About This Archive | DCHAS-L 2026 Index | DCHAS-L Yearly Index | DCHAS-L Home Page
From: Andrew Rice <0000242482721fe9-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] [EXTERNAL] Re: [DCHAS-L] Seating(?) in Chemistry Labs
Date: Feb 2, 2026 06:39 UTC
Reply-To: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU>
Message-ID: <327A31F9-22B6-4DB6-B7B7-7E82F0280FB1**At_Symbol_Here**laverne.edu>
In-Reply-To: <CAAy2tW8vO+zPOYgnDvdbLyyGq_CQ43H0KM20gyvCCLDC9oPbeg**At_Symbol_Here**mail.gmail.com>
Stephen,
Your points are well taken. However, we currently have stools in our labs. The recent chair of the department has often disliked them from the time he entered and contempalted
them not being there. There was been push back (and I have been one of them) because we do our typical 30 - 45 minute lab lecture and 15 min lab quiz in the same room. The reason for my push back is that I am concerned about how ergonomic is it to take a 15
minute quiz standing up and also stand and listen to a 30 to 45 minute over view of the experiment. (Well that is my typical time when reviewing each experiment, others are shorter).
Sincerely,
Dr. Andrew Rice
Laboratory and Department Manager
Chemistry Department
College of Arts and Sciences
University of La Verne
1950 Third Street | La Verne, California | 91750
Office: 909 448 4362
arice**At_Symbol_Here**laverne.edu
Shipping Address
2230 1st Street | La Verne, California | 91750
From:
ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU> on behalf of Stephen Taylor <stephen**At_Symbol_Here**LABSAFETYINSTITUTE.ORG>
Reply-To: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU>
Date: Friday, November 21, 2025 at 9:09 AM
To: "DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU" <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DCHAS-L] Seating(?) in Chemistry Labs
I appreciate the thoughtful discussion so far. Speaking strictly from my perspective as someone who approaches this topic from a hazard-analysis and data-driven standpoint, I remain very cautious about the use of stools or fixed seating in academic teaching
laboratories.
From an ergonomics perspective, I have not found published data indicating that standing for the duration typical of academic lab periods constitutes a significant ergonomic hazard for students. While ergonomics is sometimes cited as a justification for
seating, I have likewise not located studies demonstrating that seating in chemistry teaching labs measurably reduces ergonomic stress or prevents long-term musculoskeletal issues. In fact, prolonged or static sitting—particularly on stools that are not ergonomically
designed—can itself contribute to discomfort or chronic strain. I have also not found evidence that the presence of seating decreases the likelihood of chemical spills or exposures; if anything, increased proximity between a seated student and the benchtop
may increase the severity of spill consequences. To be clear, this does not mean such data definitively does not exist—only that, to my knowledge, it has not been documented in the publicly available literature - and I am not seeing anything from a quick google
search.
What is well supported by data across many occupational contexts is that slips, trips, and falls (STFs) are consistently among the top categories of workplace injuries. This is reflected in national
injury statistics, human-factors research, and safety-program models such as SafeStart, which highlights problems with balance, traction, and grip as common contributors to incidents. In instructional laboratories—where space is tight, foot traffic is high,
and equipment access must remain unobstructed—introducing stools that were not part of the original lab design can add exactly the kinds of obstructions and tripping hazards we typically try to engineer out.
Regarding accommodations for students with disabilities, my perspective—reinforced by my mother’s long career in special education—is that accommodations should be individualized rather than universally applied. Designing a lab around universal seating in
anticipation of potential accessibility needs is not aligned with standard best practices for individualized accommodations.
Finally, if we consider the contributing factors identified in the SafeStart model—eyes not on task, mind not on task, moving into the line of fire, and problems with balance, traction, or grip—several of these can be exacerbated when clutter, obstructions,
or confined movement paths are introduced into an instructional space. In many labs, stools increase exactly these issues. If one did want to provide seating, a safer alternative might be to place a limited number of chairs along the wall, away from the work
area, so students can rest without adding additional hazards to the primary workspace.
Given all of this, my overall view is that stools or seating in academic teaching laboratories introduce multiple potential hazards, offer limited demonstrable benefit, and should be approached with extreme caution unless specifically required for an individual
accommodation.
Stephen Taylor, Ph.D.
Executive Director
The Laboratory Safety Institute
Stephen Taylor | LinkedIn
PS. Be sure to take our Safer Science Self-Assessment to see how your organization stacks up!
K-12: Safer Science Self-Assessment
Small University, College, Community College: Safer Science Self-Assessment
On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 8:00 AM Jonathan Klane <jklane1**At_Symbol_Here**asu.edu> wrote: