|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 1, 2020 7:36:59 GMT -6
It would appear that BSU plans some kind of reopening. The operational details are not clear. There is a BSU task force at work to advise the President. Of course that means either he has told the task force what he wants or is otherwise communicating it to the, or that the President will make the decision pretty much ignoring any task force preference, but take some of the things he likes that the task force recommends to heart and assert this was a decision with wide input.
There appear to be 3 basic choices. Online only, hybrid with a lot of online with campus open more or less as usual, or hybrid with class meetings drastically changed. All options probably will mean faculty and staff are cut and work load increased for everyone. Plans are being made at the Department level in light of a hiring freeze and requests from above how to handle a normal enrollment with fewer faculty.
Hybrid means some classes entirely on line and some classes part on line, for example lecture on line for 2 hours a week with class meetings for live interaction. Perhaps 3 sessions a week with 1/3 of the normal number of students.
The contingency of opening requires safety measures such as much increased cleaning, facilities created for quarantine, frequent testing, contact tracing and requiring masks and so on. To allow social distancing seems to me to mean classes must be covered with extra class sections assigned to faculty (little or no extra pay of course required) or extra class time required to spread out classes assigned to faculty.
Mitch in other statements seems to suggest he will in some ways wall off campus from the outside world, cut the time spent on campus by compressing the semester. That doesn't seem to be easily done and I don't see that part of BSU or IU plans, but we have not seen anything definite from anybody.
Tentative and vague measures without much scientific assurance of effectiveness. But safer than normal operation.
No discussion I can find addresses the additional risk to each other and the surrounding community of student population shopping, dining and drinking. Or of how safety measures can be taken in crowded off campus housing or for that matter on campus dorms with many crowded hallways and shared areas.
All the universities need to make a call before they really know as much as they need to. Like businesses everywhere they are anxious to resume operation in order to stay afloat.
Universities across the country are attempting to reassure students and encourage them to plan on enrolling in the Fall.
Currently about 40% of those admitted to universities have not produced their deposit and the usual deadline in May for doing so is being extended. Many are offering tuition reduction and tuition deferral to encourage student to commit to school
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on May 1, 2020 8:36:15 GMT -6
I'm a little disappointed in Mearns' indecision. He seems to want to lead by committee, which isn't actually leading at all.
Departments have been asked to provide outlines of budget cuts of 3, 5, 7.5, and 10 percent.
Budget projections fail when students are not on campus. The University needs them on campus, spending money in the dining halls, the book store, at the tech store, and the vending machines.
I expect a 10% cut across the board, which means people are going to lose jobs. Technology on campus is going to come to a standstill. And with the new incentive-based budget model being implemented on campus (which I don't fully understand, because its presentation has been full of vague, feel-good doublespeak), it is gonna get really ugly. The new model was supposed to start July 1, but I don't know if that's still happening. What I do know is that we're going to have to take a huge step backwards.
The days of universities overcharging students and overspending are done.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 1, 2020 9:01:29 GMT -6
I expect a 10% cut across the board, which means people are going to lose jobs. Technology on campus is going to come to a standstill. And with the new incentive-based budget model being implemented on campus (which I don't fully understand, because its presentation has been full of vague, feel-good doublespeak), it is gonna get really ugly. The new model was supposed to start July 1, but I don't know if that's still happening. What I do know is that we're going to have to take a huge step backwards. No doubt about it. Good catch on the incentive based budgeting.
The technology is going to be strained this year for sure. I would expect some expansion of budget in that area in the future to support even wider use of on line classes. It will be the no frills basics though that get the money. At the cost of on campus resources, and academic programs.
I really am worried about issues like cuts to lab courses in science where that is a factor that makes some of our science programs top notch as students get more hands on training and chance to work with faculty mentors. The idea that we train health care professionals without having experience is like training chefs with no kitchen. Hey just teach them recipes. Who needs practice?!
The big long term threat is that not only in the near term that the state budget for BSU is cut, but that long term we are found to be "so good" at saving money and using online classes that the cuts become permanent and we are relegated to third class goals, abandoning many of our ambitions to national status.
We could end up below where ISU is today and join them at a lower end quality level closer to the regional IU campus instead of being the strong second tier school in Indiana after IU and PU. When higher ed is cut, it won't be PU and IU whose mission changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on May 1, 2020 9:55:03 GMT -6
What I do know is that we're going to have to take a huge step backwards. The days of universities overcharging students and overspending are done.
Certainly this virus mess isn't anything any sane person would want to happen. However, notice that your last two sentences are contradictory to a certain extent. There is a lot of bloat in higher education these days due to all the subsidized borrowing going on. A silver lining to this ugly dark cloud could be getting universities back to performing their real mission in a much more efficient and cost effective way. I hammer on BSU football because, after all, this is a BSU sports website, but that is only a small portion of a larger issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2020 9:55:24 GMT -6
I love the new buzzword “contact tracing”. The Chinese have changed the way we live our lives in the same vein that the radical Muslims changed the way we travel.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on May 1, 2020 9:57:33 GMT -6
On a practical level, testing and the use of the information gained from testing is going to be the key factor for universities and society in general. |
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on May 1, 2020 10:18:45 GMT -6
And Mearns just released another video that has no news, just feel-good BS.
Please stop telling us that you "appreciate" all we're doing. It rings hollow, since we've had to deal with cutbacks, minimal raises, and zero support. In the meantime, Mearns got almost double the percentage raise everyone else got, plus a 60K bonus.
I actually might prefer Gora. At least she was direct about issues, not just giving lip service. Mearns is looking like a politician.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 1, 2020 10:34:47 GMT -6
I love the new buzzword “contact tracing”. The Chinese have changed the way we live our lives in the same vein that the radical Muslims changed the way we travel. You are giving China too much a leading role. Although Chinese government did fail to respond and deserves blame there, I can't blame the first victims in China very much.
I agree it is true that the Chinese government did not react and impose enough social distancing or contact tracing, and they could have saved the world from this if they had. But that is all about the Chinese New year and unwillingness to stop travel. Had our government discovered an initial outbreak just before Thanksgiving or Christmas or the 4th of July and ignored it I wouldn't blame the USA alone for a resulting pandemic.
This was case not only requiring China to act but for the world's governments to cooperate and act in concert at an early date. Italy, England, and the USA all failed on this count with near disaster level consequence for themselves, but also the rest of the world as their citizens were free to travel.
It is that ignorance and knowing failure of government (and private sector I suppose) both in China and on the part of every other nation where the virus got an early foothold and was ignored too long, a general failure of to act early and continuing tendency to ignore science, that has been the biggest factor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on May 1, 2020 10:56:04 GMT -6
It is nearly impossible to contain a virus, especially in a free country like the US. In China? Easier to take draconian steps to slow the spread, but unless you incinerate everyone that carries it, it'll still spread eventually. The problem is the conditions in which it appeared in the first place. The wet markets in China are disgusting, and are a health hazard that should be closed permanently.
As for our reaction time, look at all the viruses in the past 20-30 years that turned out to be almost nothing. Bird flu, swine flu, Zika, Ebola, MERS, SARS... Why would we have had reason to believe this one would be any different? Seasonal flu has been more deadly than most of those outbreaks. We had no reason to believe this would be worse. The people ringing alarm bells were the same ones who panicked about the previous viruses, so the public has become jaded and skeptical of "apocalypse by virus". Cry wolf too many times and no-one believes you.
Hell, H1N1 in 2009-10 may have killed over a half-million people worldwide. Where was the panic then? I had to look it up because I didn't even remember it being a big deal. We're halfway to that number, and look at what's happened.
Open it up. Let people live their lives. Take precautions if you feel you need to. Washing hands is ALWAYS a good idea, regardless of pandemics.
Life is a series of rolls of the dice. You can't get a Yahtzee if the dice stay in the cup!
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 1, 2020 12:17:41 GMT -6
This virus is much more deadly. The H1N1 killed 13,000 in 13 months and two waves. Between 150K and 500K worldwide.
This virus has killed over 60K here in a few months first wave. Had we not acted as severely as we did you saw the projections that existed. Conservatively we might have had more deaths in this country in the first wave during 5 months than that disease had worldwide in over a year.
That difference calls for major difference in how we react.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 1, 2020 12:19:42 GMT -6
It is nearly impossible to contain a virus, especially in a free country like the US. In China? Easier to take draconian steps to slow the spread, but unless you incinerate everyone that carries it, it'll still spread eventually. That is not true if we have bought time to develop treatment and vaccine and slow the spread, and that is undeniably true. We will not see the number of infections in this country or the number of deaths we might have seen.
At the least we will see the spread of the virus to be less and the impact far less than following your prescription to live our lives and ignore it.
As for our reaction time, look at all the viruses in the past 20-30 years that turned out to be almost nothing. Bird flu, swine flu, Zika, Ebola, MERS, SARS... Why would we have had reason to believe this one would be any different? We knew early on that this virus was more deadly.
Yours is a lame argument justifying the US government response. China arguably had some excuse,they were first to confront it. Had we simply done what was in our control, the world might have delayed and suffered, but then the travel ban and time gained would have protected us substantially. As it was we squandered the opportunity.
Had Italy and Britain and others reacted quickly the mitigation would have benefited the rest of the world including the USA. Less rapid gain and fewer deaths world wide.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 1, 2020 12:22:09 GMT -6
Open it up. Let people live their lives. Your belief that the vulnerable can protect themselves if society at large does not also sacrifice is specious. And you underestimate the issues for those who are not vulnerable.
1. The vulnerable cannot shelter in place until a vaccine is in place since so many simply cannot support themselves over that extended period and many live in extended families and must risk exposure due to disease unrelated to the virus.  Going out to drugstores, groceries, medical providers would be a much more dangerous dance with death if the level of infection was greater than it is now which it certain will be, and on top of that others were" living their life" not practicing social distancing.
2. You also ignore the irreparable harm such a policy has if health care is overwhelmed by failure to flatten the curve.  In Italy and elsewhere in the world as well as in New York City where that happened,  deaths multiplied as people did not go to the hospital. 
In New York the number of deaths during this pandemic was far greater than the "official"  virus relate deaths. This either means the disease is actually MORE deadly than we realize or that people could or would not risk going to the hospital.  Those deaths would include many treatable conditions where critical care is unavailable because the great number of case among the "nonvulnerable" who may not die but may need hospital care. 
|
|
|
|
Post by CallingBS on May 1, 2020 14:40:24 GMT -6
And Mearns just released another video that has no news, just feel-good BS. Please stop telling us that you "appreciate" all we're doing. It rings hollow, since we've had to deal with cutbacks, minimal raises, and zero support. In the meantime, Mearns got almost double the percentage raise everyone else got, plus a 60K bonus. I actually might prefer Gora. At least she was direct about issues, not just giving lip service. Mearns is looking like a politician. You sensed all of that because Mearns is nothing more than a BS-spewing politician. And he doesn't really lead by committee - that's just the image he works very hard to maintain. Yeah, it sounds crazy to say it, but Gora was considerably better (in spite of the toxic culture she created and the financial scandals late in her tenure). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2020 16:32:27 GMT -6
It is important to remember the stay-at-home orders were put in place to flatten the curve and to limit the demand on our healthcare capacity. Based on the results so far (and the latest IHME model), this goal has been accomplished. The stay-at-home orders were NOT put in place to eliminate the virus or to insure there would be no future cases and deaths.
Statistics are now becoming skewed because of the unchecked ability to assign virus labels to deaths and hospitalizations for $$ gain and convenience.
A Free Society means that those uncomfortable with working may choose to continue not to do so. A Free Society also means that those wanting to work should not be arbitrarily prevented by the government from doing so.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 1, 2020 17:25:35 GMT -6
So far so good.
But many states are reopening before the curve has flattened.
Mitigation was never meant to have the limited goal you state. Never absolute. It is a method to control rate of infection. Purpose was control not elimination. This now is only controlled with a fairly high level of mitigation effort.
We should be able to reopen but not fully sooner than expected slightly because we have done well. Less mitigation is possible soon, not abandoning it. Look at the assumptions behind the projections.
|
|
