School in the 2020-2021 Academic Year & Coronavirus (Part 1)

Colby's dashboard is more mandatory disclosure than useful information. The complete lack of details on methods isn't good, but providing metrics with no sense of timing will eventually backfire if there is an outbreak.

My interpretation is that the dashboard includes all tests done by the school for a long period of time, likely since they started testing for the virus. It shows 2 Faculty/Staff infections and 3 for students. It also shows the current status as 2 recovered and 3 in isolation. My guess is that the 2 Faculty/Staff were infected over the past 5 months and have recovered, and the students are recent arrivals to campus.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Colby dashboard expands soon. The parents and students are going to demand more transparency.

@homerdog, Some info from a letter to Colby parents.

Colby administered 6,400 tests. 1,700 pre-arrival and 4,700 on campus. Their positivity rate is .08%. The dashboard includes only tests administered on campus, not pre-arrival testing. The two employees who tested positive have both tested negative two times since the positive test. Three students tested positive upon arrival to campus.

So it seems to me that they may have some false positives? They did not indicate how many other students needed to be quarantined due to exposure to these three students, but did say these students (who are all asymptomatic) had not been in contact with each other, so no campus spread at this time.

Tents have already popped up at Wesleyan; students started arriving yesterday. Self-administered nasal cavity testing will be staggered over a two week period and required twice weekly thereafter. Classes officially start on August 31:
http://newsletter.blogs.wesleyan.edu/2020/08/24/wesleyan-takes-safety-measures-as-students-arrive-on-campus/

I thought the point of lowering the rate of infection was to limit the spread of infection and the number of deaths while the vaccines are developed. Easing restrictions is a nice side benefit, if the rate of infection can be kept low. Deciding what to ease and when is not going to be much easier for college administrations (or governments) than deciding how restrictive to be was in the first place.

@eyevee Colby parents are receiving more detailed information than on the dashboard. I am not sure if the emails that we receive are also posted on the schools website somewhere, but suspect that they are.

@wisteria100 , I’m replying to your post #14855. Hamilton started classes yesterday. My son moved in last week. According to their dashboard, they’ve administered 2936 tests to students with 0 positive. They’ve also administered 1068 tests to faculty/staff with 0 positive. Students are tested twice a week. Classes are a mix of F2F, hybrid and remote. My son has three F2F and one remote class.

D’s report from the first day of classes.

  • One prof out of 4 had some tech challenges.
  • classrooms and buildings very de-densified (Seats removed or if auditorium style seating, zip tied so unusable)
  • profs behind plexiglass and wearing face shields.
  • no mask, no entry so 100% mask compliance
  • food trucks and restaurants taking meal swipes to help reduce food lines wait times.

D is thrilled to be back and said she’s so used to mask wearing and distancing from work this summer that it feels normal.

Northeastern undergrads do not move into dorms until 8/29 - 9/7 and start class 9/9. Does anyone know who NE has been testing thus far? I did see that law school classes started yesterday. Still with such a large # of tests in the last week, I was wondering who they are testing.

Big outbreaks at Mizzou and Missouri State. 160+ and 210+ respectively.

@2ndthreekids I believe certain co-op students were living on campus this summer, so staff and these students probably make up the bulk of the testing. Additionally, I know of at least one student athlete (not yet living on campus) who NU tested 2X this week after known exposure to Covid.

Let’s put these numbers in perspective: 159 at Mizzou is 0.5% of students, looks like cases on the decline: https://renewal.missouri.edu/student-cases/

Missouri State looks like they are having 20 or so cases per day, with 141 cases in last week, about 0.6% of students, looks like cases are on the rise. https://www.missouristate.edu/Coronavirus/confirmed-cases.htm

I don’t know the levels of testing and contact tracing happening at either place, but these numbers don’t look overly concerning if the rest of the schools’ practices are following CDC guidelines.

Alabama is going to be a mess, much worse than UNC. My D has a friend there - freshman. Her and her ‘bubble’ roommates were all sick on Sunday. Better the next day - but refuse to be tested because they don’t want to go to the quarantine dorm. D called out her friend forcefully, but friend doesn’t want to be outcast by ‘diming out’ the group (peer pressure at its finest). We are guessing she is probably out and about today - and showering in the community bathroom, etc…

The 533 cases reported are probably 10x that much. It will be a case study in herd immunity I guess - doesn’t sound like the university is giving into the virus. No surveillance testing. Every college that opens without mandatory surveillance testing of the entire population will have large outbreaks - that is my prediction.

This is exactly why testing must be mandatory. The friend’s response is regrettable but completely predictable.

I thought you are most contagious before you show symptoms. If if those girls at Bama were sick on Sunday, they likely spread it the most the days before. Not to say that they should not be in isolation, but they should be letting those whom they were around previous to Sunday know . Also were they masked except with each other? remember the hair stylists that wore masks and did not spread it.

That is the biggest issue with this virus. Is catching it before symptoms occur, or the asymptomatic. So that is why its about masks.

The other thing is that so far i have not seen a single report from any school of anyone being hospitalized.

Opening with mandatory testing is good, but it provides snapshots of a virus that is a full-length movie that will play out over and over again this fall.

What seems to be missing in the discussion is the short and possible long-term effects of having the virus. A friend has a child who has contracted the virus at ECU. At first, it seemed to be not much…loss of smell. The next day, things seemed better. Fast forward to this morning, where they awoke with blue lips, no smell, no taste, and feeling pretty washed out. There are others with positive tests who are in the same house, and they are all ebbing and flowing with random symptoms and pains. The feedback from the parents today is that they are beginning to appreciate that they were far too cavalier in their beliefs about the virus, and will be more respectful of infecting others (and possibly themselves) in the future. Dare I say, there is even a bit of fear creeping in that things may get worse.

0.5% of student body being active cases, comes to about 35 new daily cases per 100K (assuming active disease lasts 14 days). That’s a very concerning number, one that can get out of hand very quickly.

Don’t confuse positive testing rate with % of active cases. If 0.5% of the US currently had Covid, the situation would be significantly worse than it has ever been.

@wisteria100 Correct, Hamilton has had 0 positives at this point (approximately 3,000 student tests and 1,000 employee tests).

Copying and pasting an article from the Chronicle of Higher Education. Hope this is ok, it’s a good read:

Colleges Lost the Moral Authority to Blame Students
Institutions have always profited off risky social behavior. Complaints now ring hollow.
By Holden Thorp
AUGUST 24, 2020

It always starts with Harvard. In July, when the esteemed university wisely announced that it would move all classes online for the fall semester to limit the spread of Covid-19, President Trump lashed out: “I think it’s an easy way out,” he said, “and I think they ought to be ashamed of themselves.”

Harvard didn’t care. But Trump’s comments reverberated through red America, and soon thereafter, public and private universities in red states started announcing plans for their students to return.

Those campus administrators were in a tough spot. After my years in administration at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington University in St. Louis (one red-state public, one red-state private), I know how conflicted they were. And the timing didn’t help. In June, the pandemic seemed to be subsiding in the United States. But it came roaring back later in the summer, when a number of colleges were already far down the road toward reopening for in-person instruction.

Colleges may want to blame student partying for not allowing them to reopen successfully, but they have forfeited the moral authority to do so.
I couldn’t be more sympathetic to these administrators. The students said they wanted their campuses reopened. The faculty was cautious. The college towns initially wanted everyone to return to drive the economy, but then pulled back. Republican-appointed trustees and titans of industry were insistent that the universities reopen. Blue-state institutions gradually started announcing a virtual semester. The Ivy League members all bailed, except for Cornell. Trump tweeted incessantly that schools and colleges needed to reopen, and then started insisting on resuming college football, of all things. For the red-state football colleges, there was no way out — the lifeblood of these institutions flows through the gridiron. Among some of us veteran administrators, this upheaval is known as “being put in the blender.”

The red-state university leaders did the only thing they could do — they put plans together to open their campuses and then pushed the start button. While there was plenty of evidence that this was unlikely to work, it’s hard to fault them. In some states, like Georgia and North Carolina, the governing boards of the university systems gave them no choice but to open. In the end, the only way to convince everyone that a normal fall semester was impossible was to try to have one.

Now we know the answer. Some red-state campuses opened for business only to find that their plans unraveled just a week into the semester, as Covid-19 spread among students. Just like many offices, cruise ships, and Major League Baseball, you can make a workplace safe, but you can’t regulate what goes on outside it. When people are practicing social distancing and wearing masks, the virus doesn’t spread as easily. But when someone leaves this bubble, becomes infected, and then re-enters the bubble, look out. It’s a safe bet now that most colleges will be online in a few weeks, although a few places with a lot of resources for testing or in regions with low levels of outbreak could make it to Thanksgiving.

Although the colleges that reopened made efforts to make their campuses safer, they lamented that they could not stop the viral spread that originated in fraternities and sororities and from other forms of socializing. As campuses shut down, that has led to an awkward situation. Isn’t social culture part of the experience that colleges celebrate (and sell)? Doesn’t that make blaming the students ring hollow?

Colleges have a complicated relationship with student partying. They try to stop it when it gets out of hand, but they embrace it when it’s to their advantage. Every college fund raiser, including me, has accepted a gift after being regaled by a donor with nostalgic memories about epic parties at a frat house or dorm. We all may tangle with Greek life when confronting its racism, guns, gambling, sexual violence, and drugs, but it’s the college president who grabs a pledge form and gets on a plane when a former partyer strikes it rich later on. (UNC-Chapel Hill even has endowed chairs named after fraternities and sororities.)

The pandemic reveals the costs of failing to reckon with that paradox. Colleges may want to blame student partying for not allowing them to reopen successfully, but they have forfeited the moral authority to do so.

When Chapel Hill does well in basketball’s Final Four, there are always big parties with bonfires along the college strip on Franklin Street. In 2009, the head of the UNC Burn Center and I did a video warning of the dangers of bonfires. I was new to my role as chancellor, so I thought this was a good idea. Instead, it stoked even more bonfires. When UNC won the NCAA tournament the following Monday night, thousands of people gathered on Franklin Street, celebrating as their team cut down the nets in Detroit. Many were drunk and stoned and jumping into fires. We printed thousands of copies of a photograph of the crowd — complete with the fires — and sent them to our alumni and prospective students. We were saying to them: Look at the great experience our students are having!

How can colleges now blame students in an intellectually honest way for risky behaviors during a pandemic? If the plan is to suddenly teach them that their behavior must change, we’re starting from square one.

The system is held in place by a vicious cycle: The partying and other destructive social behaviors go on at a moderate level. When they get out of hand, the president expresses shock and outrage. That mollifies everyone long enough to get back to business. Among the critiques I received was that I wasn’t convincing enough when showing my disapproval. But it’s hard to be shocked or outraged at something you fully expect.

There is one big difference now. Most university scandals (we used to call them “matters”) break out on one campus at a time, even though the underlying causes are universal. But Covid-19 is truly a systemic crisis. Every college is now confronting the problems arising from the synergistic relationship between “bad” student behavior and the financial welfare of the institution. Even the colleges that are conducting all classes online now will have to confront this when planning for spring and beyond, depending on how vaccination and other aspects of the pandemic play out. Leaving everything as it is and asking students to behave differently is not going to work — and that’s not students’ fault. Those of us who have had the opportunity to break the cycle of partying, shock, and outrage haven’t done so.

Why not choose now as a time to start explaining what college really is? Sure, there are heavy partyers, and there are nerds who end up in the brochures wearing lab coats or sitting in the library. But there are lots of great students of all descriptions, and the current rhetoric glosses over the complicated reality: Most college students don’t raise hell at the frat house, don’t pay full tuition, don’t live on campus, and haven’t been living with their parents during the pandemic. Singling out the partyers just sustains a false and outdated image of how a college works.

Despite the current chorus of curmudgeons, residential education is not going anywhere. The MOOC fiasco proved that. Yes, some didactic material can be delivered online. But walking the hallowed ground of the campus, talking in the dorms until late at night, and — yes — socializing are indispensable parts of college. They should be treated as such rather than swept under the rug until the next crisis comes.

Kudos to this LAC for balancing caution with concern for students’ mental health.

I’m keeping an eye on Williams since my D deferred to next fall. They are requiring 2 on-campus negative tests before students can leave their rooms for anything other than picking up meals once a day, going to the bathroom, or going to get their second test. They estimate a minimum of 5-7 days of quarantine. Everyone is in singles, which tend to be tiny for first-years. While I like that their strict plan seems likely to contain spread, I am concerned that they aren’t focusing enough on isolation and mental health, just giving generic suggestions like bring games and stay connected to family and friends with technology.

Good article. Bottom line: If Purdue fails, all big schools will fail. This is b/c they’ve perhaps invested the most planning and resources in re-opening.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/will-purdue-last-university-restarts-in-person-amid-pandemic/2020/08/24/36f2b540-e60e-11ea-97e0-94d2e46e759b_story.html