Advertisement

Incidents in Schools - Incident Analysis in Developing Safety Management

  • Eila LindforsEmail author
  • Anna-Maria Teperi
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 785)

Abstract

Safety is the main issue in a good learning environment. However, several changes challenge schools. The latest research explicate that all teachers are not committed to promote safety systemically as they do not have competence or procedures to promote safety at work. Very little is known about incidents and near-misses that happen at schools to be able to learn from these and manage the safety culture proactively. This paper considers incidents, near-misses and unintentional accidents at school by analyzing 168 incident reports from three comprehensive schools in Finland, using physical dimension of safety management as a framework. The thematic content analysis made it possible to construct a clear ‘big picture’ of incidents in schools, and to better understand the complex context of school. The result helps researchers, principals, teachers and administration in education to consider physical hazards and risks and prevent accidents in school and in the school environment.

Keywords

Incident analysis Near-miss case Safety management School safety Proactive learning 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We sincerely appreciate the financial contribution of the Finnish Work Environment Fund, Fire Protection Fund in Finland and the participating organizations of this study. We acknowledge and warmly thank the staff in the participating schools for all the incident reports – this effort will help schools, students and staff around the world in the form of the incident analysis results of this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Piispanen, M.: Good learning environment. Perceptions of good quality in comprehensive school by pupils, parents and teachers. Doctoral Thesis in Pedagogics, University of Jyväskylä, Faculty of Pedagogics, Kokkola University Consortium Chydenius, English abstract (2008) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2014: The Finnish National Board of Education (2014). http://www.oph.fi/download/163777_perusopetuksen_opetussuunnitelman_perusteet_2014.pdf
  4. 4.
    Lindfors, E., Somerkoski, B.: Turvallisuusosaaminen luokanopettajakoulutuksen opetussuunnitelmassa [Safety competence in the curriculum of primary teacher education]. In: Pakula, H.-M., Kouki, E., Silfverberg, H., Yli-Panula, E. (eds.) Uudistuva ja uusiutuva ainedidaktiikka [The reforming subject didactics], pp. 328–343. Suomen ainedidaktisen tutkimusseuran julkaisuja. Ainedidaktisia tutkimuksia (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lindfors, E., Somerkoski, B., Kärki, T., Kokki, E.: Perusopetuksen oppilaiden turvallisuusosaamisesta [Pupils’ Safety Competence in Comprehensive Education]. In: Kallio, M., Juvonen, R., Kaasinen, A. (eds.) Jatkuvuus ja muutos opettajankoulutuksessa [Continuity and Transition in Teacher Education]. Suomen ainedidaktisen tutkimusseuran julkaisuja. Ainedidaktisia tutkimuksia [Subject Didactical research serie], English abstract, vol. 12, pp. 109–126 (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ek, Å., Runefors, M., Borell, J.: Relationships between safety culture aspects – a work process to enable interpretation. Mar. Policy 44, 179–186 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Waitinen, M.: Safe school? Safety culture in primary and secondary schools in Helsinki and the factors affecting it (2011). Doctoral dissertation. Researches 334. University of Helsinki English abstract (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Luopa, P., Kivimäki, H., Matikka, A., Vilkki, S., Jokela, J., Laukkarinen, E., Paananen, R.: Nuorten hyvinvointi Suomessa 2000–2013. Kouluterveyskyselyn tulokset [Wellbeing of adolescents in Finland 2000–2013. The Results of the School Health Promotion study]. National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL). Report 25/2014, Helsinki, Finland (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Markkula, J., Råback, M.: Lapset I. In: Tiirikainen, K. (ed.) Tapaturmat Suomessa, pp. 162–171. Edita, Helsinki (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rimpelä, M., Kuusela, J., Rigoff, A., Saaristo, V., Wiss, K.: Hyvinvoinnin ja terveyden edistäminen peruskoulussa 2. – perusraportti kyselystä 1.–6. vuosiluokkien kouluille. Opetushallitus: Vammala (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reason, J.: Safety paradox and safety culture. Inj. Control Saf. Promot. 7(1), 3–14 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dekker, S.: The Field Guide to Human Error Investigations. Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Cornwall (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heinrich, H.W.: Industrial Accident Prevention: A Scientific Approach, 1st edn. McGraw-Hill Insurance Series, New York, London (1931)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sullivan, S., Taxis, K., Franklin, B.D., Barber, N.: A multimethod analysis. Is the principle of a stable Heinrich ratio a myth? Drug Saf. 31, 1–6 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lindfors, E.: Turvallinen oppimisympäristö, oppilaitoksen turvallisuuskulttuuri ja turvallisuuskasvatus – käsitteellistä pohdintaa ja kehittämishaasteita. [The safe learning environment, safety culture and safety education in schools – Concept considerations and development challenges]. In: Lindfors, E. (ed.) Kohti turvallisempaa oppilaitosta! Oppilaitosten turvallisuuden ja turvallisuuskasvatuksen tutkimus– ja kehittämishaasteita. [Towards the safer learning institution! Safety and safety education as research and development challenges] Proceedings, pp. 12–28 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maurino, D.: Why SMS? An introduction and overview of safety management systems (SMS). Paper presented at International Transport Forum (ITF) Round table of Safety Management System by OECD, March 2017Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hollnagel, E.: Safety-I and Safety-II. The Past and Future of Safety Management. Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Farnhamn (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norros, L. Acting under uncertainty - the core-task analysis in ecological study of work. VTT (2004). http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2004/P546.pdf
  19. 19.
    Teperi, A.-M., Norros, L., Leppänen, A.: Application of the HF tool in the air traffic management organization. Saf. Sci. 73, 23–33 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Somerkoski, B.: Safety at school context: making injuries and non-events visible with a digital application. In: Conference: Building Sustainable Health Ecosystems. 6th International. Conference on Well-Being in the Information Society, WIS 2016. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 636, pp. 114–125 (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Somerkoski, B.: Green cross: application for analyzing school injuries. Finnish J. EHealth EWelfare 9(4), 322–329 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.23996/fjhw.65178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Teacher EducationUniversity of TurkuRaumaFinland
  2. 2.Finnish Institute of Occupational HealthHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations