The costs for laboratory consumables, chemicals and glassware etc., has increased tremendously in the last 20 years. It is worth noting that the use of many of these resources is predicated on the teaching of experiments and techniques introduced over 100 years ago. In the early years of chemistry, large quantities of chemicals were needed in experiments simply because the techniques for identifying and quantifying substances were rather crude. Large quantities of chemicals require large containers, large supports, large energy transfer devices and large inventories. Typically, many universities use a checked drawer policy for the storage and inventory of common lab apparatus. Such practices use up valuable instruction time with circulation logistics, and limit availability and access to equipment. In spite of cost control strategies through bulk and group discounting agreements with manufacturers and distributors, the increasing cost of purchasing and managing consumables has in part led to increasing tuition rates.
The need to incorporate new chemical technologies, e.g. electronic balances, pH meters, chromatographs, and computer interfaced instruments has caused many colleges to desperately seek new "indirect" ways of paying the instrument bill. Thus, we see the imposition of "lab fees", "technology fees", and other science course premiums which can exceed 10% of tuition costs. Instruments are expensive to purchase or rent, difficult to maintain, rapidly become obsolete, and are specifically designed for research rather than instruction. In the best case, instruments become mere "black boxes" not contributing to student understanding. More commonly, repair costs (usually not budgeted for) dictate that the instruments are only available for demonstration purposes or are destined to sit on the shelf. Analytical chemists have a saying - "smart instruments, dumb students."
Traditionally, the teaching laboratory physical plant has been modeled on research facilities, based on the vague notion that first year students should be "exposed" to what chemists really "do". In the universities, much of this infrastructure is old, contaminated and badly in need of replacement. Community colleges have minimal and inadequate laboratory facilities often located in remodeled shopping centers and office complexes. When funds allow the development of specific laboratory facilities, the construction costs are exorbitant: over $200,000 per lab with ventilation hoods, accommodating 25 students. It is imperative to examine alternative structures for instructional laboratories, including the option of modifying non-traditional facilities.
Another recent aspect of laboratory instruction which is causing escalating costs is the need for environmental and safety regulation and compliance. The waste disposal costs for a traditional first year chemistry lab course is about $5,000 per 1,000 students depending on which macroscopic experiments are performed and on whether legal disposal practices are implemented. Many institutions have no means of correct handling and disposal of hazardous wastes. The hidden costs of compliance with all environmental and safety regulations range from mandatory student purchase of safety goggles to expensive facilities necessary for compliant storage of chemical inventories.
Finally, it is necessary to emphasize that the labor costs of teaching laboratories are high. Universities attempt to control labor costs by assigning laboratory instruction to graduate student assistants. Community colleges do not have this luxury. Whatever the context, there is an unwritten rule that the student/instructor ratio should not exceed 25:1 in first year labs. Experience has shown that this ratio is reasonable from a safety point of view when traditional macroscopic experiments are done. The design and implementation of these experiments also requires a technical staff, usually one full time coordinator plus 5 part time/work study assistants per 1,000 students served. The time and expense involved in making sure experiments will work and in preparing large quantities of reagents is considerable.
Clearly, the costs of laboratory instruction are very high and have been increasing rapidly. Unfortunately, most universities and colleges have not examined the direct or indirect costs of laboratories and have relied on sub-departmental direction in the planning and implementation of such courses.
Information last updated on .
This page has been accessed times.