The Perils Of Privatisation - Part X
News15 mins ago
Biology Teacher
As a biology teacher, later to become a Headteacher, all the fun has been taken out of science thanks to HASAW; I used to dissect road kill; kids would do blood smears and had a load of creatures in the lab, snakes, locusts etc. I worry about future medics when they face their first cadaver!
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dominie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"“Cutting open a cow’s eye for the first time is a transformative moment for a young biologist, because once you get over the unpleasantness of all the goo coming out, you realise it is an amazing structure"
http://
That's not how I remember it. I simply remember a confusing mess, which seemed to bear no relationship whatsoever to the diagrams in the textbook!
http://
That's not how I remember it. I simply remember a confusing mess, which seemed to bear no relationship whatsoever to the diagrams in the textbook!
The best science courses were the ones that some of our 6th formers took while I was teaching maths.
It was always a pleasant surprise when, for example, teaching a class of 12-year-olds, to have a couple of 6th formers knock on my classroom door and ask me to sample some of the booze that they'd just distilled as part of their course! (Some of it was well above 50% ABV and absolutely gorgeous!).
It was always a pleasant surprise when, for example, teaching a class of 12-year-olds, to have a couple of 6th formers knock on my classroom door and ask me to sample some of the booze that they'd just distilled as part of their course! (Some of it was well above 50% ABV and absolutely gorgeous!).
>>> Don't, as far as i knew dissection of cadavers is no longer a part of their education
I was also under the impression that so-called 'gross anatomy' is no longer part of the syllabus in UK medical schools but Google seems to suggest that it's still a 'right of passage' for US medical students.
View with caution!
I was also under the impression that so-called 'gross anatomy' is no longer part of the syllabus in UK medical schools but Google seems to suggest that it's still a 'right of passage' for US medical students.
View with caution!
We get med students who come volunteer as part of their psych rotation. From what I've gathered they learn about anatomy via digital images....
http://
http://
Can't speak for other universities, but students at my university and those that attend that other place still dissect cadavers with gusto. MrsProf is sometimes asked to attend the dissection rooms where an unusual case of cardiac anatomy has come to light.
I love formalin solution which is made by dissolving 37g to 40g of the pungent formaldehyde gas in water to form a saturated solution. A small quantity of methanol is usually added to prevent polymerisation. Strictly speaking it's therefore incorrect to refer to the solution so created as "formaldehyde". Chemical suppliers catalogues have for years referred to the stuff as Formalin although you get one or two catalogues that split the difference and call it "Formaldehyde solution".
Many years ago, I was paid by the local council whilst taking my "A" levels at school to act as a sort of part-time laboratory assistant during my lunch hour. My job was to pull the formalin submerged rats out of large containers and place them on boards to be dissected by me and my fellow students in the afternoon. I never had a cold during the 2 year zoology course!
An interesting fact for those of us that work with IUPAC nomenclature is that formalin solution has changed its name to Methanal. It's so close to Methanol that it's frightening and I've even come across dissertations where it's been inadvertently misused.
I love formalin solution which is made by dissolving 37g to 40g of the pungent formaldehyde gas in water to form a saturated solution. A small quantity of methanol is usually added to prevent polymerisation. Strictly speaking it's therefore incorrect to refer to the solution so created as "formaldehyde". Chemical suppliers catalogues have for years referred to the stuff as Formalin although you get one or two catalogues that split the difference and call it "Formaldehyde solution".
Many years ago, I was paid by the local council whilst taking my "A" levels at school to act as a sort of part-time laboratory assistant during my lunch hour. My job was to pull the formalin submerged rats out of large containers and place them on boards to be dissected by me and my fellow students in the afternoon. I never had a cold during the 2 year zoology course!
An interesting fact for those of us that work with IUPAC nomenclature is that formalin solution has changed its name to Methanal. It's so close to Methanol that it's frightening and I've even come across dissertations where it's been inadvertently misused.
When I was at school our biology teacher dissected a white mouse for us. We asked when it had died and his answer was 'during break', they had a gas bottle or something. We were OK with it and later I had to dissect one myself- I got good marks.
I drew the line at the film of a dog being vivisected to demonstrate the blood circulation though - but no-one fainted. I only didn't do biology to exam level because they often dissected cockroaches and insects give me the screaming habdabs!
If people wanting to become medics can't do this then they need to think again.
I drew the line at the film of a dog being vivisected to demonstrate the blood circulation though - but no-one fainted. I only didn't do biology to exam level because they often dissected cockroaches and insects give me the screaming habdabs!
If people wanting to become medics can't do this then they need to think again.
I've chaired the odd IUPAC symposium/conference over the years Hypognosis and contributed to both the White Book and the Blue Book of chemical nomenclature. All the same, I've objected to quite a few name changes over the time and IUPAC have accepted my objections, sometimes grudgingly.
Just to take a classic example that I've cited on here before, I've banned laboratory staff from requesting Ethanoic acid. If I can call it Acetic acid, so can they! I've also done the same in the government research laboratories where I work as a consultant. The university main organic chemical stores building staff and science park staff can please themselves.
Just to take a classic example that I've cited on here before, I've banned laboratory staff from requesting Ethanoic acid. If I can call it Acetic acid, so can they! I've also done the same in the government research laboratories where I work as a consultant. The university main organic chemical stores building staff and science park staff can please themselves.
Returning to the OP's question though, I do sympathise. I think those of us at university are given a lot more leeway in respect of the practical aspects of the sciences than are allowed in schools nowadays.
The reason behind it for us is undoubtedly the contribution of laboratory safety officers that rigorously ensure that we stick to known protocols in the lab. LSO's are absent from schools because a good LSO is largely unaffordable for them.
On a personal note, I do a small amount of teaching in two or three senior schools in this area and it never ceases to amaze me the number of graduate science teachers who are oblivious to many of the hazards of common chemicals. They seem content to be able to reel off what each of the pictorial safety symbols mean without putting them into context. Often they can't even guess at the colour of a chemical compound before the container is opened. When I provide them with information on the hazards, they look at me and say "how do you know that then?". I always give them the same answer: "experience". It's not beyond anyone to learn this stuff if they set they're mind to it and we'll all better off with safer laboratories as a result
The reason behind it for us is undoubtedly the contribution of laboratory safety officers that rigorously ensure that we stick to known protocols in the lab. LSO's are absent from schools because a good LSO is largely unaffordable for them.
On a personal note, I do a small amount of teaching in two or three senior schools in this area and it never ceases to amaze me the number of graduate science teachers who are oblivious to many of the hazards of common chemicals. They seem content to be able to reel off what each of the pictorial safety symbols mean without putting them into context. Often they can't even guess at the colour of a chemical compound before the container is opened. When I provide them with information on the hazards, they look at me and say "how do you know that then?". I always give them the same answer: "experience". It's not beyond anyone to learn this stuff if they set they're mind to it and we'll all better off with safer laboratories as a result
I also think that in recent years, the progressive re-classification of poisons has resulted in whole categories of chemicals being recognised as poisons for different reasons.
As an example, Benzene was a common solvent used in laboratories and industry years ago. During my teens, my neighbour brought a pint milk bottle full of the stuff home from his employers factory. The milk bottle was sealed with a rubber bung. What did he want it for? To clean oil stains off his car using a sponge soaked in solvent. The carcinogenic properties of Benzene were largely unrecognised at the time.
Similarly, lots of people used Carbon Tetrachloride as a solvent until its hepatotoxicity was recognised. You could even buy the stuff to remove the debris left behind on removing a sticking plaster!
I used the Sudan dyes out of 50ml glass stoppered dropper bottles for lipid analysis in school oblivious to their carcinogenic properties.
In recent years though, the dangers of chemical teratogens have come to the forefront. These are toxins that can cause birth defects and development delays and include the Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons such as Benzopyrene that for years were not really recognised as carcinogenic.
I wouldn't want to go back to those seemingly carefree days of using chemicals though and I think that the HSE keeps the public and scientists safe from lots of very dangerous stuff.
As an example, Benzene was a common solvent used in laboratories and industry years ago. During my teens, my neighbour brought a pint milk bottle full of the stuff home from his employers factory. The milk bottle was sealed with a rubber bung. What did he want it for? To clean oil stains off his car using a sponge soaked in solvent. The carcinogenic properties of Benzene were largely unrecognised at the time.
Similarly, lots of people used Carbon Tetrachloride as a solvent until its hepatotoxicity was recognised. You could even buy the stuff to remove the debris left behind on removing a sticking plaster!
I used the Sudan dyes out of 50ml glass stoppered dropper bottles for lipid analysis in school oblivious to their carcinogenic properties.
In recent years though, the dangers of chemical teratogens have come to the forefront. These are toxins that can cause birth defects and development delays and include the Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons such as Benzopyrene that for years were not really recognised as carcinogenic.
I wouldn't want to go back to those seemingly carefree days of using chemicals though and I think that the HSE keeps the public and scientists safe from lots of very dangerous stuff.
1 to 19 of 19
Latest Posts
ChatterBank45 mins ago
Masterchef - The Professionals
Film, Media & TV77 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles110 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles110 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles142 mins ago
