As the sole chemist working on the Isaac Science Project, I’ve been going into a secondary school one day a week to broaden my exposure to 11–16 chemistry teaching. It’s been inspiring to see some excellent use of demonstrations to bring to life abstract concepts in the classroom, which are often based on RSC resources.
As the sole chemist working on the Isaac Science Project, I’ve been going into a secondary school one day a week to broaden my exposure to 11–16 chemistry teaching (bit.ly/3H2xAn4). It’s been inspiring to see some excellent use of demonstrations to bring to life abstract concepts in the classroom, which are often based on RSC resources.
One of the less enjoyable aspects has been biting my tongue whenever staff introduced inaccuracies to students which might lead to misunderstandings. These sometimes came about when learners asked questions and there was not enough time for a thorough discussion. However, there were occasionally inaccuracies present in the study material which, unlike simplifications or analogies, did not offer any clear benefit.
One such error was the labelling of all eye protection for year 7s onwards, including the class sets of safety specs, as goggles.
When I first witnessed this, I thought it a pedantic point not worth mentioning. Safety goggles should refer specifically to the tight-fitting, splashproof variety which protect your eyes even if chemicals take an unexpected trajectory, rather than the more common safety glasses which do not protect the eye from all angles.
People don’t always appreciate what distinguishes goggles from standard safety specs
Later in the year, I realised, however, that this distinction was not purely academic. The AQA GCSE science temperature changes practical, if carried out using the exam board provided procedure – as this school was doing – calls for 2 M sodium hydroxide. School and science educator support services CLEAPSS, ASE and SSERC all provide guidance advising that you should handle sodium hydroxide solutions at 0.5 M or higher concentration while wearing splashproof goggles (conforming to the necessary BSI standard). This applies to any chemicals that are corrosive and thus carry a risk of permanent eye damage (as opposed to temporary irritation) or that are toxic (as opposed to harmful).
In my experience there is widespread confusion surrounding eye protection terminology in schools, as demonstrated by my own interactions with teachers and social media discussions. People, including staff risk assessing activities, don’t always appreciate what distinguishes goggles from standard safety spectacles and often interpret the term goggles incorrectly. After I raised the issue, the staff at the school in question were very proactive in addressing it, revising risk assessments as necessary and amending the teaching materials referencing goggles which caused this confusion in the first place.
In my experience there is widespread confusion surrounding eye protection terminology in schools, as demonstrated by my own interactions with teachers and social media discussions (bit.ly/4keqdXZ). People, including staff risk assessing activities, don’t always appreciate what distinguishes goggles from standard safety spectacles and often interpret the term goggles incorrectly. After I raised the issue, the staff at the school in question were very proactive in addressing it, revising risk assessments as necessary and amending the teaching materials referencing goggles which caused this confusion in the first place.
Safety solutions
There are three ways of dealing with the issue of practicals requiring goggles – providing the required safety equipment or revising the practical so that standard safety specs are sufficient, or perhaps creating a situation where eye protection is not actually necessary. You can sometimes achieve the latter by simply lowering the concentration (note that the specific concentrations depend on the chemicals in question), or else by using an alternative practical which addresses the same learning or assessment points.
The exam boards make it clear they encourage centres to adapt the procedures for required practicals based on their learners’ needs, as long as they meet the appropriate apparatus and techniques requirements. Several alternatives are readily available including on the RSC Education website, such as this Exothermic metal–acid reactions experiment.
The exam boards make it clear they encourage centres to adapt the procedures for required practicals based on their learners’ needs, as long as they meet the appropriate apparatus and techniques requirements. Several alternatives are readily available including on the RSC Education website, such as this Exothermic metal–acid reactions experiment (rsc.li/3EXtJY3).
Risk assessing practical activities is the teacher’s responsibility and when consulting practical procedures, the safety protocols required are not always clear. It is important not to assume what vague terms, such as eye protection or gloves, mean without double checking the standard required based on the chemicals, or other hazards, you are using in a particular practical. Organisations such as CLEAPSS helpfully collate all the relevant information and publish buying guides which clarify the necessary standards. Stay safe.
Andrea Chlebikova is a senior project chemist at Isaac Science and lectures in physical and theoretical chemistry at the University of Cambridge
