Discussion on the cdm regulations can be a crucial factor for improving safety performance on construction sites.

/in /by

Need an research paper on the cdm regulations can be a crucial factor for improving safety performance on construction sites. Needs to be 22 pages. Please no plagiarism. The UK shares some similarities with the United States as Weil (2001) indicates that the construction site has been and continues to be one of the most dangerous workplaces in the United States. In 1999 the number of fatalities was 1190 and the number of injuries that involved absence from work being 193,765. Though the rate of injury is much lower than the preceding ten years it remains above that for the private sector as a whole and large variations within the industry are masked by industry averages. The third-highest number of fatalities of any occupational group is for construction workers. It is therefore not a surprise that the industry has been the focus of OSHA policy for several years.

Other researchers agree with this as Hallowell (2010) indicates that the US construction industry has a fatality rate of 11.1 per 100,000 workers and a recordable injury rate of 239 per 10,000 full-time workers. In order to indicate the magnitude of the situation, Hallowell (2010) further states that the construction industry employs 8% of the American workforce but accounts for 21.7% of all work-related deaths.

Lingard et al (2010a, p. 813) indicate that the construction industry in Australia has a similar profile in terms of occupational health and safety as with other developed countries including the USA and the UK. The construction industry is one of the highest risk industries in Australia. In 2002-2003 construction workers in Australia were more than two times more likely to be killed when compared to workers in other industries. Statistics for Australia for 2006 indicate that construction has consistently been the third most dangerous industry which has been surpassed only by transport and storage and agriculture for the past three years with a rise of 9% in the number of fatalities recorded in 2006-2007. The preliminary data for 2006-2007 indicated that the rate of fatalities in Australian construction was 7.8 per 100,000. However, HSE (n.d.) indicates that while reliable information is available in the UK for fatal injuries non-fatal RIDDOR reports are subject to under-reporting as estimates of the true level of accidents somewhere around 30,000.

Discussion assignment

/in /by

Masters & Disasters discussion forumIn our current topic for this course, Love & Communication, many concepts were explained that deal with relationships, love, intimacy, and, yes, divorce/separation as well. In his monumental research on long term couples (married/cohabiting/committed), Professor John Gottman uncovered communication patterns in thousands of couples and, from this data on communication patterns within couples, he was able to accurately predict which couples would have successful relationships (stay together & be happy) versus which couples would have unsuccessfulrelationships (split up; or stay together but be miserable).He called the successful couples “Masters” — he used this term because these couples ‘mastered’ the best communication practices with their partners. It’s not that they didn’t fight; in fact, many of the “Masters” fought, for sure. It’s that when they fought, they fought or argued in ways that were NOT destructive or hurtful to the relationship. They’d figured out — or mastered — how to fight fair and still love each other, maintaining respect and care for one another.The other couples in his study — the unsuccessful ones — fought as well, but they destroyed each other in the process and, eventually, destroyed their relationships as well. These couples were unsuccessful because they tore each other down or alienated each other so much that there was nothing left to the relationship and, unfortunately, they usually ended in divorce/separation within 5-7 years of marriage/commitment. He called these couples “Disasters” because the couples fought in ways that left them filled with resentment, anger, emotional distance, or alienation from their partners — definitely NOT a recipe for success in an intimate relationship!Gottman’s method for assessing couples’ communication styles with each other was so reliable that he was able to predict when NEW couples would end up divorcing simply based on their communication patterns during conflict! It was powerful research then and still is today.For this discussion, look over the materials posted under “Lecture Materials” –> Module 5 –> Love, Intimacy, & Communication. In those slides, you will see several slides related to Gottman’s research. Read and reflect about the information that explains what the “Masters” and “Disasters” actually DO when communication during conflict in their relationships. In your textbook, look at pages 248 (Box: “Communication Patterns & Partner Satisfaction”) and page 251 (Box: “Lessons from the Love Lab”).If you’ve been in an intimate relationship in the past or if you currently are in one, these communication behaviors and ways of dealing with conflict probably resonate with you. If you haven’t been in a relationship, you can still apply it to how you might imagine a future relationship.For this assignment:1) PICK THREE of the communication patterns (from page 251 in your book). You can pick any combination — from the Masters or the Disaster, or both — but pick patterns that you believe are most important/hurtful/helpful/difficult to perform during the course of a relationship. This is a very nuanced and opinion-based answer that you will provide, so think about it carefully. You can feel free to write about which of the “bad” behaviors you’ve done in a past/present relationship or “good” behaviors. Name and briefly describe each of your chosen three behaviors.2) Write about how each behavior positively or negatively impacts the relationship or how it can potentially change a relationship. Again, this is your opinion, but the point here is that I want you to reflect about these behaviors and how to integrate the “best practices” or Masters into your own life.http://cel.fscj.edu/LOR/SOP2772-M5/#top

Death Scenario and Relationship Brochure

/in /by

PART 1DEATH SCENARIORead the scenario on p, 283 of Positive Psychology.Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper including the following:Describe in detail the thoughts and emotions you felt while imagining the scenario.If you did experience this event, how do you think you would handle the final moments?If you did experience this event, how would you describe your life up to this point.In what ways can traumatic events be opportunities for growth?INCLUDE INTRODUCTION AND CONCLUSIONFormat your paper consistent with APA guidelines.PART 2Create a brochure in which you communicate the following to engaged couples:The effect of intimate relationships on wellbeingStrategies to maintain healthy relationshipsIf you do not have a template, this is the one the teacher gave us in class, attached here, it is a download and can be opened with a word program. You can use it for a template and then create your own content and pictures.   If you don’t like this template, here is a link for free templates:  http://www.wordtemplates.org/brochure-templates/tri-fold-brochure-template/THIS IS THE BOOK WE ARE USING IN CLASS:Baumgardner, S. R., & Crothers, M. K. (2009). Positive psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education

I need a Reflection paper on the topic attached below. Its due on 16th oct ,

/in /by

you will write a 1000-1500 word response to your chosen paper topic from the list below. See Course Outline for the due date.This assignment is worth 300 points, or 30% of your grade.DO NOT USE ANY SOURCES OTHER THAN THE DALRYMPLE ARTICLE AND YOUR TEXTBOOK.YOU WILL ATTACH A FILE IN THE BOX AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE.Learning Objectives:Students will demonstrate their ability to construct arguments about issues of both personal and universal significance. Their writing should demonstrate that they can construct cogent, concise, and logically coherent arguments.Assessment:Students should demonstrate that they can distinguish the relevant points that form a logically coherent argument. They should also be able to construct criticisms which effectively undermine, through the use of appropriate counter-examples, some premise of that argument.Your assignment is to read any ONE of the following four articles:The Frivolity of EvilHow and How Not to Love MankindWhat We Have to LoseRoads to SerfdomThen, FOR THE ARTICLE YOU CHOOSE TO WRITE ON, you will type a 1000-1500 word response in which you address EACH of the following points IN YOUR OWN WORDS: 1) What is the author’s main argument? 2) How does he support his main argument (evidence, ancillary arguments, etc.)? 3) Do you agree or disagree with him? 4) Why or why not? 5) Apply the insights of at least two of the readings we have studied in this course (in chapters 1-9) to your analysis. Make sure to give a substantive explanation of how the philosophers’ insights are relevant to the topic you are discussing.A WORD OF WARNING: These articles are rather long and complex. The author likes to make extensive use of his rather copious vocabulary, so I strongly urge you to havedictionary.comhandy as you work your way through your chosen article. The purpose of this essay assignment is for you to demonstrate your ability to discuss, analyze, and evaluate complex philosophic arguments. I am confident that the reading assignments, tests, and discussion boards will have prepared you for this final, and no doubt challenging, essay assignment.Note: I only allow one attempt on this assignment. Students who do not fully address all of the components of the assignment as stated in the instructions as well as the grading rubric below will have to be content with the grade they earned.Please use MLA format.Your paper will be graded according to the following rubric:Grading Rubric:The following standards are numbered in order of importance for grading.1.Essay demonstrates an understanding of the material: The student has correctly grasped a philosophical problem or question, has explained it accurately, and on the basis of a substantially correct interpretation of any texts involved. Key terms are used correctly. The essay shows evidence of the student’s independent thought, and is written in his or her distinctive voice. Short (one sentence) quotations are used (comprising no more than 10% of the body of the paper), when appropriate, to support the writer’s analysis, and an explanation is offered for each quotation.The use of block quotations will result in a severe point deduction.95 points2.Essay has clear and coherent argument: There is a clearly stated thesis, and support for this thesis in the body of the paper. Each paragraph contributes to this argument, and follows logically from the paragraph before it. The argument presented is persuasive. The insights of two other philosophers are incorporated into the analysis.95 points3.Essay fulfills assigned task: The essay addresses the entire assigned question or topic, elaborating on important ideas in satisfactory depth, but without bringing in anything extraneous or irrelevant. The introduction of the essay focuses and provides clarity for the paper. Important terms are clearly and accurately defined. Each paragraph conveys a coherent, organized thought. Short (one sentence) quotations are occasionally used, when appropriate, to support the writer’s analysis, and an explanation is offered for each quotation. No more than 10% of paper is made up of direct quotes. No block quotations.40 points4.Essay obeys standards for good persuasive writing: the writer shows that he or she is comfortable using philosophical language, and the prose is clear, not awkward. The structure of the sentences reflects the relationships between/among the ideas discussed.40 points5.Essay is technically correct: The essay has been carefully and thoughtfully proofread. The argument is written in complete sentences, with punctuation that does not mislead the reader. There are no mistakes in spelling, grammar, word choice, and punctuation.