Getting back in the lab…during a pandemic.
Welcome back! How have you been? Here at CURChem we have also been adapting to some pretty rapid changes in higher education…Some of us haven’t seen our labs since March! But elsewhere in the country, summer research is beginning…carefully. In this post, Dr. Mary Konkle of Ball State University shares her thinking and ultimately a decision to return to the lab this summer. And yes, there is PPE involved.
The COVID-19 pandemic has interrupted, and in some cases ended, lives around the world. Chemistry academic research where the majority of researchers are undergraduate students has not been unaffected. While not the highest priority on the global pandemic stage, it is nevertheless both an educational and scientific pursuit that is a high impact practice that is/was halted. This blog post articulates one approach to lab re-opening.
How did we get here?
Ball State University is a public primarily undergraduate institution (enrollment ~ 22,000) with some STEM Masters programs (e.g Biology, Chemistry) and a single multi-disciplinary Ph.D. program in Environmental Sciences. It is located in Muncie, Indiana (population ~70,000), an hour northeast of Indianapolis. Research laboratories in STEM fields are supported both by internal and external (e.g. NSF, NIH, Petroleum Research Fund) funding. As COVID-19 forced a shelter in place order, my laboratory consisted of 9 undergraduate students in a shared laboratory space of ~900 square feet. I voluntarily halted in-person research on March 15 due to the crowding of personnel, the University decided to halt in-person instructions soon thereafter. The decision to stop doing research was an emotionally difficult one, especially since my lab had six graduating seniors, but clearly imperative.
The pathway to re-opening is a much more unclear process….
Motivations to Re-open
A reasonable question is, why re-open at all? Data gathered, manuscripts submitted, or experiments accomplished are not more valuable than the health or well-being of student scholars or faculty mentors. However, the career progression of neither student scholar nor researcher cannot be suspended indefinitely. For each student who looks to graduate in May 2021, this is their last undergraduate summer for a professional experience. That professional experience can aid in opening the doors to graduate school or employment, particularly for first-generation and/or under-represented students in STEM fields. They are already vulnerable to lack of opportunity and this pandemic does not affect all demographics of our population equally. For Principal Investigators, many are pre-tenure and/or aiming to fulfill the expectation of current funding or vie for future funding.
Should we re-open labs in June? August? January 2021? There are no clear answers.
Do We Want to Re-Open?
My first question in considering re-opening was, are my students even interested in doing so? I invited lab members the week of Finals (last week of April) to a Zoom meeting to discuss possible next steps. The preface was one of assurance that if they did not wish to do their planned summer research, there would be a spot for them upon return to “normal”. One student I mentor is local, and he already had procured a job at our local hospital. Another two students who were graduating wanted badly to come back to finish up last experiments. The two remaining students were eager to complete any type of research in person that would be allowed. The next hard question I needed to ask was of myself. Did I want to go back this summer? I have a five-year old and my husband works part-time at the hospital (part-time stay-at-home Dad). Would the hospital need him more this summer? Less? Not at all? Would our child care center re-open?
In the end, I decided I did want to try to keep moving research forward with students. Two undergraduate students working this summer was certainly much more tenable than nine.
Dr. Mary Konkle
In the end, I decided I did want to try to keep moving research forward with students. Two undergraduate students working this summer was certainly much more tenable than nine. The two post-baccalaureate students were eager to come on Saturdays, and their experimental plan was already well-articulated. Now, all we had to do was wait for the state and the University to decide the circumstances and timing.
Pathways to Re-opening
The state of Indiana started a phased re-opening in late May. Shortly thereafter, professors at Ball State were notified that they could apply to return to research starting the first of June. The application contained a full schedule for every lab member for the month of June, rooms inhabited, justification for resources needed (e.g. scientific instruments), and articulation of safety protocols as they specifically applied to one’s space (and in adherence to CDC guidelines). This application was submitted to the Vice Provost for Research and needed to be approved by the Provost.
Preparation for Re-entry
For me specifically, I share a research space with another professor and our Department (like many) has shared instrument spaces (e.g. NMR room). The Department coordinated the shared spaces and my colleague and I worked out how many could work in our shared space (4 total). I was allowed to expand into a General Chemistry Teaching lab across the hall from my research space, which gave us more room. It soon dawned on me that I could not meet with any students in my <100 sq. ft. office. So, I planned to make one bench of the teaching lab into my makeshift office while student researchers are present. That way I could talk with them and be in line-of-sight of their experimental work, all while maintaining appropriate social distance. I met with each student researcher via Zoom to clarify that masks would need to be worn and temperatures taken prior to coming to lab. Also, that the schedule we had submitted for approval was immovable. We would be walking out at the appointed time, so set mobile phone alarms for 30-minutes prior to departure to ensure proper decontamination of their workspace, return of materials to the fridge/freezer, etc. I prepared the lab by demarking specific space for each researcher, assigning individual equipment that is usually shared (e.g. pipetteman), marking doors exit or entry only to limit points of congestion and then having a Zoom meeting articulating these changes to student scholars. It helped immensely to talk to colleagues, both within my institution and externally, about these plans. Inevitably, these conversations led to both previously unappreciated problems and possible solutions.
So, I planned to make one bench of the teaching lab into my makeshift office while student researchers are present. That way I could talk with them and be in line-of-sight of their experimental work, all while maintaining appropriate social distance.
Dr. Mary Konkle
Lessons Learned from the First Week Back
- I’ve discarded some polite habits. I don’t hold doors open for a student to proceed past me. I don’t wait to have an informal chat with a student while we walk together to a destination. I mention this because social habits are hard to break.
- Be patient about your productivity goals. Things move slower than before. There are several reasons for this. Fewer students, more restricted access to shared equipment due to social distancing, etc.
- Be in the lab with your students for the first couple of days (while observing social distancing). There are couple of reasons for this. First, it allows you to experience what they do. We are wearing masks, goggles, lab coats and gloves. Working under those conditions feels different. As Investigators, we should be aware of what we are asking of our student scholars. The second reason is that it allows you to properly train students in new procedures (e.g. social distancing, frequent decontamination).
- Each institution needs a clearly communicated feedback loop to report problems with procedures or noncompliance. This process should be shared with student scholars. We are in a new era and the chance of getting something this important and complicated 100% right on the first try is unlikely. I believe there should be anonymous options for reporting and it should be reporting to an Institutional body, not individual Departments. This would minimize blowback on vulnerable groups such as students or junior faculty.
We are wearing masks, goggles, lab coats and gloves. Working under those conditions feels different. As Investigators, we should be aware of what we are asking of our student scholars.
Dr. Mary Konkle
It is clear that the COVID-19 pandemic has not affected our country’s populations, and therefore the populations that serve them, equally. My goal in sharing this journey is to provide fodder for future discussions within the Chemistry and higher education community about moving forward with research during/after this pandemic.
Dr. Mary Konkle is an Assistant Professor of Chemistry at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana and a CUR Chemistry councilor
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder