Importance of Safety in STEAM Programs
This is a common question from school districts, school building administrators, and teachers since there is some variation in the answer depending on the jurisdiction that you are in (certain states have different interpretations and regulations) and, ultimately, the frequency of safety training is determined by the employer (school district).
As you can imagine, this can be frustrating and difficult for stakeholders in educational systems to understand and schedule to be considered ‘compliant’ with federal, state, and local requirements. Let us investigate the most referenced safety standards that apply to science, STEM, and CTE teachers (and students) and their supervisors at the school and district levels.
As a benchmark indicator, according to Dr. Roy and Dr. Love in their recently published ‘What the Data Tells Us’ research, 35% of Science, STEM, and CTE teachers have NEVER had formalized safety training (either during their preservice or initial hiring at the school district) which is a frightening and preventable statistic with legal implications for teachers, principals, and superintendents in case of an accident or an injury to a staff member or a student.
One of the most interesting key findings from the 2021 Dr. Roy and Dr. Love study on safety in schools was that ‘There was an identifiable lack of safety training, as only 54% of participants reported receiving such training during undergraduate technical and teaching methods courses. This not only puts students at a higher risk of an accident but also does so for the teacher!
Teacher preparation programs and mentor teachers should ensure safety is a core focus for all preservice teachers. Undergraduate and Faculty of Education programs should have a practical laboratory safety training component as a requisite criterion or condition of graduation where students are expected to be able to demonstrate competency and understanding of fundamental laboratory safety procedures and hazard identification coupled with risk assessment and exposure to legal, professional safety standards including the OSHA Laboratory Standard and the National Fire Protection Act (NFPA) at a minimum due to the inherent risks found in the science laboratories and CTE laboratories in schools across the land.
Another key finding from Drs. Roy and Love were that ‘there was also an identifiable lack of safety training provided by school districts. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires employers (school districts) to train employees (teachers) upon initial hiring, anytime thereafter when a new hazard is present (e.g., new equipment, new chemical, etc.), and when there is a new job assignment in the workplace (STEM or CTE lab).
Further research featuring statistical analyses from the data in this study revealed that a lack of safety training, along with other factors, was significantly associated with increased accident rates. This is a preventable statistic with the proper grade and discipline-specific safety training provided at least annually to educators in science, STEM, and CTE programs. This is both a powerful and frightening fact when considering that there is no consistency in safety training and these teachers are the same people responsible for modeling proper laboratory procedures for students in the laboratory. Makes you think about the multiple failures in existing safety training strategies in school districts, doesn’t it?
K12 science laboratories are often perceived as ‘dangerous’ or ‘unsafe’ places for teaching and learning due to the inherent hazards and risks associated with a combination of biological, chemical, and physical hazards in these academic laboratories. OSHA recognized the need for a series of legal standards specifically for science laboratories and in 1990 (over 30 years ago) created what is collectively known as the ‘Laboratory Standard’ (29 CFR 1910.1450), which requires all employees working in laboratory settings (including special education teachers and paraprofessionals) to undergo safety training before they enter the lab.
This is to ensure employees are aware of and know how to work with chemical hazards in the work area. This is important – since there is no mention of physical or biological hazards mentioned in the regulation referenced, only ‘chemical’ hazards. The potential physical and health hazards associated with chemicals are the baseline for OSHA 1910.1450 and the requirement for a Chemical Hygiene Plan. The CHP must be tailored to reflect the specific chemical hazards present in the laboratory where it is to be used.
The OSHA Lab Standard clearly states that ‘Laboratory personnel must receive training regarding the Laboratory standard, the CHP, and other laboratory safety practices, including exposure detection, physical and health hazards associated with chemicals, and protective measures.’
As responsible educators know, under CFR 29 OSHA 1910.1450, safety training must occur during the initial work assignment and prior to assignments involving new chemical exposure situations. All workers in the laboratory must be provided with access to relevant safety information and training that includes, at a minimum, the following criteria:
Additionally, OSHA mandates that the school district (employer) provide the following safety training topics initially and as part of the ongoing and ‘refresher’ safety training to all employees with access to the laboratory or chemical storeroom:
The employer is required to review the chemical hygiene plan (CHP) or environmental hygiene plan (EHP) annually and make edits and enhancements. It is a responsible practice to provide these updates and some form of safety training to fellow educators in the form of a ‘safety refresher’ training on the contents of the CHP.
Certain jurisdictions require that at science and STEM department monthly meetings that a portion of the time is allocated to safer practices and conversations of legal and professional safety practices that apply to the department and formal documentation for these training sessions.
Many factors contribute to the safety training schedule, which will be unique to each school and district, yet the requirement for progressive, ongoing relevant safety training exists. Ensure that all department members acknowledge the safety training content being discussed as a mechanism to reduce legal liability and potential legal entanglement.
According to the official NSTA position paper on ‘Safety and School Science Instruction,’ there are some key elements to be aware of regarding safety training in these program areas. Comprehensive safety programs are important tools in reducing injury during science activities.
School district leaders are responsible for developing and adopting a comprehensive safety program that includes safety policies and procedures that are consistent with better professional practices and legal safety standards.
Knowing that there is a legal requirement for relevant safety training in K12 schools and across school districts in the USA, according to Dr. Ken Roy, there are some actions that can be taken to increase the level of ‘safety awareness’ about appropriate (grade and age as well as subject-specific) safety training.
The following is a brief list of action items that should be shared with employers to protect teachers and students in the academic science laboratory. The list is based on both legal standards and better professional safety practices. It is a starting point for improved biological, chemical and physical hazards notification/awareness, understanding, action, and protection. The comprehensive list includes the following:
4. Require employee training on hazardous substances, including:
The noted suggestion list is a start to help raise the level of awareness and understanding on the part of both the employer and the employee relative to working with biological, chemical, and physical hazards in the academic laboratory. Science education is meant to be fun and engaging– but also safer by having a well-informed school administrator, science faculty, and student body.
As a reminder, school districts, as employers, have the legal responsibility to conduct districtwide science safety training for all K–12 teachers of science upon their initial assignments to classrooms, labs, or storerooms where hazardous chemicals are present and prior to assignments involving new exposure situations. In addition, progressive training should occur annually so teachers can review, discuss, and update the safety program, share experiences and better professional practices, and receive legal updates and other information related to science / STEM instruction and safety.
So there is the answer to the frequency of safety training. ANNUAL safety training is the safer choice and the most practical for teachers, CHOs, school building administrators, and other staff members. By having a current, compliant, cost-effective, consistent, and comprehensive safety training and risk management system in place, you can reduce the risks and provide a safer and multi-dimensional hands-on experience for your students. This safer learning environment will provide a platform for students to explore the world around them and select a future trajectory based on the innate curiosity found within them, rooted in these safer learning experiences originating in the science laboratory.
Remember that there is no ‘fine line’ between safe and unsafe, therefore having appropriate, relevant, annual (ongoing) safety training is a necessary component of your instructional program from a legal and professional perspective for school principals, department heads, teachers, and all other stakeholders in the educational ecosystem.
One of the most interesting key findings from the 2021 Dr. Roy and Dr. Love study on safety in schools was that ‘There was an identifiable lack of safety training, as only 54% of participants reported receiving such training during undergraduate technical and teaching methods courses. This not only puts students at a higher risk of an accident but also does so for the teacher! Teacher preparation programs and mentor teachers should ensure safety is a core focus for all preservice teachers.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires employers (school districts) to train employees (teachers) upon initial hiring, anytime thereafter when a new hazard is present (e.g., new equipment, new chemical, etc.), and when there is a new job assignment in the workplace (STEM or CTE lab).
This is a preventable statistic with the proper grade and discipline-specific safety training provided at least annually to educators in science, STEM, and CTE programs.
Ensure that your risk management program includes ANNUAL safety training for your schools’ science, STEM, and CTE teachers. You have a responsibility under your’ duty of care obligations to provide safer learning and teaching environments and regulatory and legal obligations under OSHA, NFPA, and other professional standards to do the same. It is a priority to reduce liability through hazard and risk mitigation in schools, and proper safety training and awareness is the best method to achieve this objective.
James Palcik, OCT, Former Director of Education, Safety & Compliance
‘Safety First. Accidents Last.’
Explore how AI in education moves from experimentation to real impact in K-12, with leaders…
Discover effective strategies and resources to boost student engagement in math classrooms, including tips for…
Discover why 67 slang from Skrilla's 2024 hit is the viral school trend students love…
Discover how AI and gamification transform education by personalizing learning, boosting engagement, and driving student…
Discover 10 proven strategies to prevent teacher burnout, reduce stress, manage workload, and boost well-being…
Discover 10 effective ways schools can engage parents in understanding AI in education, building trust…