We know, of course, that a pendulum swings both ways. It _is_ possible to be overly safe in terms of being so careful that it interferes with the job being done. I appreciate this is a contentious assertion in this forum and please hold off for a moment before vilifying me. I'll recount a situation:

I have been working with an UG student on a modest research project (natural products extraction and transformation) in collaboration with a colleague (junior faculty responsible for organic chemistry laboratories). The first step of the project is relatively simple: extract CBD (acid form) from a hemp oil and purify it by acid-base extraction for use in some subsequent steps. The student (good junior chemistry major) struggled and could not get any product from two sequential extraction steps. Hmm. I suggested we walk through the steps together, with me in the lead, to help tune him and it up. He was shocked with I vigorously shook a hexane solution of the hemp oil with a 2M NaOH/2M NaCl aqueous solution all in a separatory funnel. He remarked with incredulity that in his recent organic chemistry laboratory course he was instructed in no uncertain terms to very gently swirl the mixture to prevent over pressure. In my hands the extraction was successful and proceeded as pred!
icted. I taught the student how to properly vent the glassware. The student shared our experience with my colleague who reviewed the protocols being used in the teaching laboratories and concluded that in an abundance of conservatism the students were learning an ineffective protocol.

I appreciate and admit this is a tiny piece of a big picture and it is dangerous to draw big conclusions yet - and this is a big yet - it is most important for the chemistry to work while it is just as important for there to be no loss of life, limb or property. If the chemistry doesn't work then there is no point in "safety" - the work oughtn't even be performed.

Joseph

On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 9:48 AM, Ralph Stuart wrote:
> ** Caution: EXTERNAL Sender **
>
>> This produces an insidious 'conservative' feedback cycle: books are written with content that faculty want to teach; faculty teach (to some degree) what is tested (by ACS exams, in part), and the exams test what is in books. Breaking into this feedback loop is not easy, and not without risk.
>
> My thanks to Rob for posing his follow up question and Dave for his response. I found it a very interesting description of the sociology of how sciences are defined for teaching purposes.
>
> Dave's quote above reminds me of a comment my son made after he started taking graduate level math classes to prepare for PhD economics work. I asked him what he learned there that he didn't get in undergrad math classes such as those I had taken as an engineering undergrad.
>
> His response was 'I learned that everything that teach you in high school is a lie.' The idea he was pointing to is that less than 10% of the the high school (and undergrad) audiences are likely to ever explore either math or chemistry beyond the course being taken and educating those audiences on the messy details of real life that arise when you use either math or chemistry techniques seriously (i.e. on a professional basis) doesn't fit either into the textbooks or the grading systems we have now.
>
> I think that this explains the ongoing challenge the safety community faces in impacting the chemistry education - by definition safety issues are loose ends of the 'scientific process' as described in the textbooks. Systems like GHS, the regulatory environment, and anecdotal stories about specific events (Wetterhahn, UCLA, Texas Tech) could fit into the textbook / testing system, but I'm not sure that professional and ethical aspects of lab safety can show up in the classroom. I suspect that daily experience of lab decision-making is necessary before students can relate to the big ideas we are evolving when it comes to lab safety (these big ideas could include RAMP, professional judgment, regulatory liability).
>
> This doesn't mean to me that we should address lab safety in the undergrad curriculum, but we should also expect to revisit the topic on a regular basis through out a chemist's career. And to return to the Neal's original question, that applies to the chemistry educator's career as well...
>
> - Ralph
>
> Ralph Stuart, CIH, CCHO
> ralph**At_Symbol_Here**rstuartcih.org
>
> ---
> For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
> Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas

--
Joseph A. DiVerdi, Ph.D., M.B.A.
Associate Professor of Chemistry
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
+1.970.980.5868 - /diverdi.colostate.edu/
/us02web.zoom.us/j/9460709393

---
For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post