Yes. That’s what I said…many ways for schools to infer income levels. I did say, that Need-blind schools don’t see whether an applicant applied for FA, and if they did, what their level of need is.
I never said, nor implied, that college admissions are meritocratic (with the exception of schools that auto-admit based on stats).
Generally, colleges build their classes according to their institutional needs and goals. People disagree with how transparent schools should be regarding that process.
@NearlyDone2024 Many full pay students are worthy of their admissions to need blind colleges. Just saying. They fit in other ways that help build the class just like everyone else.
I’ve been following this thread, and reading as many articles on this subject as I can, as I have in incoming freshman and we are trying to decide what to do about next year.
I see that many of the college plans to return include testing and contract tracing which seems reasonable to me. However, where and how are these colleges going to get the amount of tests that they all need to allow kids to return to campus? It seems like the larger state schools would need many thousands of tests (if they were to test all students, faculty, etc.) before school starts and then to test the same group as the year goes on. Multiply that by all the colleges of all sizes around the country, and that’s a lot of tests. I’m in the NY-metro area, and it’s hard to get a test here if you don’t meet certain criteria. How will the colleges get the supplies that hard hit areas are having a hard time with? (I’m not trying to be antagonistic - just having a hard time wrapping my head around this. I want nothing more than colleges to open up this fall!)
She could sign up for those exploratory classes assuming they’d be in-person. If the classes turn out to be online later, the college is likely to allow her to switch to the classes that fulfill her Gen Ed requirement because online classes, especially the online Gen Ed classes, are unlikely to have size limitations.
Why would they not have size limitations?
Gen Ed classes tend to be large and designed to accommodate as many students as possible so they can all fulfill their requirement. Furthermore, if they’re held in online format, they’d no longer be constrained by physical room size.
My son’s college (large state U) said they are exploring how they can do testing ( I think just getting the tests for student health services isn’t all that simple). Contact tracing is typically done by the state or county government and the school is trying to figure out how involved they can be or what they can do independently.
I think by fall testing will be more widely available at least. Not sure what they will work out with regards to contact tracing.
@Mwfan1921 @homerdog
Not implying full pay kids aren’t worthy kids. Many objectively are. Just stating the fact that among many equally worthy kids, even for ostensibly need blind colleges, it’s an edge. Had to explain this hard life lesson to my kids.
For more on the topic, please see “2 REASONS WHY NEED BLIND ADMISSIONS IS A FARCE” from a well-known private counseling group. (www.■■■■■■■■(dot)com/the-ivy-coach-blog/college-admissions/2-reasons-need-blind-admissions-farce/)
Thanks, and back to the main topic of how things will change this fall.
^There’re need-blind schools and there’re NEED-BLIND schools. Some are more need-blind than others. Imperfect admission processes, whether by intention or by negligence, lead to less than perfect need-blind admissions.
It’s useful to remember that many people still attach a lot of prestige to a college being “need-blind”. This is why colleges fight so hard to maintain the conceit even though most of them are operating on pretty thin margins to do so.
This article by a math professor is really the best I have read on this topic. Sad but very true.
https://theiblblog.blogspot.com/2020/04/a-case-for-virtual-fall-term-2020-and.html?fbclid=IwAR0n8MrLE01KYkH-48hoJgxsLxGUHOFnQNWjA5tqb8mFZgKs29T8tUqbsNQ
FDA has not said ETA of a vaccine is Mar 2021, what is he even talking about?
I have said this before on various threads…the fastest a vaccine has ever been developed is 4 years, further we have been unable to make vaccines for many viruses.
Some people will have grave concerns about any vaccine that launches without adequate levels of safety data…and those concerns seems reasonable, even coming from normally pro-vaccine people. Then manufacturing enough doses and administering those for all US citizens could take months. Maybe years. And that’s if it’s a US company that develops the vaccine. If it’s a Chinese or EU company…we will wait in line.
What we know for sure…there will be disease breakouts on campuses, in K-12 schools, in workplaces, etc. If we have adequate testing, contact tracing, and quarantining, many things should be able to open up, albeit in a modified manner. If schools have students in-person, seems like some many are saying they will take a hybrid approach…hopefully this math teacher will have the option to teach virtually.
@Debbeut well, all of the universities who have claimed that they’ve got it figured out and are going back wouldn’t agree with that professor’s view I guess. Of course, the most conservative choice is to just be online and from home but (1) kids won’t be “at home” who have leases near campus since it seems like most of them are planning on going back and (2) it’s only early May and maybe testing/contact tracing will be figured out by mid-August.
Overall, I don’t disagree with his points, though, as it does seem unlikely that we won’t have virus breakouts and we have no idea how bad they will be. Each family has to make their own decisions. If they are uncomfortable with how their student’s college is planning to handle the fall, then they have the choices we’ve been discussing for 142 pages.
Students can stay home. Sounds like many schools might be offering classes online for those who don’t want to risk a return to campus. For those with an option to take a gap year or a semester/year off, they have that choice too. NO ONE likes these choices. We are all going to have to analyze the risks and rewards of the options given to us once the schools make plans.
Sounds like we will be getting more info on Friday with Bowdoin presenting some options to the students. Apparently none of them are “ideal”. Not surprised.
I strongly disagree with virtually every point made in this article. In fact, I have made a counterpoint to each of its individual points:
We may never have a vaccine. Getting one even in the next 18 months would easily be world-record time four a vaccine.
Actually, distance learning is causing a great deal of inequity in terms of education, and so would continuing it. The notion that we need a vaccine before going back to college (when it is not yet widespread) is rather unrealistic.
This was posted nearly three weeks ago, and testing has rapidly been ramping up by the day; many colleges, including my own (Amherst College) are expecting to have a sufficient amount of testing in fall to test everyone when they arrive and to do tests whenever anyone feels sick, and even random tests for good measure.
Although not anywhere near perfect, Remsedevir already appears likely to help somewhat with COVID-19. Even we can find another treatment to combine with it, it could be very effective in reducing the death and hospitalization rates.
Everybody else in the fall will be traveling too. Since coronavirus has spread everywhere at this point, if everybody else is going to work everyday in fall, college students won’t be contributing much to the spread through travel.
Students could be required to wear surgical masks, which many colleges (including Amherst) are acquiring in mass numbers as we type. They could require them to wear it on-campus, and only let them take off masks in their own rooms. With regard to dining halls, they could shift to a to-go model (Amherst has already done this for the 200 students staying on-campus). The HVACs system could not spread it across rooms; the droplets are too large to last that long/that distance.
Due to rapid testing, we won’t need to do 14-day quarantines anymore. We will have tests that will have a same-day turn around, so quarantine will only need to be for a few days.
The virus is already in every community. It will probably come to the universities (if not there already), but if both infected and healthy people wear masks, it could greatly inhibit the spread to a manageable level.
See point 5.
See point 7.
Place smaller classes in larger lecture halls to allow social distancing, and limit increase the number of lab sections to reduce size; place large classes on a virtual format (in these large lecture classes, students wouldn’t be missing much anywhere if they were still on-campus in that academic environment).
Coronaviruses (including COVID-19) are very weak, and can be killed by soap, hand sanitizer, and cleaning wipes. All students would have to do is wipe down their desks as they arrive and leave. They would also wear masks in the classroom (speaking with them may be a pain at first, but we’d adapt quickly).
See Point 12.
If everybody is wearing surgical masks, we will only need to isolate people who have been in close contact for a minimum of 15 minutes, and if they test negative, they can go back (maybe wait a day and test a second time for good measure). They are acquiring the means for testing, contact tracing, and isolating (through local hotels and such) as we speak.
Instructors can teach from home while sick. Amherst is already making teaching from home for the semester an option for any professor who feels uncomfortable returning to a classroom setting.
An education is necessary, and online education simply isn’t cutting it. Concerts and sporting events are NOT, by any means, necessary.
Why could on-campus parties not be banned? Why would that be illegal? I don’t know what colleges that have a large proportion of students living off-campus, but Amherst has virtually all students on-campus, and is going to require students to stay on-campus in fall and not leave. Colleges aren’t responsible for anything that happens off-campus.
At-risk students will have the option of taking time off or continuing their education remotely, in addition to the option of returning to campus, signing a liability waiver, and taking the risk. Also, as mentioned earlier, surgical masks inhibit spread too, and the death rate is still tremendously low (WAY LESS than 1%) for college-age students in at-risk groups.
Trust me, most students my age (even ones in at-risk groups) aren’t stressed about getting coronavirus; we are way more stressed about whether we will be able to return to school in fall. If we are forced to socially isolate ourselves for another semester, I guarantee you there will be a significant spike in college-age suicides that takes the lives of significantly more college-age students than coronavirus would.
I’m sure that next semester they would not be allowed to have strict attendance policies; even if they could, I’m sure virtually none of them would. If a student felt sick and a professor tried to penalize them, they could go to the class dean.
I’m sure they will be flexible with exam dates given the current situation of the virus.
Colleges will have the resources to manage outbreaks next semester and mitigate spread (testing, contact tracing, masks, PPE, quarantine facilities). Even assuming the hypothetical scenario here does happen, the financial cost from marketing would pale in comparison to how much they would lose from not reopening next semester. Also, in all likelihood, with the resources to manage outbreaks, just as much, if not more, students would probably die if they stayed at home than returned to campus (except in the case of at-risk students who stay at home if they isolate themselves; trust me, most non-immunocompromised college-age students will not be socially isolating themselves at home if forced to stay home next semester; they will probably be going out quite frequently).
Once again, the financial cost in the hypothetical scenario in point 22 would pale in comparison to how much they would lose by not reopening next semester.
Division I Sports programs that make major money through television rights/programs would probably take place in empty stadiums. Other sports will probably not be happening, especially in Division II and III schools.
The introductory / exploratory courses for various majors are often the same courses that other students use for general education. E.g. introduction to economics, psychology, or sociology, various history and literature courses, etc… Science and math can be exceptions, where the general education version is separate and easier compared to the version for those intending to major in the subject (but these majors are more likely to have long prerequisite sequences that must be started early, and the introductory courses for majors in those subjects can be large).
A college can be perfectly need-blind when considering and comparing individual applicants (this is what is typically meant when “need-blind” is used). But it can still be need-aware when making admission policy before the application season in deciding what applicant characteristics to weigh more or less. If it wants to alter the SES profile of its admit class it can alter the weighting of correlated characteristics like legacy, types of ECs, etc., and it can alter the admission process to increase or decrease the barriers that lower SES students face (e.g. CSS Noncustodial Profile screens out many FA needy students who have uncooperative divorced parents). Obviously, these are not perfect correlates to FA need, but when the college just wants the overall admission class to end up with a target FA need profile, it does not care (and expects) that there will be some individual exceptions to the FA need correlation to the correlated characteristics.
Something to consider: sitting in an indoor classroom for an hour has a similar risk profile to having a meal in an indoor restaurant, if (in each case) there is a contagious person also there. Even if the contagious person is more than six feet away, being in the same room for an hour gives plenty of time for the virus to circulate and give you a high enough dose to become infected.
Performing arts involving singing or wind instruments indoors could be even higher risk, due to more forceful breathing. So could indoor PE or athletic activity, even for activities that do not involve contact or close proximity.
@ucbalumnus The droplets that coronavirus spreads through are too large for it to spread to a person six feet away.
@ChemAM
Although I know students are anxious to get back to in person dorms/classes (my DS as much as any of them!), and although perhaps small LAC’s like Amherst would have an easier time than some bigger schools dealing with this, there becomes a point when it would seem quite unpalatable to go back. It’s hard to imagine constant mask wearing, wiping down everything before and after use, no dining halls, no parties, and attempts at social distancing as being worth the trouble, cost and risk. There is really no good answer but allowing more time will certainly increase the chance of a good treatment and vaccine. Remdesevir is given IV for the severely ill. It is not the same as something like tamiflu which can be taken orally at the first sign of the influenza virus. That would be a much better option of course. Just my opinion…
@Debbeut that is correct. I hope kids who are trying to make decisions about leave of absences will have enough info to make a good decision including the details of what life will really be like on campus.