edited bv A w n High Schwl Avon. CT 06004
Safety in the Classroom: A Model for Training
Science Teachers
Gary E. Dunkleberger Can011County Board of Education 55 NO* Coult Street Westmlnster. MD 21157 Sue Snyder Maryland State Department of Education 200 W. BBltimore Street Baltimore. MD 21201
We have learned that students understand science best when they do science. This project assumed that teachers would understand science safety best when they are directly involved with inspections. Background In recent years there has been a great deal of concern raised about the safetv of science classrooms. These concerns often center on chemical safety, particularly as it relates to the use and storaae of hazardous substances. Teachers have turned for help their administrators. They in turn have then reauested assistance from their state department of education. The state education agencies have looked to other state agencies for support. This pilot project was unique in that it brought together teachers and administrators from Carroll County Maryland, the Maryland State Department of Education, and the Maryland Occupational Safety and Health Administration (MOSHA) in an attempt to combat one county's prohlems. Each of the groups contributed resources to the project. The teachers selected aereed to use some of their planning time " to work on the prolect. The local sclence supervisor donated a ereat deal of ulanning tlme as well as the fac~lltiesof the prbject. The ~ a r ~ l a nState d Department of Education funded the vroiect and consulted on the planning. The experts from ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ land a taught n n e the d inservice and suhsequently evaluated the finished products.
t;
Project Overview There were three main goals of the project. The first was to train a select group of teacien to hecomeexperts on chemical safety and storage. The second was to examine and evaluate the current storage of chemicals in the county's 12 secondary schools. The third was to develop aguide designed to improve the safety conditions in all county science classrooms. The inservice component was planned to train teachers to become safety inspe&rs of science classrooms and chemical storage areas. They were given two days of intensive instruction on issues related to toxicology and the use of hazardous chemicals. In addition they received information on how storage areas should he organized, and they practiced inspecting storage areas based on OSHA procedures. These trained teachers returned to their respective schools and conducted extensive inspections of the science classrooms and science storaee areas. Results were then compiled and "SafetyTips" is planned as a source of safetyinformationand practical suggestions to meet lhe special needs of high schml chemishy teachers. It is also intended as a forum for teachen to share Wir experiencesand Seek solutions to safety-relatedproblems.
submitted to the county science supervisor. Based on the reports from the schools, the science supervisor then organized a team of those teachers to establish county safety regulations and develop a science safety guide for the county. The lnservice Component Particinants for the laboratorv trainine insoection workshop inciuded teachers from ail second-uy s'chools in the countywide system. Middle school were represented by the department chairperson while high schools were represented by both the department chairperson and the chemistry teacher. I t was considered particularly important that these last two groups he well trained in the area of laboratory safety for several reasons. First, most of the potential problems arise a t the high school level and primarily in the area of chemistry. Second, the involvement of the department chair was assumed to be critical since he or she would subsequently become responsible for the coordination and implementation of any safety program. Workshop Deslgn The workshop consisted principally of three segments. Teachers were pre-tested by having them complete a safety inspection of the chemistry room and the two adjoining storerooms where the workshop was being held. This estahlished a measure of their baseline knowledge, and also sensitized them to the magnitude of the prohlek. Afterward, instruction on a number of relevant topics was presented by two former MOSHA inspectors who had particular expertise in the area of industrial hygiene. The third component was a follow-up inspection of the lab facilities by the participants and a subsequent discussion of the hazards to he found. Without ouestion. the most unusual feature of this workshop was the' lah inspection where participants were asked to tour a chemistrv lab to uncover as manv as 40 svecific instanrev of improper storage of materials or other safety violations which had been . ore-olanned. Sume of these fabricated . problems included: fire blankets out of containers water to shower shut off gas cylinders lying on sides chemical bottles extendine bevond shelf no lips un chemical sturagc shplves dummy bottles of hazardous suhstance.i (picric acid, benzene. carbon tetrachloride): inompatihles tuyerher; carcinogens materials within 18 in. of ceiling food and cigarettes (evidenced by bits of food or ashes) in rooms glass in trash unmarked containers labels without dates hottles on sides spill of unknown origin chemical storage alphabetical old, opened containers of peroxide (dummy) rusted cans of ether (dummy) dirty glassware stored with clean no fire extinguishers or ones that had been discharged improper goggles nitric and acetic acids stored together (dummy) heavy bottles (acids) stored high acid bottles not in trays sodium hydroxide in glass-stoppered containers (dummy) items improperly stored in fume hood ~~~~~
.
~~
~
~
~
~~
~
~
-
.
Volume 62 Number 1 January 1985
73
During the initial inspection tour few teachers bothered to check the safety shower to find that i t had been turned off. Boxes stored within 18 in. of the ceiling that would have interfered with the operation of the sprinkler system were completely unnoticed. Only one person took note of the gas storage bottles lying on their sides. Few recognized potential hazards of certain chemicals in the storeroom, chemical containers ~~~~-~~without labels. and storage . - hottles ~ r o t m d i n.gbeyond the edge of the shelf. This initial insnection tour was followed hy intensive instruction on a number of topics including toxicology, general safety practices, chemical storage, compatibility of substances, disposal, and proper labeling. Much of this, particularly the compatibility of various substances, required a good chemistry background to he fully understood. However, for individuals lackina the strong chemistry background, these discussions became meaningful when they centered on the practical considerations of what should or should not be stored brside each other. As a result of the training, many of the teachers became aware of deficiencies in their own laboratory practices. O-n.. e.teacher ..-.- later wrote that the trainine session had alerted her to the many dangers in her own cla&oom. The final laboratory inspection was the culminating activity, serving as a post-test for the workshop. Teachers applied their new skills to another attempt a t finding safety hazards in the lab. In addition to the hazards present for the pre-test, additional items were added for the post-test search. Once this final activity was completed, all of the hazards in the rooms were identified and discussed by the professional inspectors. ~
~
Evaluation of Workshop Feedback from teachers indicated that the inspection component was an overwhelming success. The data gathered in a follow-up questionnaire indicated that this post-inspection tour and the subsequent discussion of the hazards to he found rated very high in terms of the prohahle change it would bring in the personal practices of the individual participants. On a five-point scale, the mean teacher rating for the probable change to result from this segment of the workshop was 4.7. This was interpreted most favorably in terms of the potential carry-over effect of the ideas presented. In fact, i t was apparent that the response of the teachers involved was one of overwhelmina enthusiasm. At the end of each segment, participants were asked to rnte the presentation in terms of 1) its uualitv, 2) the quantity of material presented, and 3) the probable change in practiies i t would produce on a one-to-five scale. Of the two inspections and six instructional components, all but one were rated very highly by teachers. Teacher Survey Component Teachers returned to their schools following the inservice and inspected the science classrooms and storage areas. Thry used the techniques learned during the workshop to identify hazardous conditions and practices. Through these procrdures teachers uncuvrred a large number of prohlems. In many races dangerous situations h&ame readily recognized for the first time. These situations included huge stashes of old and potentiallv daneerous chemicals. i m.~ r o.n e rstorage " - facilities, ineffective safety equipment, and unsafe laboratory procedures. These results and the concerns of the teachers involved led the countv to take immediace action. Much safety wuipment including fume hoods and flammable storage Eabfneis was
74
Journal of Chemical Education
installed. One major undertaking was the total revamping of the chemical storerooms. Teachers were brought in during the summer to r~organizechemicals that had been stored alphabetically into a design hnird upon the model described in the Ninn Scientific Cntaloeue. A verv costlv" disoosal . of old. dangerous, and unwanted chemicals was then undertaken through the use of a commercial disposal company. The Development of the Safety Guide The most lasting effect of this workshop was that i t was followed up bv the develonment of a countv science safetv manual. his manual contained informationgained from the worksho~alone with material from other safetv sources. A team of Eive teachers selected from the originalgroup of inservice participants made county policy decisions affecting lab safety and wrote the text material of the guide. Once com~iled,the mide was introduced to county science teachers through an inservice program planned and excuted by the teachers who wrote the manual. This had the benefit of clearly delineating the new county policy on safety-related issues while minimizing potential resentment. Teachers generally perceived i t as being the product of their peers rather than policy simply imposed by a higher authority. This attitude was essential to its successful imnlementation. An evaluation conducted bne year after implementation found that teachers perceived that the safety manual had greatly clarified expectations and desirable practices as well as raising their consciousness toward the legal implication of science lab safety. More importantly, teacher responses to the survey indicated that most of them had modified their lahoratory practices to conform to the safe methods outlined in the new auide. In addition they indicated that there was a significak improvement in t h e manner in which chemicals were stored in their schools. Perhaps the most important outcome of the project has been the outline for an effective inservice in science safety. The most critical component seems to have been the training of teachers to he inspectors. This component led to an increased awareness on the part of the teachers and was also a means for a county-wide inspection program. In addition, having those same teachers involved with establishing policy seems to have led to better acceptance of county safety regulations. The joint sponsorship of this project should be a model for future programs intended to train teachers in the area of safety. State agencies are an excellent source of expertise for ~ r o i e c t ssuch as these. State occunational safetv and health administrations have an obligation to assist systems with the development of safe working conditions for all teachers. In addition, state health departments have responsibility for the environmental health of the students and teachers. These departments, through the state science supervisor's office, can consult on a wide varietv of safetv issues. Thev can also provide consultants to locaisystems assist withihe training of teachers. Many concrrns about safety in the science clnssroom remain. They include areas such as elementary science, middle school science done by elementary school teachers, chemical disposal, and updating lists of hazardous chemicals. However, we believe that the Carroll County Safety Project is a major step forward by one county and a model for others attempting to deal with this complex problem.
