiencies, training targets, training needs, and specific training content. For each safety culture deficiency, clearly define the training targets, training needs, learning objectives or outcomes, target learners, trainers and trainees, time allocation, specific training content, activity arrangements, auxiliary materials or equipment, training environment setup, preparatory work, how to evaluate training effectiveness, and how to ensure the application of training effectiveness. Then, integrate all deficiencies into a training plan table to complete the safety culture training design.

[0115] Step S4. Based on the needs of safety culture training, determine the theme, format, target audience, and display space for the safety culture carrier design, and complete the safety culture carrier design. Specifically, this includes:

[0116] Safety culture carriers and safety culture training are complementary means of building a safety culture. Building safety culture carriers involves expressing the essence of safety culture through different media and external forms, enabling employees to intuitively accept and understand safety culture in their daily work and life. Ultimately, this translates the understanding of safety culture into concrete safe operating practices, achieving a fit between safety culture and safety practice. It is an important way to disseminate and spread safety culture.

[0117] S4-1. Learn about the forms of safety culture carriers and their dissemination characteristics, and clarify the practical significance of carrier design in enhancing employees' safety awareness. There are various forms of safety culture carriers, as shown in Table 4 below, which lists common forms.

[0118] Table 4

[0119]

[0120] S4-2. Based on the missing safety culture elements in the accident cases, determine the form, content, target audience, display units, and space of the designed safety culture carrier; select 1-3 missing safety culture elements as the theme of the safety culture carrier design, and carry out the safety culture carrier design.

[0121] S4-3. Integrate the determined safety culture content into the carrier design to complete the safety culture carrier design, and explain the design concept through a combination of text and graphics. To facilitate the evaluation of the design quality of the safety culture carrier, a safety culture carrier design scoring standard table is designed as shown in Table 5 below.

[0122] Table 5

[0123]

[0124] S4-4. To transform the scoring criteria (Table 5) into quantitative calculations, this invention employs a weighted summation algorithm to calculate the comprehensive score S of the safety culture carrier design. carrier The specific formula is as follows:

[0125]

[0126] Among them, S carrier The overall score for the carrier design (out of 100 points). k is the number of the primary indicator in Table 5. W k The weight of the k-th primary indicator is given in Table 5. The weight values ​​(out of 1) are W. content =0.40 (Design content), W struct =0.20 (design structure), W art =0.20 (Design artistry), W creative =0.20 (Creativity and Application). S k S is the score of the k-th primary indicator (out of 100). k The actual scores of its subordinate secondary indicators (such as "content health (10)", "structure clarity (10)", etc.) k,q The result after conversion is: or S k It can also be directly defined as the score of the primary indicator in Table 5 (such as S). content (Maximum score is 40), at this time W k =1 and S carrier =∑S k .

[0127] Step S5. Referring to relevant standards and combining the safety culture weaknesses and improvement plans identified in the previous analysis, independently design safety culture evaluation indicators. Specifically, this includes:

[0128] S5-1. Distinguish between quantitative measurement and evaluation of safety culture. Clarify that the comprehensive evaluation of an enterprise's safety culture construction level is an evaluation of the level of the enterprise's safety culture itself and its effects; the results obtained from quantitative measurement of safety culture only reflect the level of the enterprise's safety culture itself and do not involve the effects of safety culture.

[0129] The design and evaluation of assessment methods to evaluate the overall effectiveness of safety culture development is a crucial aspect of safety culture construction. Safety culture evaluation is a systematic measurement conducted to understand the current state of a company's safety culture or the effectiveness of its safety culture development, yielding qualitative or quantitative analytical conclusions. A comprehensive evaluation index system for the effectiveness of corporate safety culture development not only examines the current status and effectiveness of safety culture construction, helping managers understand in advance where safety management problems lie and reducing the costs incurred by post-accident control measures, but also identifies specific content and directions for the company's safety culture development.

[0130] S5-2. Learn the evaluation procedures and methods for safety culture construction; the evaluation procedures include: establishing an evaluation organization and implementation agency, formulating an evaluation work implementation plan, assigning tasks, collecting and verifying basic data, statistical analysis of data, writing an evaluation report, providing feedback to enterprises and soliciting opinions, submitting the evaluation report, and summarizing the evaluation work; and refer to relevant safety culture guidelines to learn the evaluation procedures and the shortcomings of existing indicators.

[0131] The evaluation method is based on the recommended standards "Guidelines for Enterprise Safety Culture Construction" (AQT 9004—2008) and "Evaluation Criteria for Enterprise Safety Culture Construction" (AQT 9005—2008). Analysis revealed the following shortcomings in the practical application of these two standards:

[0132] ① The unclear definition of "ethics" in the standard leads to a vague definition of safety culture, evaluation indicators deviate from the conceptual framework, and lack practicality;

[0133] ② The AQT standard does not clearly explain the connotation of safety culture, the indicators lack theoretical support and logical hierarchy, and the actual scoring is difficult to accurately determine;

[0134] ③ The weights of the comprehensive evaluation indicators have not been rigorously demonstrated and lack data support, resulting in arbitrary weight allocation and affecting the scientific nature of the evaluation system.

[0135] Finally, referring to the "Guidelines for Enterprise Safety Culture Construction" (AQT 9004—2008) and the "Evaluation Criteria for Enterprise Safety Culture Construction" (AQT 9005—2008) and their existing problems, we independently designed safety culture evaluation indicators and explained the rationale behind the design. This process enabled us to master the design of safety culture evaluation methods, processes, and indicators, and further understand the connotation of safety culture.

[0136] S5-3. Based on previous results, independently design hierarchical evaluation indicators and use the normalized weighting method to determine the weight W of each indicator. j That is, assign values ​​to each indicator according to its relative importance in the evaluation system and normalize them, and submit a complete evaluation system document.

[0137] S5-4. Use a weighted summation algorithm to determine the overall score of the enterprise's safety culture construction level.

[0138] After determining the hierarchical evaluation index system, this invention requires students to determine the weight W of each index using the normalized weighting method. j This addresses the issue of "weights not being rigorously validated." The normalized weighting method assigns importance scores S to indicators. j And after normalization, W is obtained. j Finally, the overall score S for the enterprise's safety culture development level is calculated. total The calculation formula is as follows:

[0139]

[0140] Among them, S total The overall score for the enterprise's safety culture development level (out of 100 points); n is the total number of evaluation indicators; W j The normalized weight of the j-th indicator (satisfying) ); Score j is the actual evaluation score of the j-th indicator.

[0141] Correspondingly, such as Figure 2-4 As shown, based on the above-mentioned teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction, this invention also proposes a basic teaching experiment system for safety culture, which includes: an experiment task execution module, an access control module, a data statistics module, and a resource integration module.

[0142] The experimental task execution module is used for the entire process of safety culture construction experiments; it analyzes the safety culture deficiencies in accident cases based on the "2-4" accident causation model and generates a structured analysis report; it extracts common weaknesses and generates improvement strategies through a comparison tool; it designs targeted safety culture training programs and suitable carrier formats based on the analysis results; and finally, it constructs a graded evaluation index system based on national standards, outputs comprehensive evaluation results, and forms a closed-loop process of "analysis-improvement-design-evaluation".

[0143] The access control module is used for multi-role collaboration and process control; it defines three levels of permissions for administrators, teachers, and students, and implements a mechanism for mandatory completion of tasks and control over page dwell time.

[0144] The data statistics module is used for dynamic monitoring of teaching and learning behaviors; it collects data such as experiment duration, task completion rate, exercise accuracy, and report scoring in real time, and generates class learning heatmaps and multi-dimensional analysis panels for teachers, supporting dynamic optimization of teaching strategies.

[0145] The resource extension module is used for system function integration with external data; it has a built-in national standard library and typical accident case library, and supports the import of external accidents and the addition of custom cases.

[0146] In addition, the system can be divided into student terminal, teacher terminal and management terminal according to functional modules.

[0147] On the student side, after students enter the learning interface after identity verification, they complete five experimental projects in sequence; each experimental project contains four core learning units: experimental introduction, experimental teaching, homework and experimental report; students can complete the entire process of knowledge internalization and practical operation under the intelligent guidance of the system;

[0148] Teacher side: Provides a teaching platform for online classes, helping teachers better complete their teaching tasks related to safety culture; Designed using a system structure diagram, the system's functions are decomposed from top to bottom to meet teachers' actual needs for online teaching and better assist them in completing their teaching tasks; Based on actual teaching needs and considering the actual teaching situation, the teacher side's functional modules are mainly divided into experiment management, question bank management, homework management, learning management, announcements and notifications, and system management;

[0149] The management side mainly considers the main problems and required functions encountered during the actual operation and maintenance of the system; relevant personnel are required to manage and maintain the system to ensure that students and teachers can complete their teaching tasks using this system platform and to ensure the smooth progress of various tasks; the management side functional modules specifically include experiment management, question bank management, notices and announcements, and system management.

[0150] The system adopts a blended learning model framework, which includes a pre-class guidance stage, a classroom teaching stage, and a post-class consolidation stage.

[0151] During the pre-class guidance phase, teachers push pre-class resources and guidance tasks through the platform, and students complete case studies, theoretical self-tests, and submit questions. The platform synchronizes data and issues warnings for anomalies, laying the foundation for subsequent classroom teaching.

[0152] During the classroom teaching phase, online interaction is the main method, combined with knowledge explanation, task practice and dynamic guidance, supplemented by offline discussion and progress monitoring to help students complete their learning tasks.

[0153] In the post-class consolidation phase, online experiments, reflection reports, and Q&A discussions are combined with offline results optimization and scoring feedback to deepen knowledge and expand abilities, ensuring that students complete knowledge consolidation and reflection.

[0154] This invention is based on a modular design framework, constructing five core experimental modules around accident case analysis, comparison of similarities and differences in safety culture, training design, carrier design, and evaluation indicators. It adopts a step-by-step guided operation process, integrating the "2-4" accident causation model analysis, safety culture element diagnosis, and improvement strategy design functions. The system supports multi-level permission management, ensuring learning depth through a mandatory completion mechanism for experimental tasks and a minimum page dwell time limit. Combined with automatic generation of experimental reports, intelligent scoring of post-class exercises, and multi-dimensional data statistics on the teacher's end, it achieves closed-loop management and dynamic feedback in teaching. Furthermore, the system has a built-in case library, a safety culture element library, and links to national standard documents, supporting the design of training plans, the use of carrier design examples, and the independent construction of evaluation indicators, covering the entire process of safety culture construction. Through a blended learning model and interactive task design, it effectively enhances students' internalization of safety culture theory, strengthens the systematic analysis and practical innovation capabilities of enterprise safety culture construction, and improves the cultivation of students' practical innovation abilities, providing an integrated solution for teaching and enterprise application.

[0155] Obviously, the embodiments described above are only some embodiments of this application, not all embodiments. The accompanying drawings show preferred embodiments of this application, but do not limit the patent scope of this application. This application can be implemented in many different forms; rather, the purpose of providing these embodiments is to provide a more thorough and comprehensive understanding of the disclosure of this application. Although this application has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art can still modify the technical solutions described in the foregoing specific embodiments, or make equivalent substitutions for some of the technical features. Any equivalent structures made using the content of this application's specification and drawings, directly or indirectly applied to other related technical fields, are similarly within the scope of patent protection of this application.

Claims

1. A teaching experiment research method for building a safety culture, characterized by: Includes the following steps: S1. Analyze the causes of accidents through accident case studies to understand the role of safety culture; S2. Compare the similarities and differences in corporate safety culture in different accident cases, compare the impact paths of safety culture in accident cases, and propose corresponding improvement measures for the problems existing in corporate safety culture; S3. Based on a specific accident case, identify the training targets and training needs, design safety culture training content, develop a safety culture training plan, and complete the safety culture training design. S4. Based on the needs of safety culture training, determine the theme, form, target audience, and display space of the safety culture carrier design, and complete the safety culture carrier design; S5. Referring to relevant standards and combining the safety culture weaknesses and improvement plans identified in the previous analysis, we will then independently design safety culture evaluation indicators.

2. The teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step S1 specifically includes: S1-1. The "2-4" accident causation model is used as the analytical tool. Based on the Heinrich, Bird, and Loftus accident causation chains, this model applies organizational behavior principles and references the definitions of safety culture and management systems to propose a new accident causation chain. The specific steps are as follows: S1-1-1. Determine the organization for accident analysis; multi-organization accidents should be analyzed separately within each organization, and then the control feedback relationships between organizations should be considered. S1-1-2. Identify the direct event chain that led to the accident; these events include unsafe acts and unsafe conditions; identifying unsafe acts requires examining violations and dangerous behaviors of all members of the organization; S1-1-3. Analyze individual safety capabilities, organizational management systems, and safety culture; safety capabilities include safety knowledge, safety awareness, safety habits, safety psychology, and safety physiology; organizational management systems include safety policies, organizational structure, staffing, and procedures; safety culture includes multiple safety culture elements; S1-1-4. Analyze the behavioral pathways between causal factors in an organization; S1-2. The operational procedure for implementing the "2-4" accident causation model is as follows: Extract information from the accident report, identify the direct cause, indirect cause, root cause, and source cause, and label the corresponding safety culture elements and provide explanations for the causes; then select two accidents from the accident case set and analyze them from the aspects of direct cause, indirect cause, root cause, and source cause. Based on the specific definition of the elements in the model, find the safety culture elements in the case that reflect the deficiencies in the company involved in the accident, and explain the reasons. S1-3. Analyze the selected accidents to obtain the event sequence diagram of the accidents, determine the cause for each event, find the corresponding shortcomings in safety culture for each cause, form the safety culture cause action path, and synthesize all action paths to obtain the accident cause analysis diagram and the accident cause development path diagram; S1-4. Based on the aforementioned accident cause development path diagram, calculate the deficiency degree of safety culture elements using an accident attribution path weighted algorithm; specifically including: S1-4-1. Determine m accident causal development paths P i And assign each path P to the cause level according to steps S1-2. i Assign path criticality weights W pi ; S1-4-2. Based on the safety culture cause-effect path in step S1-3, construct path P. i With the N safety culture elements e in step S1-1-3 j The relationship between them R ij ; S1-4-3. Calculate the j-th safety culture element e j Total Deficit Score D j The calculation formula is: ； Where N is the total number of safety culture elements in step S1-1-3; m is the total number of paths; W pi R represents the criticality weight of the i-th path; ij This represents the association between path i and element j, and its value is 1 or 0; i∈[1, m], j∈[1, N].

3. The teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction according to claim 2, characterized in that: Step S2 specifically includes: S2-1. Based on the analysis results of the two selected typical accident cases, Accident A and Accident B, and combined with the safety culture element library in the case study database, compare the similarities and differences in their safety culture deficiencies to generate a comparison table of safety culture elements; the specific steps are as follows: Based on the total deficiency score D of safety culture elements for the two accidents calculated in steps S1-4 j Construct the deficiency vectors D for these two accidents respectively. A and D B The similarity between the two vectors is calculated using the cosine similarity algorithm, and the formula is as follows: ； Among them, Sim(D A D B (D) This represents the similarity score between the safety culture deficiencies of the two accidents. A,j and D B,j These are the total deficiency scores calculated for the j-th element in steps S1-4, respectively, for the two accidents. S2-2. Using the behavioral path analysis tool of the "2-4" accident causation model, we analyzed the impact path of safety culture elements in the two accidents and marked the differences in key nodes; S2-3. Propose improvement strategies to address the weaknesses in the safety culture of the company involved in the accident.

4. The teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step S3 specifically includes: S3-1. Understand the relevant knowledge of training needs surveys, compare the expected performance of employees with the actual situation, identify gaps, and the process by which enterprises and individual employees express their training needs and desires; the specific process includes five parts: training needs analysis, gap identification, analysis of the causes of the gaps, determination of measures to fill the gaps, and determination of training needs. After understanding the relevant knowledge, based on the shortcomings of the safety culture of the company involved in one of the two selected accidents, the target group and training needs for safety culture training were determined. S3-2. Design safety culture training content. After completing the training needs survey, it is usually found that the training needs of employees in different positions in the company are different. The training needs are extracted and summarized, and an effective training plan is designed. S3-3. Based on the safety culture training plan and the identified safety culture training targets and needs, design specific training content from four aspects: safety culture deficiencies, training targets, training needs, and specific training content. For each safety culture deficiency, clearly define the training targets, training needs, learning objectives or outcomes, target learners, trainers and trainees, time allocation, specific training content, activity arrangements, auxiliary materials or equipment, training environment setup, preparatory work, how to evaluate training effectiveness, and how to ensure the application of training effectiveness. Then, integrate all deficiencies into a training plan table to complete the safety culture training design.

5. The teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction according to claim 4, characterized in that: In step S3-1, the key target positions analyzed in safety culture training are mainly those with frequent and numerous safety accidents. Personnel analysis mainly involves analyzing the gap between the current and expected conditions of individual employees to determine the personnel who need and should receive training and the content of the training. The focus of the analysis is on the understanding of the basic core concepts of safety culture, safe behaviors in daily work, and violations. If the differences in behavior or performance are caused by employee non-cooperation, insufficient personal ability or skills, or lack of attention from management, training can eliminate the differences. The procedure for developing a safety culture training plan in step S3-2 includes: clarifying training objectives, expected training outcomes, target audience, determining training content, determining training format and methods, selecting training instructors, choosing training time, determining training location, and preparing for quantitative measurement of safety culture.

6. The teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step S4 specifically includes: S4-1. Learn about the forms of safety culture carriers and their dissemination characteristics, and clarify the practical significance of carrier design in enhancing employees' safety awareness; S4-2. Based on the missing safety culture elements in the accident cases, determine the form, content, target audience, display units, and space of the designed safety culture carrier; select 1-3 missing safety culture elements as the theme of the safety culture carrier design, and carry out the safety culture carrier design. S4-3. Integrate safety culture content into the design of the carrier, and explain the design concept through a combination of text and graphics; S4-4. Quantitatively score the completed safety culture carrier design; calculate the comprehensive score S of the carrier design using the safety culture carrier scoring algorithm. carrier The algorithm is based on p preset primary evaluation indicators I. k and its weight W k And for each primary indicator I k The secondary indicators are used to score the primary indicator S. k The first-level evaluation index I k It should include at least: design content, design structure, design artistry and creativity, and application; Among them, the overall score of carrier design S carrier The calculation formula is: ； Where p is the total number of primary evaluation indicators; W k For the k-th primary indicator I k The weights of S; k Let k be the score of the k-th primary indicator; k∈[1, p].

7. The teaching experiment research method for safety culture construction according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step S5 specifically includes: S5-1. Distinguish between quantitative measurement and evaluation of safety culture, and clarify that the comprehensive evaluation of an enterprise's safety culture construction level is an evaluation of the level of the enterprise's safety culture itself and its effects; the results obtained from quantitative measurement of safety culture only reflect the level of the enterprise's safety culture itself, without considering the effects of safety culture. S5-2. Learn the evaluation procedures and methods for safety culture construction; the evaluation procedures include: establishing an evaluation organization and implementation agency, formulating an evaluation work implementation plan, issuing task assignments, conducting research, collecting and verifying basic data, statistical analysis of data, writing an evaluation report, providing feedback to enterprises and soliciting opinions, submitting the evaluation report, and summarizing the evaluation work; and refer to relevant safety culture guidelines to learn the evaluation procedures and the shortcomings of existing indicators; S5-3. Based on previous results, independently design hierarchical evaluation indicators; specifically including: The weights W of each tiered indicator are determined using the normalized weighting method. j This method uses importance scores S for each indicator. j The evaluation and normalization process yields W. j Finally, students need to submit a complete document outlining the tiered evaluation indicator system. S5-4. Based on the aforementioned graded evaluation index system, calculate the overall score S of the enterprise's safety culture construction level. total The calculation formula is as follows: ； In the formula, n is the total number of hierarchical evaluation indicators; W j The normalized weight of the j-th indicator satisfies Score j is the actual evaluation score of the j-th indicator.

8. A basic teaching experimental system for safety culture based on the teaching experimental research method for safety culture construction as described in claim 1, characterized in that: The system includes: an experimental task execution module, a permission management module, a data statistics module, and a resource integration module; The experimental task execution module is used for the entire process of safety culture construction experiments; it analyzes the safety culture deficiencies in accident cases based on the "2-4" accident causation model and generates a structured analysis report; it extracts common weaknesses and generates improvement strategies through a comparison tool; it designs targeted safety culture training programs and suitable carrier formats based on the analysis results; and finally, it constructs a graded evaluation index system based on national standards, outputs comprehensive evaluation results, and forms a closed-loop process of "analysis-improvement-design-evaluation". The permission management module is used for multi-role collaboration and process control; it defines three levels of permissions for administrators, teachers, and students, and implements a mandatory task completion mechanism and page dwell time control. The data statistics module is used for dynamic monitoring of teaching and learning behaviors; it collects data such as experiment duration, task completion rate, exercise accuracy, and report score in real time, and generates a class learning heatmap and a multi-dimensional analysis panel for teachers, supporting dynamic optimization of teaching strategies. The resource extension module is used for system function integration with external data; it has a built-in national standard library and typical accident case library, and supports the import of external accidents and the addition of custom cases.

9. The safety culture foundation teaching experimental system according to claim 8, characterized in that: The system is divided into functional modules, including student, teacher, and management terminals; On the student side, after students enter the learning interface through identity verification, they complete five experimental projects in sequence; each experimental project contains four core learning units: experimental introduction, experimental teaching, after-class exercises and experimental report; students can complete the entire process of knowledge internalization and practical operation under the intelligent guidance of the system; The teacher's side: provides a teaching platform for online classes, helping teachers to better complete the relevant teaching tasks of safety culture; By adopting the form of system structure diagram design, the system's functions are decomposed from the top to the bottom, meeting the actual needs of teachers in online teaching and better helping teachers complete their teaching tasks; Based on actual teaching needs and taking into account the actual teaching situation, the teacher-side functional modules are mainly divided into experiment management, question bank management, homework management, learning management, notices and announcements, and system management. The management terminal mainly considers the main problems and required functions encountered during the actual operation and maintenance of the system; relevant personnel are required to manage and maintain the system to ensure that students and teachers can complete their teaching tasks using this system platform and to ensure the smooth progress of various tasks; the management terminal functional modules specifically include experiment management, question bank management, notifications and announcements, and system management.

10. The safety culture foundation teaching experimental system according to claim 8, characterized in that: The system adopts a blended learning model framework, which includes a pre-class guidance stage, a classroom teaching stage, and a post-class consolidation stage. During the pre-class guidance phase, teachers push pre-class resources and guidance tasks through the platform, students complete case studies, theoretical self-tests and submit questions, the platform synchronizes data and issues warnings for anomalies, laying the foundation for subsequent classroom teaching; The classroom teaching phase primarily utilizes online interaction, combined with knowledge explanation, task practice, and dynamic guidance, supplemented by offline discussions and progress monitoring to facilitate students' completion of learning tasks. The post-class consolidation phase involves online experiments, reflection reports, and Q&A discussions, combined with offline results optimization and scoring feedback, to deepen knowledge and expand abilities, ensuring that students complete knowledge consolidation and reflection.

Images