A NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR TRAINING INTERNATIONAL TEACHING ASSISTANTS IN LABORATORY SAFETY Final Report I. Purpose II. Rationale III.Procedures IV. Responsibility for Safety Training A. An Overview of Safety Training B. Safety Training and ITA Training Programs V. Findings of Needs Assessment: Suggested Safety Issues/Communication Concerns for ITA Training A. English Communication Concerns B. Cultural Background/General Knowledge Concerns 1. Legal Rights of TA/RAs and Lab Safety 2. Responsibility of TA/RAs for Implementing Lab Safety 3. The Importance of Asking 4. Avoiding Short-cuts VI. Materials Identification VII.Conclusions/Benefits Appendices Appendix A - Persons Interviewed for this Study Appendix B - Materials on Laboratory Safety Appendix C - Suggested Safety Issues/Communication Concerns for International Teaching Assistant Training: Summary List Appendix C - Immediate Benefits of this Study A NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR TRAINING INTERNATIONAL TEACHING ASSISTANTS IN LABORATORY SAFETY Final Report I. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to do a needs assessment for the training of international teaching assistants (ITAs) in the special communication and cultural demands of the laboratory assistant with respect to lab safety and to provide suggested topic/skills that that might be considered in developing ITA training programs. II. Rationale During the past decade, on university campuses across the United States, concern has grown over the inadequacy of the English communication skills of ITAs. Special training programs have proliferated. Sophisticated techniques have been developed to improve language and pedagogical skills and to provide the necessary cultural background. Many ITAs are assigned as lab assistants. Training for lab safety has been the responsibility of specific science and engineering departments as they are most knowledgeable about the content. However, in these general ITA programs and in lab safety training programs, little attention has been paid to a most critical aspect the ITA's responsibility: the communication needs related to enforcement of lab safety. Communication problems have led to serious accidents and thousands of dollars in damages at many American universities. Laboratory instruction is carried out by ITAs in many science and engineering disciplines. Because ITA training programs typically bring all disciplines together, a generic core curriculum needs to be developed, focussing on the special communication tasks and cultural and general knowledge background needed in maintaining lab safety. III. PROCEDURES This study was supported by a mini-grant from the Laboratory Safety Workshop at Curry College, Milton, Massachusetts. The principal investigator (PI) is Dr. Margaret van Naerssen, a specialist in English for Science and Technology (in the U.S. and overseas) and now at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Gregory Barnes, the Drexel Administrator of this project and fulltime faculty member, assisted by arranging the initial contacts for the PI, by reviewing her work, and by requesting a separate focus on legal rights with regard to lab safety. Dr. Barbara Hoekje also provided useful feedback to the final report. The center of the research effort has been Drexel University in Philadelphia. Visits to the regional office of the federal agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and a nearby industrial research laboratory were also included. At Drexel the PI met with professors in charge of lab teaching assistants or in charge of departmental lab safety, laboratory managers, and the university safety officer to identify communication and cultural concerns. The persons interviewed are listed in Appendix A. Their contributions are greatly appreciated; however, the PI remains responsible for the contents, including errors. The ideas in this report have been generalized and some also come from experiences of this researcher outside of this university. The Teaching Assistants still have not been interviewed due to difficulties in arranging acceptable meeting times. However, if possible TA interviews will eventually be done. Safety tours of two laboratories also provided useful background information and a realistic perspective for the researcher. These were made to the Materials Engineering Lab at Drexel and to a laboratory and office at a nearby industrial research laboratory, General Electric Aerospace. IV. RESPONSIBILITY FOR SAFETY TRAINING A. An Overview of Safety Training Universities have the primary responsibility for basic safety training for all Teaching Assistants. In this report the concern is specifically with international TAs who teach/assist with laboratory courses in the sciences and other technical programs. Under OSHA guidelines, universities are required to provide appropriate safety training for their employees, including all TA/RAs. ITA training programs can supplement this effort by providing focussed work on communication skills and cultural concerns related to lab safety and by arranging with the university for additional regular lab safety training to be conducted during the ITA training period to take advantage of a "captive clientele." Appropriate training for laboratory TAs seems to be provided in a variety of ways: -by university safety departments or an office of emergency services, on a university-wide basis -on a university-wide basis, followed up by special training within a particular department (chemistry, biology, etc.) -on a departmental basis Departmental training takes a variety of forms. Some are listed below. More than one might be used in combination. -formal, detailed training, including hands on practice with laboratory equipment focussing on safe use and emergency training -safety reminders for each laboratory experiment as a professor prepares with the TAs for a lab lesson -a walk-through of a laboratory, pointing out potential dangers, emergency equipment and emergency notices -safety references in lab manuals used by TAs in preparing for experiments -contractual arrangement regarding safety rules before laboratory key is issued; TA reads lab safety rules, discusses with lab manager any rules not understood, and then signs the rules, indicating an understanding and an agreement to follow the rules On research projects, an RA might have some of the training given above, or might learn informally from others already working a project. Due to limited resources, OSHA focusses more on enforcement in industry than in universities, thus, the enforcement of appropriate lab safety training and implementation of safety regulations varies by university and among university departments. Some factors that affect this variability include: -staffing levels in university safety/emergency departments -staffing in science/technical departments -workloads of professors, lab managers and TAs -professional priorities of professors and TAs -size of department/number of TAs being supervised -level of dangers as perceived by professor, lab manager, TAs and students -budgets for safety equipment/hazards communications -willingness of professors, lab managers, and TAs to be viewed as enforcers of safety B. Safety Training and ITA Training Programs Basic safety training remains the responsibility of the university and particular departments. An ITA training program should not take over this responsibility. As the staff members are not qualified safety officers, the ITA program should avoid any legal responsibilities for safety training. However, it can schedule special sessions of university-sponsored safety training. It can also reinforce safety concepts and assist with special communication and cultural concerns that ITAs might have or eventually encounter related to laboratory safety and review for ITAs their rights and responsibilities as employees of the university vis-a-vis safety. An ITA program could work with the Safety Department to have the same safety program normally given for all TAs given to ITAs in the program. As scheduling and enforcement of attendance at training sessions appear to be problems for university-wide training, an ITA program could provide an additional opportunity for the university to reach a "captive clientele" of TAs. The safety training could be a requirement of the ITA program for those planning to work in science/technical departments. Having special training for ITAs will provide an "immersion" situation, with modifications made to assure comprehension without embarrassing the non-native English speakers in front of native English speaking TAs. This training should be equal to that offered regularly by the university, not condensed to be squeezed into an ITA training program. In fact, it might have to be a supplement to the regular ITA training program in terms of scheduling, unless there is special training for other TAs not in the sciences that could be offered while the science TAs are taking their safety training. When university-wide safety training is offered to TAs at another time, the announcement should state that ITAs who took the training in the ITA program do not need to attend. This legitimizes the university-sponsored safety training scheduled earlier in cooperation with the ITA program. This also lets other TAs realize that the ITAs, not present in the regular training, have not been given waivers. Of course, such ITA safety training would not cover those ITAs arriving late or those not required to attend the ITA program. These would be required to attend the university-wide training. All TAs, including ITAs, would still, of course, be required to attend any additional safety training sponsored by their departments. Enforcement of attendance of those that did not attend safety training in the ITA program would still remain the responsibility of the various departments. If the university provides special lab safety training sessions for ITAs, it is suggested that one of the ITA trainers sit in on the sessions, observe the responses of the ITAs, and have a follow-up session to find out where the ITAs felt they had difficulties in English comprehension, with a lack of general knowledge, or due to different cultural backgrounds. V. FINDINGS OF NEEDS ASSESSMENT: SUGGESTED SAFETY ISSUES/COMMUNICATION CONCERNS FOR ITA TRAINING In this section some safety issues and communication concerns are suggested for possible inclusion in ITA training programs as possible content for language skill development or as topics for cross-cultural discussions. Specific techniques and lessons are not included in this report as this study is not a curriculum development effort. The topics/issues are summarized; however, more details of each interview are available, on an anonymous basis, in the detailed follow-up summaries that the interviewer prepared after each interview. As a result of the interviews, it became apparent that there was less concern with the basic linguistic abilities of the ITAs than with the need to reinforce certain issues. The need to reinforce certain areas does seem to arise partially out of uncertainty with the ITAs English proficiency in some cases, but in other cases from possible cultural and background knowledge differences. The various departments seem to have worked out solutions for screening, placement, and in some cases pedagogical training, for ITAs once they have been hired (although some would like to improve these procedures). There are cases in which it is discovered that the ITAs English still is not adequate to teach: alternate assignments are given and formal or informal training arrangements are made. A. English Communication Concerns In the original proposal the following were given as potential areas of need. 1) comprehension, in English (aural and written) of lab safety requirements; 2) oral English skills and general pedagogical skills involved in teaching lab safety to a class; 3) oral English skills needed to enforce lab safety; and 4) oral English skills need to respond to lab emergencies. An additional area of focus in such a curriculum would be the professional cultural background and general knowledge needed to appreciate the reasons for certain requirements and to understand the importance of the ITA's role in enforcing these requirements. As a result of this study, it is still felt that the English skills, 1)-4), listed above, can be included in an ITA training program, but they might not always be the primary focus of a unit. Rather they might evolve out of a unit focussing on a more general topic, such as "Legal Responsibilities of TAs and Lab Safety." (See Appendix C for a summary list: Suggested Safety Issues/Communication Concerns for International Teaching Assistant Training, Language Skill Development.) B. Cultural Background/General Knowledge Concerns In addition to the English communications skills mentioned above, specific and very important safety topics that have evolved out of this study are given below: -Legal Rights of TA/RAs and Lab Safety -Responsibility of TA/RAs for Implementing Lab Safety -The Importance of Asking -Avoidance of Short-cuts These topics, in fact, apply to native English-speaking TAs as well, but because of their importance and the communication skills and cultural background knowledge involved in them, it is very important to have them reinforced in ITA training. The findings related to these topics are discussed below. (See Appendix C for a summary list: Suggested Safety Issues/Communication Concerns for International Teaching Assistant Training, Cultural Background/General Knonwledge) 1. Legal Rights of TA/RAs and Lab Safety International Teaching/Research Assistants, like any employee (in manufacturing/non-manufacturing work situations), have certain rights under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), as amended, through 1988. -the right-to-know about the safety conditions of any work situation (equipment, materials, environment) -the right to safety training for their work situation, for use of equipment/materials, emergency procedures, and safe disposal -the right to the maintenance of certain work safety conditions States may also have safety legislation that is at least equal to that of OSHA; some have stronger legislation, for example, Pennsylvania. In this state, university students also have certain minimal rights: -the right-to-know about the safety conditions of any study situation (equipment, materials, environment), if a student requests it -the right to safe labelling of materials/equipment that the student must use in his/her studies It is useful to remind an ITA/RA that if he/she changes status, and is no longer employed by the university, his/her rights are reduced, but certain minimal rights still pertain. This is particularly relevant to international graduate students who are doing independent research. While all TA/RAs may be reluctant to make demands of their departments or the university, ITA/RAs may be particularly reluctant to do so, as discussed later in the section on The Importance of Asking, Thus, ITAs, in particular, need to be told that, for their own safety and the safety of their students, they must become aware of their rights, as employees, under OSHA regulations, specifically, their right-to-know, their right to training, and their right to safe work conditions. This becomes even more crucial when they are working in laboratories as a large majority do. They must become aware of safety issues. They must be assured that it is not wrong to ASK. In fact, they must be made to FEEL FREE to ASK when they do not know, REQUEST training, and DEMAND safe working conditions. If they are not able to obtain a satisfactory response to their requests at the departmental level, they should know they can go to the university director of safety or special department set up to respond to emergency health hazards. At the same time, however, they must also RECOGNIZE their own RESPONSIBILITIES: to follow safety guidelines (not take short-cuts) and to enforce safety when they are in a teaching situation irrespective of potential student groans/protests. This is discussed in more detail in the next section. 2. Responsibility of TA/RAs for Implementing Lab Safety As employees of a university (an institution under the jurisdiction of OSHA), TA/RAs have the responsibility to implement safety in their research work and in their lab classes. They must do this, not just to protect the university, but more importantly, to protect their colleagues and students as fellow humans, and particularly their students who are learning about a subject area. The TAs must also recognize that students are not as fully protected under the law; therefore, they as TAs must do their part to protect them. TA/RAs have the responsibilities of: -asking for safety training for themselves -asking for adequate safety equipment in their labs -asking for adequate hazards communication in their labs -asking about, if they do not fully understand a procedure, the potential dangers, and the appropriate safety procedures -modeling safety procedures, such as wearing proper safety protection (eye protection, gloves, etc.) -explaining dangers and safety procedures to their students -explaining the dangers of "short-cuts" -enforcing safety in the class Issues of responsibility can be easily coordinated with oral communication skills. ITAs might discuss strategies for enforcing safety in the class: what to say in the first class, how to communicate with students who refuse to follow safety procedures, how to deal with aggressive behavior, with horseplay, etc. Another enforcement issue of concern (cultural) for some ITAs might be role relationships of TAs and students, and in particular, the ITA's sex and expected behavioral patterns the ITA might bring from his or her country that might cause enforcement problems. An ITA/RA, like any graduate student working as an assistant, does not like to admit he/she does not know or understand, however, this can result in irresponsible actions. This problem is discussed in more detail in the next section, The Importance of Asking. An orientation to federal/state/local agencies concerned with safety and the environment, as related to laboratories, might help the ITA/RA understand how their responsibilities are part of a larger picture. 3.The Importance of Asking The importance of asking, of being willing to say "I don't understand," "I don't know," is a very important topic for all TA/RAs, and it is of particular importance to ITAs, given possible linguistic and cultural barriers. An ITA/RA, like any graduate student working as an assistant, does not like to admit he/she does not know or understand, fearing that it might reflect on the final assessment of their abilities by their professors or that they will lose respect of the students they are supervising in laboratories. This can be compounded, in many cases, for ITAs/RAs, in at least four ways. First, their comprehension of the language of the university (English in North America) may be weak. Second, they may be from a culture in which losing-face in front of a professor may be a very serious matter. This may cause them to retreat into silence or to murmur "I understand," or, alternatively, to become cocky in their behavior. Their supervisors may understand their behavior for its surface meaning, "I understand." Third, they may be from a "developing country" and carry with them a concern for compensating for what they perceive may be others' perceptions of them and of their past education, especially when studying in a highly technological society. Thus, again, they may not wish to admit now knowing or not understanding. And, fourth, those from countries lacking more modern technology, or having only minimal equipment, in science/technical laboratories in high school and universities, may be very strong on theory, but may lack hands-on experience or may lack familiarity with newer equipment. They also may not wish to admit their lack of familiarity with laboratory equipment. An ITA training program would provide a "safe" forum for the discussion of this topic, for bringing out possible cultural differences, and for suggestions on how to handle related situations. 4. Avoiding Short-cuts As graduate students gain confidence in their abilities, when they are working alone, and when they are under time pressure, all too frequently there is the temptation to take short-cuts. However, all too often, it has been the short-cut that has led to serious laboratory accidents. Sometimes the short-cuts are in the procedures of the experiment. But sometimes they are safety short- cuts. Some examples of safety short-cuts that might lead to accidents (or that have!) include not taking the time to put away equipment, not drying wet hands, not bothering to wear protective glasses, not using a proper container for carrying a chemical, not moving a ladder to a better position to reach something, wiping up a chemical (that is easily absorbed by the skin) with a paper towel, etc. While this is not common when they are teaching a laboratory, it is a concern that has been repeated enough by supervisors to be included here. An ITA program focussing on safety would be an appropriate place to discuss this as ITAs, as graduate students also do their own research. VI. MATERIALS IDENTIFICATION While the main focus of this study was to do a needs assessment, the PI was to be alert for possible materials. The Director of Safety and Health has been the primary source of materials; although others have also been identified. (See Appendix B for a list of the materials identified to date.) VII. CONCLUSIONS It is hoped that the information in this report will have the benefit of raising the awareness in regard to lab safety on the part of English as a Second Language (ESL) instructors conducting ITA training, who are usually far-removed from laboratory dangers. More concretely, as many ESL instructors frequently have little training in the sciences and other technical areas, it is hoped that this project will provide the initial groundwork to assist these trainers in the development ITA units on the communication and cultural needs related to lab safety. It is also planned that this report will provide the basis for a follow-up curriculum development project to develop and implement a generic lab safety training unit for the International Teaching Assistants training program around the country. We wish to thank the Laboratory Safety Workshop at Curry College, Milton, Massachusetts, for its support of this project. Report submitted by Dr. Margaret van Naerssen Principal Investigator April 17, 1990 Appendix A Persons Interviewed for this Study 1. Arnelia Hollinger Director of Safety and Health Drexel University 2. (Mr.) Shirley McCullam Lab Manager Materials Engineering Drexel University 3. Kathy Hunchak-Kariouk Laboratory Manager Environmental Studies Institute Drexel University 4. Bob Tidona Laboratory Manager Mechanical Engineering Drexel Engineering 5. Dr. Douglas Ruby Director of Teaching Assistants and Lab Courses Biological Sciences & Bio-Technology Drexel University 6. William Halpin Operations Manager Physics Drexel University 7. Dr. Kevin Owens Head of Chemistry Safety Committee Drexel University 8. Carl Moore Former Manager Department of Chemistry Emory University It should be noted that nothing in this report should be construed to be critical of any person or of Drexel University. Nor are these individuals responsible for the contents of this report. Appendix B Materials on Laboratory Safety 1. Materials From Director of Safety and Health Video tape: Circle of Safety Drexel Guide to Safer Living 1989-90 Department of Security and Parking and Department of Safety and Health (note: Occupational Safety, Campus Safety-Emergency Telephones, Emergency Procedures-Medical Emergencies, Fire Emergencies, Water Leaks, Spills of Hazardous Materials, Gas Leaks, Utility Interruption) Campus Emergency Procedures and Safety Guide Department of Safety and Health Drexel University (All) The MSDS--Your Guide to Chemical Safety American Chemical Society. 1985. Safety in Academic Chemistry Laboratories (note: Safety Rules for the Laboratory, Responsibility for Safety, Student Training) Chemical Risk: Personal Decisions J.T. Baker Chemical Co. "Baker Saf-T-Data Guide." (symbols) Hollinger, A. "Laboratory Safety Quiz." Department of Safety and Health, Drexel University "Laboratory Safety Survey" "Important Telephone Numbers" "Drexel University Fact Sheet, September 1989" (OSHA, Occupational Safety and Health Administration) "Drexel University Fact Sheet, September 1988, on OSHA Compliance" "Working with Compressed Gases" "Laser Institute of America Information Sheet" "Control Measures for the Four Laser Classes" "Agencies of Associations Related to Safety Kasnoff, Craig. 1987. "Handle with Care." Campus Voice, Fall 1987 Kaufman, James A. 1986. Laboratory Safety and Health. (ACS Audio Courses) Washington, D. C.: American Chemical Society (manual plus 4 tapes) (note: Introduction-Safety Philosophy; Scope of the Problem -Life's Hazards, Hazard vs. Risk, Deaths, Accidents, and Illnesses; The Question of Liability-Negligence and the Prudent Person, Case Studies; Summary: The Effective Safety Program) Mallinckrodt Co. "Safety in the Laboratory: Incompatible Materials." Smith, James, ed. 1988. Laser Safety Guide. Toledo, Ohio: Laser Safety Committee, Laser Institute of America. Emergency labels for Hazardous Material and for Emergency Information for all classrooms, computer rooms and laboratories at Drexel 2. Other Materials Lab manuals from each department OSHA Organizational Chart OSHA poster, overview of the provisions of The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, "Job Safety & Health Protection" (OSHA 2203, 1989, Revised) "Your Guide to the United States Environmental Protection Agency" (OPA 001089, February 1989) Excerpts on Workers' Compensation from The Guide to American Law, Everyone's Legal Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing Co., pp. 413-419 Appendix C SUGGESTED SAFETY ISSUES/COMMUNICATION CONCERNS FOR INTERNATIONAL TEACHING ASSISTANT TRAINING Summary List Language Skill Development 1. Comprehension, in English (aural and written) of lab safety requirements Written -Reading safety procedures in lab manuals -Reading safety labelling/emergency direction signs -Reading appropriate sections in a university safety guide Aural (listening) -Comprehension of key concepts university/department sponsored laboratory safety training workshop 2. Oral English skills and general pedagogical skills involved in teaching lab safety to a class -Presenting a lab safety policy at the beginning of a course -Teaching (including demonstrating) lab safety procedures for specific equipment relevant to student's specialty -Teaching (including demonstrating) use of emergency equipment (clothing, spill kits, fire extinguishers, eye washers, showers, first aid kits, blankets, etc.) 3. Oral English skills needed to enforce lab safety -Knowing what to say when student is not following the safety procedures (this may depend on the potential severity of the danger): first reminder, follow-up reminder, taking full control of the situation -Understanding own role as an enforcer and safety provider and the need to use the language appro- priate for these roles 4) Oral English skills needed to respond to lab emergencies -Using simple, direct commands with clear pronunciation: removing students from the danger, beginning emergency treatment, directing others to assist -Making emergency telephone calls: providing crucial, basic information and responding to questions by an emergency dispatcher Cultural Background/General Knowledge 1. Legal Rights of TA/RAs and Lab Safety -Understanding rights under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (right-to-know, right to training, and right to maintenance of safe conditions) and relevant State and Local laws -Understanding the relationship of employee to employer in the university setting -Understanding the procedures to be followed in a particular university to follow up on rights 2. Responsibility of TA/RAs for Implementing Lab Safety -Transferring knowledge of safety procedures as a crucial part of the body of knowledge in that field -Protecting students who lack experience in the field (and who are not fully protected by the law) -Understanding the roles of such government agencies as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency 3. The Importance of Asking -Asking as a part of one's safety rights -Asking as a part of being responsible -Understanding that asking when one doesn't know or is not sure should override embarrass- ment, face-losing, etc. -Understanding how communication difficulties resulting from a failure to ask or admit one doesn't understand can lead to accidents 4. No Short-cuts in Safety -Understanding how the pressures on graduate students can tempt them to take short-cuts which can result in serious accidents Appendix D Immediate Benefits of this Study 1. The PI was able to provide Dr. Barnes with a section for a report he has just given at the international conference of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) in San Francisco, March 5-10. His presentation proposed a "Bill of Rights" for International Teaching Assistants. The PI, with the assistance of the Director of Safety and Health, provided a section on the legal rights of TA/RAs and responsibilities with regard to laboratory safety and cultural insights on the reluctance of ITAs to ask for help, to admit they do not understand. 2. The process of interviewing had effects on those interviewed. -In some cases there was a raising of the awareness on the part of those being interviewed of the cultural/ communication concerns of ITAs or simply reminding others of these concerns. This came about simply by the focus of the interviews. -As the interviewer went from one person to the next, she brought with her solutions to problems that others had mentioned. These were shared as seemed appropriate. At least one of those interviewed mentioned this to the Director of Safety and Health and indicated that he had appreciated this. 3. A pilot course for English for Science and Technology with a focus on the interaction of industry, government and the university with a focus on laboratory safety was offered as an elective through the English Language Center. While the attendance was variable and ended up rather small, the course provided the opportunity to try out some ideas learned from the needs assessment, develop and revise some materials, and learn from the students. An potentially important spin-off of this course on general safety for students relates to an activity involving making emergency telephone calls. Practice included role-play calls "from the students' home to a 911 dispatcher (the Director of Safety). Afterwards they prepared emergency call cards (to be placed by their phones) with a few simple English phrases along with cues in the students' first language. When the Director of Safety heard of this she requested that the students give her copies so that she can have them reproduced in the campus newspaper for others with that same background to use...and to prompt students from other language backgrounds to provide additional versions. -- Margaret van Naerssen mvnaerss@mail.sas.upenn.edu/ English Language Programs & Graduate School of Education, U. of Pennsylvania, 21 Bennett Hall, 34th & Walnut Streets Philadelphia, Pa 19104 USA (215)898-8681