Abstract:

The Teaching Laboratory Unit (ULD) is a centralized laboratory system in which an integrated Quality Management System (QS) has been implemented and is responsible for maintaining the laboratories, providing equipment, and managing waste generated during practical sessions. Within this system, students develop cross-disciplinary knowledge and skills in Quality, Health, Safety, and the Environment. One of the indicators of this QS is the data obtained from surveys designed to measure the satisfaction levels of practical course coordinators, teachers, and students, as well as to assess whether students acquire the expected transversal knowledge. In this work we describe the results obtained in surveys conducted the first semester of the 2025-26 academic year. Given that students traditionally have difficulties with waste disposal and with the emergency plan, the results presented correspond to this area. To improve students’ knowledge a free mobile app (RESIDUS ULD-UB, available since September 2024) has been developed. It provides guidance on the disposal of chemical and common laboratory waste. The survey for coordinators focused on laboratory infrastructure and equipment and safety-related questions; the survey for teachers assessed whether they were up to date with required transversal training and identified equipment issues, and finally, to survey the students, four representative courses were chosen, with the questionnaire tailored to each course. The course “Initiation to Laboratory Work” (ITL, first year) is a practical course in which they acquire basic knowledge on quality systems and procedures in chemical and biological laboratories. The courses “Experimentation in Organic and Pharmaceutical Chemistry” (EOPC, third year) and “Pharmacognosy” (PC, fourth year) generate a large amount of specific waste. Finally, the course “Environmental Health and Management” (EHM, fifth year), was chosen to assess their competences before graduation. Results show that 81% of coordinators (n=27) informed their teaching team about the existence of the app, but only 54% of teachers (n=108) state that they had encouraged students to consult it. Among students, 92% of ITL students (n=126) reported being informed and using the app, but this value decreased progressively to 31% in the fifth year (EHM, n=71). Nevertheless, students demonstrated good knowledge in disposing of specific waste, such as coverslips (ITL, 88%), dichloromethane (EOPC, 98%, n=62), ethyl acetate (EOPC, 77%), thin-layer chromatography plates (EOPC, 95%), and biologically contaminated glass capillary tubes (PC, 100%, n=16). In contrast, for common waste, such as uncontaminated gloves, the percentage decreases along the degree (ITL 86%, EOPC 71%, PC 69%, EHM 58%), while 83% of teachers answered this question correctly. Regarding the evacuation plan, only 52% of coordinators informed their teaching team that students must consult the evacuation map, and therefore only 43% of teachers confirm having done so. Nevertheless, when asked to identify the emergency exit of their laboratory, students show correct response rates of 80% in ITL (two laboratories), 74% and 58% in EOPC (two laboratories), and 72% in EHM. In conclusion, the results obtained indicate that the learning strategy has been effective; however, some reinforcement should be implemented in the later stages of the degree to consolidate key competences mainly in common laboratory waste disposal.

Keywords:

Practical sessions, laboratory waste, emergency plan, SDGs (3, 4, and 13).