Evaluating and updating an international occupational health course requires careful collaboration and coordination between team members. Using a proven methodology is important and ensure all partners understand the process is imperative. This presentation outlines the playbook to identify interested training partners and properly review the instructor and student manual as well as the handouts and presentation materials. If done right, the outcome can improve delivery of the course offering and understanding of the course attendees. This methodology can be used to update and improve delivery to so many other courses offered on an international platform.

1. The 11th International Occupational Hygiene Association (IOHA)
International Scientific Conference
Partnerships to Update OHTA
Noise Measurement Course
Presented by:
Derek Miller, LFOH, MNZOHS
Bernie Fontaine, CIH, CSP, FAIHA
Moderated by:
Thais Morata, Ph.D.
September 24, 2018

2. Presenters
Bernard L. Fontaine, Jr., CIH, CSP, FAIHA
• Managing Partner – The Windsor Consulting Group
• Director – Workplace Health Without Borders – US
Derek Miller, LFOH, MNZOHS
• Consultant – Miller Hygiene Consultancy
• Executive – Health and Safety Association of New
Zealand
Moderator
Thais Morata, Ph.D.(Audiology)
• Research Audiologist – National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
• NORA Manufacturing Sector Council Coordinator
W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

3. Objectives
• Identify the concerns relative to course offering
• Select team leads/members to review material
• Define and review the process for evaluation
• Understand the terminology for the review
• Manage team to meet goals and timeframe for
completion
• Review comments and revisions by reviewers
• Revise course materials and vet for approval
• Track changes and keep records for update
• Develop performance metrics

4. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

5. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects
• Student manual last updated – Jan 2009
• Instructors’ course materials last updated –
Sep 2014

6. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects
• Who is the intended target audience?
• Are the goals/objectives clear and concise?
• What is the expected level of understanding?
• Which standards are applicable?
• Is the information updated/technically correct?
• Is writing style in the student manual easy to
understand?
• Will students understand the noise principles
and practice the application?
• Will students be able to use the instruments
and collect noise measurements/data?

7. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

8. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

9. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

10. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

11. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

12. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects
• Intermediate level course for workplace noise
risk assessment and general environment, and
significance of measurement data in relation to
compliance standards
• Physics of Noise
• Human Response to Noise
• Machinery Noise
• Assessment of Noise Risk
• Noise Control and Hearing Protection
• Introduction to Environmental Noise
• Standards and Good Practice

13. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects
Learning outcomes based on the successful
course completion; student will be able to:
•Describe consequences to health and well-being of
excessive exposure to noise;
•Understand measurement (including dosimetry) of
noise in relation to current standards;
•Conduct surveys in the workplace to assess risks
from noise;
•Advise on need and means of control including PPE;
•Advise on environmental noise risk assessment and
concern;
•Understand current standards and good practice in
these fields.

14. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects
Course format:
• Core module for International Occupational Hygiene
Certificate
• Five day course [45 hrs. with practical demonstration
sessions, lectures, tutorials, guided reading,
overnight questions and examination].
• Short answer 40-question “open book” examination
with an allowed time of 120 minutes and a formative
practical assessment. Some questions may require
calculations.

15. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

16. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

17. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

18. Need for Change
• Course lecture and materials too advanced for
intermediate level of understanding
• Lectures and handouts designed for acoustical
engineers with very scientific approach
• Scale back info toward technologist level of
understanding and provide practical approach
for field evaluation of noise measurements
• Establish team of qualified reviewers with
multi-disciplinary approach to review course
• Revise course materials and student handouts
• Review list of authorized trainers

19. • Understand need for change
• Comments from instructors
• Feedback from participants
• Evaluate frequency/severity of
evaluation comments
• Review course materials
related to topic
• Evaluate functionality, level of
understanding and participant
pre-requisites
• Examine skills and knowledge
of instructors related to topic
• Course attendance
• Frequency of course offerings
Partnership to Update OHTA Course

20. Partnership to Update OHTA Course

21. Best Practices in Managed Doc Review
• Planning and project management
• Team selection and training
• Workflow analysis for team members
• Quality control of change process and goals
• Communication with stakeholders
• Reporting mechanism for progress updates
• Agreement on changes, updates, deletions
• Maintaining records and document control
• Storage and posting of change information

22. • Identify stakeholders with wide range of subject
matter expertise and professional experience
• Management and leadership
• Technical – instrumentation and subject matter
• Field experience in performance activities
• Training and education to deliver results
• Collaboration between business partners
 Internal to organization – OH Learning
 External to organization – NIOSH, etc.
Team Selection

23. • Personality traits considered for review process
• Dependability - document reviewers are trustworthy
and reliable
• Efficiency – manage time to complete document
review
• Conscientiousness - requires a careful, thoughtful
and deliberate analysis of applicable information
• Team-oriented - review is a team-based process with
the ability to work well with other team members
• Strong work ethic – requires speed, efficiency, and
willingness to go the extra mile to get job done
• Flexibility – requires the ability to accommodate
last minute or time-sensitive changes
Team Selection

24. • Skill set required for mastering review process
• Subject matter expertise in noise physics and its
measurement – surveys verses compliance
• Technical skills on how to measure noise levels,
exposure groups, and interpret data
• Attention to detail on type of instrumentation,
location/method of collecting noise measurements
• Communication skills to explain the method and
results of noise testing to all stakeholders
• Quality control and quality assurance of noise
measurement – peak, impulsive, and continuous
• Documentation of calibration and reporting test
results
Team Training

25. Selection of Team Members
Role Name Title Contact Info Phone Email Notes
NIOSH Lead
Thais
Morata
Senior Service Fellow,
Division of Applied
Research Technology
Address: 1090Tusculum
Avenue, Cincinnati,
Ohio, USA 45226
Phone: 513-
533-8487
tcm2@cdc.gov
OHTA Lead
Revisor
Bernie
Fontaine
Managing Partner -
Windsor Group
14Sheinfine Ave, South
River, New Jersey USA
1+7322215687 windsgroup@aol.com ATP
OHTA Revisor
and Reviewer
Dougie
Collin
Iqarus Environmental
Services
UK
44(0) 7778
125240
dougie.collin@iqarus.co
m
ATP
OHTA
Reviewer
Derek
Miller
Consultant and Pres.
Of NZ OH Society
New Zealand
64- 9-416-
8360
derekmiller@ihug.co.nz ATP
OHTA
Reviewer
Anish
Ranpuria
RISC Virginia, USA 703-627-6976 anishr@riscohs.com ATP
OHTA
Reviewer
Benjamin
Mueller
Ostergaard Acoustical
Associates
200Executive Dr. West
Orange NJ 07052USA
1+ 9737317002 bmueller@acousticalco
nsultant.com
ATP
OHTA
Reviewer
Jack
Zybura
Lewis S. Goodfriend &
Associates
415Route 24, Chester,
NJ 07930 USA
1+ 9089557763 jzybura@lsga.com ATP
Revision and Review Team Members

26. Workflow Analysis for Team Members
Define the Process Review the Process

27. • Meet to collaborate on stakeholder selection
• Meet the participants and confirm commitment
to the review process
• Meet to define the review process and set
timeline for completion
• Meet to discuss the review outcome and set
timeline to change course materials
• Meet to review progress of changes made
• Meet to conduct final review and submit for
approval
Partnership to Update OHTA Course

28. Meeting 1 Attendees: Action Items: Meeting 2 Attendees: Action Items:
Date: Date:
Revision and ReviewTeamMembers
Partnership to Update OHTA Course

29. • Establish introductory and follow-up meeting
schedule with stakeholders
• Discuss organizational structure for review and
comment
• Understand the process to review the documents
• Explain terminology to provide proper comments
and suggested revisions
• Suggest reviewers provide specific changes in
relation to each paragraph, and
• Provide references to support major revisions to
principle/practice or technical changes
• Understand differences in noise measurement
Partnership to Update OHTA Course

30. • Criterion for review and editing document
• Consolidate comments from all stakeholders and
record adjudication of each comment
• Comment placed in order of the applicable page
and paragraph within document
• Select the highest classification of the comments
 (G) General (CN) Correction Necessary
 (M) Mistake (CE) Correction Expected
 (U) Understanding (+) Major Revision
 (P) Proposal (-) Minor Revision
Quality Control of Change Process

31. Comments should be designated as noted below in type of comment and the comment assessment by each reviewer.
If revisions are suggested, reviewer must provide the type of change and the exact wording of any specific change. (Include references)
If reviewer agrees with previous comments and/or suggested changes without any additions, enter "accepted" - A or "note without change" - NWC.
G General CN Correction Necessary R Rejected
M Mistake CE Correction Expected A Accepted
U Understanding + Major Revision D Discussion Needed
P Proposal - Minor Revision NWC Note Without Change
Reviewer's Names First Initial
Dougie
Derek
Last Name
Collin
Miller
Ranpuria
Mueller
Zybura
Anish
Benjamin
Jack
Fontaine windsgroup@aol.com
First Initial Last Name Email Address
Comment from ReviewerType of Comment
Email Address
dougie.collin@igarus.com
derekmiller@ihug.co.nz
anishr@riscohs.com
bmueller@acousticalconsultant.com
jzybura@lsga.com
Revision and Review Team Members:
Lead Review Names
Thais Morata tcm2@cdc.gov
Bernard
Quality Control of Change Process

32. Communicating with Stakeholders
Line
Type of Comment(G,
M,U,P,CN,CE,+,-)
Reviewer's
LastName
Date
Reviewed
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
ReviewerComments:
Reviewer'sSpecificCommentandJustification,Questions,
Concerns,Reasoning,and/orProposal forChange
Cite SpecificReference
inDocument(e.g. §,¶)
Original WordingfromSpecificParagraph
CitedonSpecificPage
ReviewerComment
(R,A,D,NWC)

33. Line
Type ofComment(G,
M,U,P,CN,CE,+,-)
Reviewer'sLast
Name
Date
Reviewed
1 Mistake Fontaine 1/22/2018
2 Understanding Fontaine 1/22/2018
3 Major+ Fontaine 1/22/2018
4 Understanding Fontaine 1/22/2018
ReviewerComments:
Reviewer'sSpecificCommentandJustification,Questions,
Concerns,Reasoning,and/orProposal forChange
Cite SpecificReference in
Document(e.g.§,¶)
Original WordingfromSpecificParagraph
CitedonSpecificPage
ReviewerComment
(R,A,D,NWC)
TMorata: The the syllabusandthe chaptersinthe manual donotmatch(inparticularunder
Assessmentof Noise risk).Istartedthe reviewfocusedonthe manual. Thiswill require the Syllabus
andPowerpointstobe correctedlater,once the Manual'supdate iscomplete. Jan192018
Manual 1.3LearningObjectives:
Addtwonewobjectivesonp.2.
N/A
Addobjectives:(1) Understandwhentorecommendthe
needforaudiometrybasedonthe outcome of the
exposure assessment.(2) Evaluate effectivenessof
hearingprotectionif workerexperiencesatemporaryor
permanenthearingthresholdshift.
Manual p.ii - Incorrect
temperature indefinitionfor
speedof sound
20•C Typographical error:Change to200
C
Manual Section2.2Propertiesof
Soundp.5
The speedof soundinairisapproximately343m/s.
The speedof soundinairisapproximately343m/sat
standardroomtemperature andpresessure.
Manual 2.Physicsof Sound- Insert
Course Introduction
Inordertounderstandoccupational noise,itisimportant
tobuildanunderstandingof soundanditsinteractionwith
the ambientenvironment.Noise isasubjective.Noise to
one personmaynotbe conceievedasnoise byanother.
Yet,everyone isexposedtonoise atwork,home,
recreation,hobbies,etc.The effectof loudnoise over
time canbe damagingtoaperson'shearing.Thiscourse
will focusonnoise measurementtoevaluate exposure to
unwantedsound.
Reporting Mechanism/Progress Update

34. • Justification for critical comments:
• Violations of law or other regulatory obligation
• Unnecessary risk to life (health/safety) or property
• Inconsistency with current technology or application
• Unreasonable burden due on economic or technical
infeasibility
• Justification of substantive comments:
 Potentially unnecessary, incorrect, misleading,
confusing, or inconsistent with other sections
 Disagrees with proposed responsibility,
requirement, and/or standard operating procedures
Agreement on Change/Update/Deletion

35. • A substantive comment is usually not sufficient
justification for reviewers to nonconcurrence on
comments or proposed change(s)
• Several substantive comments collectively may
be grounds for nonconcurrence on comments
or proposed change(s)
• Convincing support must be provided for the
justification of all critical change(s)
• Final reviewers must (a) accept recommended
changes, (r) reject recommended changes, or
(p) partially accept some of the change(s)
Agreement on Change/Update/Deletion

36. • Take away from making substantive change:
• Will the student better understand the subject?
• Does course provide useful application of material?
• Does course provide useful tools to evaluate noise?
• Will student be able to conduct a risk assessment?
• Will they remember it long after course conclusion?
• If the answer is not “YES” – go back to the
drawing board and fix it
• Give careful thought to being clear, concise,
and compelling in the course message
W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

37. Comments should be designated as noted below in type of comment and the comment assessment by each reviewer.
If revisions are suggested, reviewer must provide the type of change and the exact wording of any specific change. (Include references)
If reviewer agrees with previous comments and/or suggested changes without any additions, enter "accepted" - A or "note without change" - NWC.
G General CN Correction Necessary R Rejected
M Mistake CE Correction Expected A Accepted
U Understanding + Major Revision D Discussion Needed
P Proposal - Minor Revision NWC Note Without Change
Reviewer's Names First Initial
Dougie
Derek
Last Name
Collin
Miller
Ranpuria
Mueller
Zybura
Anish
Benjamin
Jack
Fontaine windsgroup@aol.com
First Initial Last Name Email Address
Comment from ReviewerType of Comment
Email Address
dougie.collin@igarus.com
derekmiller@ihug.co.nz
anishr@riscohs.com
bmueller@acousticalconsultant.com
jzybura@lsga.com
Revision and Review Team Members:
Lead Review Names
Thais Morata tcm2@cdc.gov
Bernard
Quality Control of Change Process

38. Upload Modifications
• Modify course syllabus and
rebrand it toward
technicians evaluating
occupational noise
• Change applicable sections
in the instructors’ manual,
questions, practicals, and
tutorials
• Change corresponding
information in the student
manual
• Change overhead slides,
handout materials, and
homework assignments

39. • Path forward to complete review process
• Review all of the editorial comments and suggestions
• Incorporate change in student manual, instructor’s
guidelines and training materials
• Modify the course syllabus to reflect update
• Conduct final review of changes to all materials
• Announce course overhaul and revisions
• Present course to international students
• Review comments for continual improvement
• Set timeframe to conduct another review
• Establish performance metrics
W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

40. Vetting Review to Instructors/Students
• Review major changes to instructors approved
to present course
• Request comments from course instructors
• Present updated course to new student group
• Provide updated course evaluation to students
• Determine if revised course objectives meet
goals
• Review/update exam questions to meet course
goals/objectives

41. Recordkeeping
• Track acceptance of
course changes and
updates by instructors
via questionnaire
• Track student pass rate
on exam results and
homework assignments
• Critique course
evaluations and student
comments relative to
course changes/updates
• Track course attendance

42. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects

43. W503 Noise - Measurement and Its Effects