Date of Award


Document Type



Edith Cowan University

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy


Faculty of Communications, Health and Science

First Supervisor

Dr Milos Nedved


The goal of this research was to determine a model safety and health baccalaureate curriculum. A secondary target was to ascertain if safety and health practitioners and safety and health educators would concur on course offerings. To simplify this study effort, a search of literature was conducted on the Occupational Safety and Health field. There were no in-depth studies of this type for such a general population; therefore no instrument was available for this study. The perusal of literature indicated that most such studies had been conducted using a more specific target group of subjects. That is, faculties or former students of a particular university, one was completed on only certified safety professionals (CSP), or members of the National Safety Managers Society (NSMS) and the like. This study included most geographical areas of the United States of America and thus faculties and former students from many universities. First, it was necessary to determine the competency required for a successful career in Occupational Safety and Health. Second, devise a survey instrument to collect the competency information to function well in his area and essential to the development of a curricula questionnaire. Directories used to select expert subjects to serve as judges for this research included the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE), American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA), National Safety Council, Business and Industry Division (NSC/B&I), and the World Safety Organisation (WSO). Since the Delphi technique was being used, a pilot study was employed to collect information from a selected group of practitioners and educators. This information served as the basis for creating a survey instrument that was mailed to 489 health and safety practitioners and educators. A total of 355 or 72 per cent of the surveys were returned. Eighteen surveys were undelivered for various reasons, with a total of 337 usable surveys, of this population list responding to the survey ranking the importance of the courses. The data from the returned surveys were analyzed by several different methods suggesting: (I) There was a preference for certain core, elective and preparatory courses. (2) There were some significant differences of the responding safety practitioners and safety educators. (3) There was no evidence of non-respondent bias for the total group; however, considering only the safety practitioners there was some evidence of regional bias. These analyses facilitated the recommendations that certain course offerings be required for: (1) a core curricula, (2) particular preparatory courses and (3) a choice from several electives course listings.