Coronavirus

[clean]

To continue...
"California Gov. Gavin Newsom said at least 8,400 people have been monitored locally, but the number of test kits his state has received isn't enough. We have just 200 kits, and that's for not just the traditional diagnostic, but also surveillance. It's simply inadequate," Newsom said Thursday. "But no longer will that be the case. ... We have been assured of our capacity to significantly, exponentially increase the capacity to test.""

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/27/health/us-cases-coronavirus-community-transmission/index.html

[zyzzx]

From my understanding of all the news articles, everyone on the ship ended up getting tested, right?

I dont think so...

"Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said Monday that it might be difficult to test everyone aboard the ship.

Only 336 passengers had been tested as of Monday, according to the health ministry."

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/02/10/national/japan-test-all-passengers-diamond-princess-cruise-ship-coronavirus/#.Xll2U6hKjIU


The inability to test the passengers was linked to a shortage of the testing supplies. 

Recently California's Governor indicated that they had only 400 kits, if I remember the number.  That is a big part of the weakness in the response. It is hard to identify who has the illness, and it has taken some time to get the results back... it is not a quick test.

That was Feb. 10, which was ages ago... From more recent articles about the end of the quarantine, it sounds like people were not allowed to leave unless they tested negative. And everyone who got repatriated on a special flight would have also been tested. Looks like 23 people did slip the net (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/23/coronavirus-woman-on-diamond-princess-cruise-ship-tested-positive-after-disembarking), but that wouldn't be noteworthy unless they'd thought they'd tested everybody.

Dunno what's going on with the inability to do tests in the US, but other countries seem to have figured this out - South Korea is getting up to something like 10,000 per day.

[mythbuster]

So here's the thing about the "testing". Right now there is no universally agreed upon, validated, easily available commercial kit to test for this. Samples sent to the CDC have the viral genomes PCR amplified and sequenced! This is NOT something that the average community hospital has the ability or the expertise to do. Especially if your community hospital farms out their testing to Quest Diagnostics or the like. I'm amazed that the news hasn't brought up this fact- the virus is too new to have a reliable test developed for it yet!
    Most the testing being done right now in the US is for every other family of respiratory viruses. This is what my colleagues who are Clinical Micro directors at major hospitals are doing. It's a process of elimination. If you don't have flu/ RSV/adenovirus etc. and you have the appropriate symptoms, THEN we send your sample to the CDC. It's slow.
    In Asia they MAY be using some sort of SARS test as the closest thing- but that will have a huge error rate. I have colleagues who work in molecular diagnostics companies and have been to Chinese hospitals. Chinese hospitals have accumulated all the equipment for the molecular tests, but generally don't have anyone who knows how to run them. They are often showpieces. This is a BIG part of the reason why the numbers in China have been so wonky- we haven't all decided what "counts" as having Corona virus. The US numbers will be slow coming out, but will at least be more accurate.

[Hibush]

Thanks mythbuster for that update.

How many of the supplies and machines for testing are made in China, and therefore subject to the same supply shortage that is hitting other industries?

[no1capybara]

Thanks Mythbuster, for the info. It's already interesting to read this thread and see the information and thoughts change over the past month or so.

I spoke to a friend of mine Friday who is a large city health and safety director.  That city has gone through several public health alerts.  He said the main thing will be to try to slow the spread of the virus until they can get a vaccine developed which should be a year or so.

In the meantime I am waiting to hear if I get a major travel grant in April.  I will DIEEEEEEEEE if I get it and then they ban all Americans from entering the country or otherwise screw up the travel.

DIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEE I tell you.  The anxiety is driving me nuts!

[downer]

So on my Twitter feed, I saw a faculty member on the west coast (CA, not WA) who seems very woke, pronounce that they have taken the following steps as a result of the potential pandemic:
- I'm using Zoom to broadcast my lectures
- I'm no longer taking attendance
- I've cancelled sections
- I'm doing course evals early

I'm inspired to stay home and cancel all sorts of stuff. I'm just curious how grades will be assigned for students who do worse as a result of these changes.

I was under the impression that there was a Federal mandate to take attendance. Something to do with student funding.

[clean]

I was under the impression that there was a Federal mandate to take attendance. Something to do with student funding.

I do not take attendance in my classes. 
I do report those that have not attended by the 12th day, which is something related to student funding.  When I submit final grades, I am required to report the last date attended for those earning an F.  I use the last date of any work submitted/quizzes taken.  (I give frequent quizzes.  IF they attend, they get at least a 1, so a zero means that the student was not in attendance).

For what it is worth.

For the other... I would not take such actions unilaterally.  There is a requirement to meet your classes, and changing the format of a class to online is not something that I think a faculty member can do unilaterally.
There could be repercussions.  Students could complain that they are not able to learn and ask questions or whatever.  There are test issues I would think.  Grade appeals would be hard to defend with a unilateral change.  Faculty members could complain and administrators would find this hard to defend, I would think. 

[Hegemony]

"...changing the format of a class to online is not something that I think a faculty member can do unilaterally." Unilaterally meaning what?  Moving classes online is part of our disaster policy (we are in an earthquake zone). I moved mine online once when we were snowed in for a week and campus was closed.

I think it would be smarter for the university as a whole to set guidelines as to when it's time to move classes online, but I also think prudence is the better part of valor. Some professors are immune-compromised, some are undergoing treatment for cancer, some have severe asthma ... I don't think any of those should be compelled to endanger their lives when perfectly suitable alternatives exist. The West Coast has multiple cases of community transmission going on — it's going to get worse before it gets better.

[clean]

"...changing the format of a class to online is not something that I think a faculty member can do unilaterally." Unilaterally meaning what?  Moving classes online is part of our disaster policy (we are in an earthquake zone). I moved mine online once when we were snowed in for a week and campus was closed.

I think it would be smarter for the university as a whole to set guidelines as to when it's time to move classes online, but I also think prudence is the better part of valor. Some professors are immune-compromised, some are undergoing treatment for cancer, some have severe asthma ... I don't think any of those should be compelled to endanger their lives when perfectly suitable alternatives exist. The West Coast has multiple cases of community transmission going on — it's going to get worse before it gets better.

"Unilaterally meaning what?  Moving classes online is part of our disaster policy (we are in an earthquake zone). I moved mine online once when we were snowed in for a week and campus was closed." 
IF campus was closed, that would initiate the switch.  Faculty do not close the campus, administration does.  When we close for hurricanes, that is the signal to implement the switch.  It is not a professor deciding that "it is going to rain, so we will be online for the next 40 days".

"ome professors are immune-compromised, some are undergoing treatment for cancer, some have severe asthma I don't think any of those should be compelled to endanger their lives when perfectly suitable alternatives exist."
then they should notify their supervisor that they have an issue and seek permission to make the changes.  Even with the American Disabilities Act, your employer is not required to accept YOUR solution to the problem.  The employer must allow accommodations, but not just any accommodation is permitted, even under ADA.  The point is, IF you take unilateral action, then you are alone. That may be fine, but IF there are problems, you will be hanging out there ALONE ... as an example perhaps of what or how to do or NOT do something. 

Maybe I just feel that MY administration has taken too many lessons from the Chinese Government.  ... the one that arrests you and makes you apologize for doing the right thing, but which may be viewed as critical of the government or 'spreading rumors'.  It is best NOT to be on the front line before the firing squad.  It is best to be behind the administration, not in front of it. 

Im reminded that one should not do something that would not look good on the front page of the local paper.  Professor (not administration) cancelling classes (or not showing up to classes in person) would not be looked upon favorably by administration I dont think.  IF it were the correct thing to do, then the administration would initiate the action (like a snow day mentioned above). 

[Hegemony]

Well, I also moved online when I was stuck in another city for a week by a snowstorm after a conference. The rest of the university continued as usual.

In the present situation, I am head of a program, and I've let the profs teaching in my program know that I fully support them switching their classes to online, even if the university does not mandate it as a whole. In the case of one prof who is definitely immune-compromised, I have urged her to do it, and told her that I will meet up with her to help her get her materials online rapidly and smoothly. I also will be holding our regular department meeting online, by email — it's only 9 people, so that's simple enough.

[clean]

Well, I also moved online when I was stuck in another city for a week by a snowstorm after a conference. The rest of the university continued as usual.

That was appropriate.  However, you didnt go online for 'winter' because there is a danger of snow. It was not open ended.

I hope your decisions do not come back to haunt you.  As I believe I said earlier, if everything works out, then there is no problem.  IF one person complains, some actions would be hard to find support by administration (at least the administration I have at the salt mine that buys my services!) 

IF one program on campus 'went rogue' while others were still requiring classes to meet where and when scheduled, I suspect that would trigger the 'one person complains' situation and the department head of the 'rogue' department would have what in my vocabulary would be defined as "a coming to Jesus meeting" with a higher level administrator.

Good luck!

[Hegemony]

Clean, your place is much more micro-managing than ours.

[clean]

I hope you are right and all works out positively. 

I hope that the actions you are taking are well documented and supported by the policy.  For instance, while it is nice that you are supporting your ill coworkers, here, if someone has cancer and needs an accommodation for their schedule, they would need to file paperwork with HR first.  HR would then take the steps to inform the chair to make the required adjustments. It would not be appropriate for the chair to take these actions without the documentation going to HR first.  Otherwise, should someone else later claim that they deserve similar treatment, but did not get it, it opens the university to legal entanglements. 

[Hegemony]

Do you not have online courses as a regular part of your curriculum?  Some of our courses are online, some are face-to-face, and we certainly don't have to get permission, much less HR permission (!) to run one or the other. In fact I had set up six new online courses just before the whole coronavirus thing broke, and I certainly didn't need anyone's permission to do so, any more than I did when I set up last year's batch. We're on the quarter system, as well, so the new set doesn't start until the beginning of April — plenty of time to adjust if need be. And I see no issues with offering the online option to all our faculty. The university has been urging us to develop more and more online courses, giving us extra development funds to transfer courses online, and applauding if we do it.  It's win-win over here.

If you really have to jump through so many hoops just to offer an online course, your place is even more micro-managing than I had assumed.  Do they also require the agreement of higher administration and HR if you decide to run them on a Tuesday/Thursday schedule instead of MWF, or as a once-a-week seminar, or as a hybrid online/face-to-face course (we have those too, completely at the discretion of the department), or anything else outside of the normal lockstep? 

[clean]

Do you not have online courses as a regular part of your curriculum?  Some of our courses are online, some are face-to-face, and we certainly don't have to get permission, much less HR permission (!) to run one or the other. In fact I had set up six new online courses just before the whole coronavirus thing broke, and I certainly didn't need anyone's permission to do so, any more than I did when I set up last year's batch. We're on the quarter system, as well, so the new set doesn't start until the beginning of April — plenty of time to adjust if need be. And I see no issues with offering the online option to all our faculty. The university has been urging us to develop more and more online courses, giving us extra development funds to transfer courses online, and applauding if we do it.  It's win-win over here.

Yes we have online classes.  We also have a full semester, so if someone decided, of their own accord, that they would move a face to face class online as a response to CV19 I foresee problems for that faculty member.  Making changes at the start of the term is not a problem. However, this conversation was started because someone in California made such a decision, and not at the start of a quarter.  It also seems that you, an administrator, have made changes that are congruent with the university's mission and goals.  It seems that those changes were made at the usual time for such changes, and not in the middle of a quarter. If so, then that is not the same situation as that alluded to in CA.

Do we need permission to change to TR from MWF... well that is a bit of a trick question.  Our building management issues require that a certain percentage of classes be offered on MWF, and even before 930 am.  As long as the requirements are met, then no permission is required. However, if moving a class from MWF or after 930am  caused a department to go out of compliance, then there would be problems or approval by the higher ups.  (Administration has studied the formula funding requirements from the state that govern approval of new buildings, and as administration wants new buildings built, then deviations from their optimization formula plan ARE monitored!)