Safety laws are not to blame for lifeless labs

9th February 2001, 12:00am

Share

Safety laws are not to blame for lifeless labs

https://www.tes.com/magazine/archive/safety-laws-are-not-blame-lifeless-labs
While your report on the threats to practical science (TES, January 26) was a reasonable summary of many views, your leader did not draw the right conclusions.

There is no need for regulations to differentiate more between school labs and chemical conglomerates. With minor (but irritating) exceptions they already do quite well. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) usually interprets the regulations in a realistic and pragmatic way.

A seminar, organised two years ago by the Royal Society of Chemistry at the request of the HSE, came to the conclusion that health and safety legislation was not inhibiting exciting practical science. It was sometimes used as an excuse, but the real reasons are well known. They include: insufficient technician time; teachers without the time or confidence to prepare and practice demonstrations; an over-loaded curriculum; too much emphasis on exam results, through mindless repetition of past papers; insufficient and clapped-out apparatus.

A bigger problem than regulations is the increasing tendency for parents to take legal action. Every time a pupil gets a finger burnt as aresult of picking up a hot tripod, the school is at risk of being sued. Usually, the case is very weak, but unfortunately insurers find it expedient to pay up a small amount, rather than go to the expense of going to court.

Unfortunately, too, waste disposal regulations are not interpreted with the same degree of common sense as those on health and safety. If applied literally, a school science department (but not a history department) could be prosecuted for throwing a torch battery into the refuse.

So far, neither the Environment Agency nor the Department of the Environment, Transport and Regions has been willing to say that they would not consider prosecution in such circumstances.

The laboratory development programme, referred to by education minister Estelle Morris, will at last improve the surroundings in which science is taught. But this will make little difference without tackling the other issues and banging a few heads together (without protective hard hats!) Dr Peter Borrows Director, Consortium of Local Education Authorities for the Provision of Science Services Brunel University


Want to keep reading for free?

Register with Tes and you can read two free articles every month plus you'll have access to our range of award-winning newsletters.

Keep reading for just £1 per month

You've reached your limit of free articles this month. Subscribe for £1 per month for three months and get:

  • Unlimited access to all Tes magazine content
  • Exclusive subscriber-only stories
  • Award-winning email newsletters
Recent
Most read
Most shared