I think each college will do what their state and board of trustees permits them to do.
^^The famous answer, and the correct one, is “it depends”. At some colleges, star professors individually, and faculty collectively, will have a major voice, even an effective veto, on such decisions.
Yes.
Hopefully they understand the potential consequences of their school being remote, especially if other schools bring students back to campus. Of course, we don’t yet know if any school will be able to bring students back.
In general close to zero influence. As long as the school follows the local, state, and CDC guidelines they will be fine. There are a few professors that bring in research money or are world renown that have influence, but the majority of the teaching staff is very expendable.
Schools with a professor union could have influence though. I’m not familiar with that situation and the campus politics that go along with it.
@austinmshauri thank you for sharing the college perspective in such a thoughtful way.
IMO this pandemic is exasperating some basic, underlying issues in higher ed, and accelerating the urgency of finding solutions. Tuition is already at a tipping point for many middle/upper middle class kids; you see it all the time here on CC where parents who 10 -20 years ago would have paid for private college are now on a merit hunt or sending their kids to the state flagship due to cost. I really don’t think we want to end up with private colleges that are composed of only the very wealthy and lower SES, with few middle/upper middle SES kids.
I think at least some colleges have already been cutting down on programs because there aren’t enough paying students. At least, I know that a program my kid wanted to participate in at her school was cancelled because not enough of the participants could pay for the experience, and the college didn’t want to come up with the funds to pay for the kids who couldn’t pay for the experience themselves.
IMO the benefit of the private colleges are the experiences outside of the classroom that the college facilitates - the internships, research, ECs, that all help the kids decide what they’d like to do for a career and give the kids some experience for their resume.
If colleges start wielding a sharp scalpel to cut costs, they need to be careful not to cut those things that end up differentiating them from the public college experience. (And let me say that the publics are light years better than they used to be about this, so the gap is closing on that end too).
What I’m trying to do here is to generate some thought about what we can do to ensure that those kids who will be in college during the pandemic, will be able to receive the benefit of their bargain with the school. It seems like the internships/research/ECs will all be off the table for a good part of this year. What can colleges do to still provide those experiences to kids? Maybe a 5th year at no/low cost? Sure, some classes will be more crowded, but does it make a difference if a class has 150 vs 100 kids in it? And maybe the college will have to hire some more administrators to help find and then coordinate these experiences, but better to spend some money doing that than telling the kids who are otherwise missing out due to the pandemic, “too bad, so sad, you have to lump it”.
I know that there are no good answers. But surely, the burden can’t be made to fall on the parents/kids, with a severely limited offering of internships/research/ECs, on-line classes, etc.
And, BTW, I bet if kids were given the options of a gap year and a 5th year, only 20% or less would take advantage of it. I could be wrong, just my opinion.
Internships are not always within the college’s control. With 40 million unemployed or whatever the current number is, I think there will be very few such opportunities in the future, and even fewer paying ones.
If 20% of students take a gap year (not sure if you are just talking frosh, but also leaves for sophs/juniors) at LACs, that will be financially devastating to each and everyone regardless of their endowment, and could require significant policy changes (layoffs, decrease in FA, need-blind to need aware, etc.)
5th year could be attractive if the job market isn’t good for each year’s graduating seniors.
@homerdog I feel that, at least at LACs, the faculty would push to resume in-person classes, not to continue remote learning. Many professors at my college have said they are eager to teach in-person again.
Most of the good financial aid private colleges enroll few lower SES students (typically 10-20% from the lower half of the income range, using Pell grant as the proxy for that). The “upper middle class” is still what fills the classes, because many of them have the money to pay without needing (much) financial aid. That many “upper middle class” parents do not have the money despite high incomes (whether by bad personal luck or bad personal financial choices) does not matter too much to the colleges as long as there is an ample supply of those who do have the money and are willing to pay.
Of course, that means that the trend that a student’s college choice, or being able to go to college at all, is mostly decided by his/her parents’ circumstances and choices (mostly financial, but (as seen in various threads) often based on parent preferences beyond financial limits), rather than the student’s own academic and other achievements (some of which are enabled or limited by parents’ circumstances and choices). Relatively few high school students do not have parental constraints on college choice, and grew up in high opportunity environments that enabled academic and other achievements rather than limiting them.
A POV from a community perspective - http://higheredstrategy.com/community-vs-community/?
Quote: "It will be disastrous for universities and colleges as educational communities to go back in a way that includes only certain people. If international students, students living with elderly relatives, students with compromised immune systems or students with disabilities are either not invited back at the same time as everyone else, or are only offered a continuation of remote classes while others come back face-to-face, the re-open will be a farce. "
I think a lot of professors really want to get back in the classroom. The face a lot of the same difficulties as the kids learning from home; spotty internet, distractions from family members, lack of robust class discussion. Of course professors with risk factors should be allowed the remote option.
I wonder though if classes are remote if they will still be P/F? One semester is ok, more than that could prove problematic.
Not all schools are P/F. My kid is taking all hers for a grade. She had an option, but was told as a premed that if she chose the P/F option, that would hurt her, so she didn’t have much of an option after all.
Not all colleges adopt mandatory P/F grading for remote learning this current term. If the fall term is remote again, I expect all the colleges will at least offer the option of letter grades.
Unfortunately, this would basically tie the hands of schools that may want to slowly return to normal.
International Students - aside from the foreign students that remained on campus, colleges have no control on the ability of new foreign students to return to campus. That belongs to the feds.
Students living with elderly relatives. Caution would say that these students should either commit to remain on campus or opt for distance learning to avoid possibly infecting their relatives. This may be an area where liability waivers may be needed.
Students with compromised immune systems. Same as for “Students living with elderly relatives”.
Students with disabilities. Should be no impact here.
The quote seems to reflect the “It needs to come back 100% normal, or nothing” camp of thought. Should not expect this - not this year anyway.
@1NJParent True. Amherst chose a Flexible Grading Option this semester, where we would all get letter grades but we would have the choice (for every class individually, not just all or nothing) of converting each grade to a pass or keeping the letter grade. I was personally really disappointed in this because in some classes it would look bad to not keep the letter grade given the option, depending on where we want to go post-graduation. I want to attend a top chemistry Ph.D. Program after graduation, and I am disappointed because it is looking like I will end Gen Chem 2 with a B+.
The chemistry PhD programs are more likely to be concerned about how you do in your upper level chemistry courses, your undergraduate research experience, and faculty recommendation letters.
So be more concerned about whether you learned everything from general chemistry 2 that you need for later chemistry courses, rather than the B+ grade. (Now, it is different for pre-med and pre-law students, who need to minimize the number of grade point deficits below 4 that they accumulate.)
@ucbalumnus Thank you!
Can’t remember where I read this article, but it was surmising that many public universities are going to have to raise tuition and slash offerings and amenities due to state budget shortfalls which will result in reduced funding to schools.
Did you choose to receive the letter grade instead of P/F? How late into the course do you have to make that selection? Presumably switching your selection from one to the other after your initial selection isn’t an option.
@1NJParent We can wait until after we get the final grades to decide; graduating seniors have until May 22, others have until June 15.