For new construction, reconstruction, or renovation, a critical consideration in creating space for laboratory experiences is how the design can best support science learning and teaching. Over the past decade, there has been little research examining the relationship between physical laboratory spaces and student learning. The few studies available suggest that laboratory facilities influence teaching and student learning in poorly understood ways.
The results suggested that active forms of learning were associated with better science facilities Ainley, , One researcher in Israel considered the history of the transformation of chemistry laboratories in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere from fixed benches with rows of reagent bottles to more open, flexible layouts that allowed better communication and collaboration between teachers and students Arzi, She concluded, on the basis of this history and other research, that not only are science teachers influenced by space design, but they also influence those designs Arzi, A case study of one high school illustrates how the availability and quality of laboratory facilities may influence the availability and quality of effective teachers.
When parents in this poor inner-city school found that one reason the school could not recruit a science teacher was a lack of laboratories, they organized to demand improvements from school district administrators. Because of the expense of constructing or renovating laboratory space, the design should be future-oriented, supporting a vision of the science program over a decade or more.
The first step in designing laboratory space is to develop such a long-term vision for the school science curriculum. The school science supervisor, along with curriculum coordinators, other science teachers, administrators, and state and local experts, often play important roles in developing this vision Biehle, Motz, and West, While the design of particular facilities will vary depending on the local science curriculum, available resources, and building codes, all school labo-.
In addition, past studies Novak, ; Shepherd, and current laboratory design experts Lidsky, agree that laboratory designs should emphasize flexible use of space and furnishings to support integration of laboratory experiences with other forms of science instruction. Combined laboratory-classrooms can support effective laboratory experiences by providing movable benches and chairs, movable walls, peripheral or central location of facilities, wireless Internet connections and trolleys for computers, fume hoods, or other equipment.
These flexible furnishings allow students to move seamlessly from carrying out laboratory activities on the benches to small-group or whole-class discussions that help them make meaning from their activities. Integrated laboratory-classrooms that provide space for long-term student projects or cumulative portfolios support the full range of laboratory experiences, allowing students to experience more of the activities of real scientists.
Forward-looking laboratory designs maximize use of natural sunlight and provide easy access to outdoor science facilities. See Figures and for examples of laboratory-classrooms with flexible designs. Designing school laboratory spaces to accommodate multiple science disciplines could provide both educational and practical benefits. First, because undergraduate science education, like science itself, is becoming more interdisciplinary, a National Research Council committee has recommended making undergraduate laboratory courses as interdisciplinary as possible National Research Council, High school laboratory facilities that could accommodate interdisciplinary investigations would help prepare students for such undergraduate laboratory courses.
Second, high school students enroll in a wide variety of science courses National Center for Education Statistics, The committee was unable to locate any systematic national data on the extent to which current high school science laboratory spaces incorporate any of the aspects of flexibility described above. No systematic information was available on the extent to which high school science classrooms may be. For example, in California, among the 74, high school science classes offered during the school year, the largest group 37 percent was in general science, followed by life science classes 27 percent.
Classes in other science subjects made up much smaller shares of the total, including chemistry 9 percent , integrated science 7 percent , and physics 4 percent California Commission on Teacher Credentialling, For example, almost no information was available on the fraction of high schools that include combined laboratory-classroom space instead of separate laboratory rooms.
Among the National Science Teachers Association members who responded, over three-fourths indicated they taught in combined laboratory-classrooms.
Among the 1, responding International Technol-. FIGURE Laboratory classroom set up for small-group investigations at central benches and individual activities at side benches.
Because laboratories require space for student activities, shared teacher planning, teacher demonstrations, student discussions, and safe storage of chemicals, along with specialized furnishings e. In some cases, there may be enough capital budget to build a laboratory, but no funds are set aside in the operating budget to provide the equipment and supplies to use the laboratory over subsequent years.
Gohl observed:. It is not uncommon in jurisdictions throughout the country to find people who invest a tremendous amount of money in high tech [high-voltage alternating current] systems, great science labs, and then underfund them historically once they are built. There is no consensus as to how one budgets those resources into the foreseeable future. The New York State Regents exam has exerted pressure for high schools throughout the state, including those in New York City, to increase the number of laboratory courses offered.
In New York City, 16 of the 18 schools surveyed increased the number of science classes requiring laboratory experiments between and In nine of the schools, the laboratory load at least doubled. The average increase in laboratory load between and was 90 percent.
Changes in the budget for laboratory materials and supplies were not commensurate with these increases in laboratory loads. In the same time period, 7 of the 18 schools studied experienced a cut in their science budgets, and 5 of these schools simultaneously experienced increases in their laboratory load. For the nine schools that experienced an increase in their science budget, the budget increased 34 percent while the corresponding increase in laboratory load was percent.
When limited funds prevent schools from designing and constructing laboratory facilities in the school, there are alternative ways to provide students with effective laboratory experiences. Schools and teachers can arrange field trips with the help of local groups, such as the Audubon Naturalist Society, the local science museum, and the state department of natural resources. Schools in rural areas may be able to obtain one of a growing number of mobile school laboratories see Box Laboratories on wheels can provide facilities, equipment, and trained teachers to rural students, and many of these laboratories also provide teacher professional development.
However, because these projects typically rely on a variety of funding sources, including grants, they are not always sustainable. However, the National Science Foundation provided temporary funding to sustain the program through the school year Virginia Polytechnic Institute, In contrast, the Juniata College Science in Motion Program in Pennsylvania, initially funded by the National Science Foundation, has been sustained with state funding since Mulfinger, A few school districts and cities have found economies of scale by centralizing laboratory facilities in one location this can be either an alternative to having laboratory facilities in every school or a supplement.
Students across the county will use the laboratories at Sterling every other day, attending their home high schools for other courses and extracurricular activities Helderman, In Tel Aviv, Israel, a centralized science facility performs a similar role, serving students from several schools with laboratory facilities and expert science laboratory teachers Arzi, Students in Tel Aviv attend their home schools for other subjects and the science center for science.
Although well-designed flexible laboratory spaces can support effective laboratory experiences, access to such space is not available to all schools and students. Among science department heads surveyed in , 21 percent indicated that facilities posed a serious problem for science instruction in their school Smith, Banilower, McMahon, and Weiss, This represented an increase from , when about 18 percent of heads of science departments indicated that facilities posed a serious problem.
In , the U. General Accounting Office GAO surveyed a nationally representative sample of 10, schools in 5, school districts. GAO mailed surveys to facilities directors and administrators in the school districts in which the sampled schools were located and received a 78 percent response. Survey results were statistically adjusted to produce representative estimates at the national and state levels U.
General Accounting Office, , p. In its analysis of survey responses and school and student characteristics, GAO included responses about both elementary and secondary school buildings. The survey identified three trends. First, inadequate laboratory facilities varied by community type. The highest percentage of ill-equipped schools was in central cities, followed by urban fringes or large towns, and the smallest percentage of ill-equipped schools was in rural areas or small towns.
Second, inadequate laboratory facilities varied by proportion of minority students, with less adequate laboratory facilities in schools with higher concentrations of minorities see Table Third, inadequate laboratories were associated with the proportion of students approved for free or reduced-price lunch, with less adequate facilities in schools with higher concentrations of students eligible for reduced-price meals see Table More recent data regarding the adequacy of science facilities are available from a survey of school principals in New Jersey conducted in by Mark Schneider.
Due to its focus on a single state, less careful design, and lower response rate, the results of this survey are less conclusive than the earlier GAO survey. In fall , 1, principals who were members of the New Jersey Principals and Supervisors Association were sent surveys by email and fax.
The response rate was about 20 percent. In this survey, principals were not given any guidance to judge the adequacy of their laboratory facilities. Despite these weaknesses, the survey responses are discussed here, as they are among the very few data available on the adequacy of laboratory facilities. In response to this survey, principals in the poorest schools were more likely to find the facilities for science to be inadequate than principals in average or high-income schools.
Specifically, around 30 percent of principals in poor schools indicated their science facilities were inadequate compared with less than 10 percent of principals in average or high-income schools Schneider, Surveys in three large cities with large concentrations of poor and minority students also reveal inadequate laboratory facilities and equipment.
A survey conducted in New York City in the mids found that the few available laboratory rooms were in constant use, with teachers rotating in and out of classrooms. With no time to clean up broken glass or spills, student safety was compromised Schenk and Meeks, In response to phone and mail surveys conducted in , almost 60 percent of science teachers in Chicago and Washington, DC, reported either that their science laboratory facilities were somewhat inadequate or very inadequate to meet curriculum standards or that they had no science laboratory facilities at all Schneider, Equipment necessary to safely conduct a variety of laboratory experiments is not available in all classrooms.
In the survey of science education, high school teachers were asked about equipment used in their science classes. They responded that they frequently used electricity in over On average, teachers indicated that less than 10 percent of their science classes lacked needed access to electric outlets, running water, and gas for burners. However, teachers indicated that a larger share of science classes 26 percent in and 11 percent in would have benefited from hoods or air hoses that were unavailable.
A follow-up analysis of this national survey data revealed disparities in the availability of laboratory equipment and supplies. Teachers in schools with the highest concentrations of non-Asian minority students were more likely than teachers in other schools to indicate that fume hoods or air hoses were needed but not available Banilower, Green, and Smith, Teachers in rural schools reported spending far less on equipment than teachers in urban or suburban areas, and equipment spending also varied by poverty and the ethnic composition of schools.
Equipment spending was also lower in schools with higher concentrations of non-Asian minorities. As in the case of laboratory facilities and equipment, such easy access is not equally distributed to all high schools and all high school students.
An earlier survey in New York City revealed that one South Bronx high school had no facilities designed specifically for laboratory investigations. Lack of adequate supplies and access to those supplies can have severe effects on teaching and learning. A science teacher at an urban high school in a poor neighborhood of Washington, DC, told the committee that he teaches laboratories only every two weeks because of the challenge of obtaining and assembling supplies.
The science supervisor of a rural school district in southwestern Virginia, speaking to the committee, described the challenge of teaching laboratory classes off a cart of equipment and supplies and teaching ecology in the school library. Lack of available, accessible laboratory equipment and supplies forces some teachers to purchase these items out of their own pockets. In fall , this tax deduction was extended for two years. This section provides a brief review of safety issues.
Science teachers and schools have clear legal liability for the safety of students engaged in laboratory activities, and local, state, and federal regulations, codes, and policies provide clear specifications for ensuring student safety. The limited evidence available suggests that some U. As defined by U. Science teachers and their supervisors have three basic duties. Failure to perform any of these could result in a legal finding that a teacher or a school administrator or both is liable for damages and a judgment and award against that teacher or school administrator Council of Chief State Science Supervisors, no date, p.
The duty of instruction. These instructions must follow professional and district guidelines. The duty of supervision. This includes not tolerating misbehavior, providing greater supervision in more dangerous situations, providing greater supervision to younger students and those with special needs, and never leaving students unattended.
The duty of maintenance. This requires that the teacher never use defective equipment, file written reports for maintenance or correction of hazardous conditions or defective equipment, establish regular inspections of safety equipment and procedures, and follow all guidelines for handling and disposing of chemicals.
Standards of care are established not only by law and regulation but are also incorporated in building codes and guidelines established by voluntary associations.
In the event of student accident or injury, courts may consider whether the size of the laboratory facility and the number of students using the facility met standards of care. State laws and regulations governing class size are based on occupancy standards established by the Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc. Roy, Both of these sets of standards call for 50 square feet of space per person in school laboratories or workshops. The National Science Teachers Association NSTA calls for a minimum of 45 square feet per student for a standalone laboratory and 60 square feet per student for a combination laboratory-classroom Biehle et al.
This translates into at least 1, square feet for a laboratory and 1, square feet for a combined laboratory classroom. The NSTA recommends a maximum class size of 24 students in high school laboratory science classes. The U. Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA establishes standards of care to protect the health and safety of all employees, including teachers and other school employees. This standard requires school science teachers to create and maintain a chemical hygiene plan CHP.
In most schools, a science teacher or teachers develop the CHP, which outlines policies, procedures, and responsibilities to increase student, teacher, and staff awareness of potentially harmful chemicals. The CHP requires proper labeling of all chemicals, using a Material Safety Data Sheet, which outlines important safety information, and safe storage. These data sheets must be made available to school employees and must be kept in a safe but easily accessible location.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health provides guides for proper separation of incompatible chemical families. Environmental Protection Agency EPA administers several laws and regulations affecting safety in high school science laboratories. To carry out provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, EPA issues regulations and guidelines governing safe storage of laboratory chemicals, equipment, and supplies.
Title III of this act governs emergency planning and right-to-know about potentially hazardous chemicals , and Title IV governs chemical disposal. In addition to these federal regulations and guidelines, the American National Standards Institute ANSI has established voluntary standards for laboratory safety that include:. ANSI Z ANSI Z87—guidelines for protective equipment at easily accessible locations.
It offers cutting-edge features that allow you to mobilize your employees efficiently, utilize assets wisely, as well as plan your workspace effectively. Apart from its unique tools, the system is also backed by industry experts who can provide users with assistance whenever they encounter issues with the platforms. Rosmiman IWMS helps companies oversee the processes and life cycle of their real estate and other assets.
These processes include planning, control, maintenance, and integration with multiple financial and other business systems. RecTimes is a facility management system designed specifically for sports facilities like ice rinks, soccer fields, swimming pools, and gymnasiums. Aiming to reduce administrative tasks while increasing accuracy and efficiency, this software helps users manage venue reservations, collect payments, and file bookings in one convenient platform. It even provides a complete and transparent scheduling system for your convenience.
By utilizing one for your company, you can easily improve the way you make business decisions. All you have to do is choose which one will mesh well with your unique needs and preferences. Hopefully, with our list of top 20 facility management software, you were able to kickstart your search. If you are looking for closely related software solutions, you should also check out computerized maintenance management software. Notice that a number of solutions in the current list also falls in this software category.
You may head to this list of top CMMS tools for business facilities for specific examples, which should allow you to shortlist your choices. This crop of top ERP systems also gives you wider options for your business needs. This is especially so if you are operating a company with various departments, functions, and processes.
Also, check our compilation of the best workflow management tools. These offer an in-depth analysis of the different systems available on the market that should guide you in choosing the best one for your company. Did we miss any facility management systems? If so, feel free to leave a comment below.
His main areas of expertise are blockchain technologies, cryptocurrencies, and the use of biometrics in fintech solutions. With more than 1, solutions scrutinized in the last 5 years spent on our team he always prioritized offering readers an unbiased perspective on modern financial technologies.
Top Facility Management Software of Hello, Nice article. How do you determine best FM software? Best regards and a wonderful day. FinancesOnline is available for free for all business professionals interested in an efficient way to find top-notch SaaS solutions. We are able to keep our service free of charge thanks to cooperation with some of the vendors, who are willing to pay us for traffic and sales opportunities provided by our website.
Sporting a user-friendly design, Hippo CMMS provides comprehensive work order management, maintenance planning, and vital safety compliance for your facility management needs. It provides multiple industry use cases while reducing business costs.
Hippo CMMS. Try out FMS:Workplace with their free trial. Detailed UpKeep Review. Detailed Skedda Review. Detailed FMX Review. Detailed Prodsmart Review. Detailed Quick Base Review. Detailed ServiceInsight Review. Detailed Nexudus Spaces Review. Detailed OfficeSpace Software Review. Detailed AiM Review. The following recommendations are for minimal facilities and equipment for the proper functioning of an academic archives. This area should be large enough to accommodate large tables, computing equipment, and other equipment for processing records.
It must be:. The area should be large enough to:. Space needs may include areas for;. Archives should have enough shelving for present holdings and for five to ten years of projected growth. It should be constructed of material that is safe for archival records with adjustable shelves to accommodate the types of materials and containers used for storage.
Archives must provide appropriate storage equipment for oversized items, photographs, maps, and other items which may vary in size or types of media. Major types of necessary equipment and supplies include:. Special equipment required will depend upon the types of records and their potential uses. About Archives What Are Archives? Home » Guidelines for College and University Archives.
Facilities for Academic Archives 1.
0コメント