TBH, The only way expulsion is going to be justified is if they also punish the teachers and the principal for not providing the oversight to make sure these chemicals were not available to the kid to do this experiment in the first place. And even then I'd say the adults in charge are the ones that should be punished for this.
If the kid brought these chemicals to school to conduct the experiment, then I would definitely venture that there is fault with the kid here, but hardly felony territory and questionable expulsion territory. It really depends on the severity of the incident and the amount of prior knowledge the kid had about the safety. The severity should take into account both the size of the explosion and whether or not students and teachers were at risk when this experiment was conducted. Most kids who know something might be a bit dangerous or uncertain at least have the common sense to conduct these experiments in places where people are unlikely to experience bodily harm. Everyone I knew as a kid that did something like this (including myself) knew enough to guess the maximum magnitude of potential damage and made sure to conduct such experiments far enough from others. When you hear about kids playing with hardcore stuff like a homemade pipe bomb, it's usually a rural or suburban kid that goes way out into the woods to conduct their experiments. When it is something minor like strapping a bunch of Estes model rocket engines together and lighting them, they know enough to have everyone stand far enough back and behind cover before starting the fuse for the experiment. Expulsion really is only merited if humans were actually legitimately at risk.
They don't need to have knowledge of the experiment to be culpable, just knowledge that these chemicals were made available without adult supervision. Lab/chemical safety is no joke and I would bet that it was lax or non-existent oversight of these chemicals that prompted this. Kids will be kids. They have limited knowledge of the consequences of their actions, especially when chemistry is involved.
The best situation is one where chemistry can be taught safely in schools by teachers with enough knowledge and good sense to provide a safe environment. The next best alternative is to provide a limited subset of chemistry equipment and chemicals that cannot cause an explosion or serious harm, but still provide educational value. Only when neither of those two conditions can be met, should you remove lab chemistry from an educational environment. This is certainly not desirable, but still better than providing an unsafe environment for chemistry.
If the kid brought these chemicals to school to conduct the experiment, then I would definitely venture that there is fault with the kid here, but hardly felony territory and questionable expulsion territory. It really depends on the severity of the incident and the amount of prior knowledge the kid had about the safety. The severity should take into account both the size of the explosion and whether or not students and teachers were at risk when this experiment was conducted. Most kids who know something might be a bit dangerous or uncertain at least have the common sense to conduct these experiments in places where people are unlikely to experience bodily harm. Everyone I knew as a kid that did something like this (including myself) knew enough to guess the maximum magnitude of potential damage and made sure to conduct such experiments far enough from others. When you hear about kids playing with hardcore stuff like a homemade pipe bomb, it's usually a rural or suburban kid that goes way out into the woods to conduct their experiments. When it is something minor like strapping a bunch of Estes model rocket engines together and lighting them, they know enough to have everyone stand far enough back and behind cover before starting the fuse for the experiment. Expulsion really is only merited if humans were actually legitimately at risk.
They don't need to have knowledge of the experiment to be culpable, just knowledge that these chemicals were made available without adult supervision. Lab/chemical safety is no joke and I would bet that it was lax or non-existent oversight of these chemicals that prompted this. Kids will be kids. They have limited knowledge of the consequences of their actions, especially when chemistry is involved.
The best situation is one where chemistry can be taught safely in schools by teachers with enough knowledge and good sense to provide a safe environment. The next best alternative is to provide a limited subset of chemistry equipment and chemicals that cannot cause an explosion or serious harm, but still provide educational value. Only when neither of those two conditions can be met, should you remove lab chemistry from an educational environment. This is certainly not desirable, but still better than providing an unsafe environment for chemistry.