College this fall--parents' perspective

[Caracal]

Right now at this precise moment, when we have lots of cases, and don't have any systems set up to figure out how many and where they are, you can't have schools reopen or really do much safely. But that's the point, none of this is sustainable. You have to get things down to a level where you can manage risks. But managing risks will mean having to deal with them too. That's why I find this so confusing "If a kid has a transmission rate that is 1/10 of the adult transmission rate, but has 10x as many interactions in a day, then it's no help." No help to what? These are imaginary numbers but that would mean that children going to school posed less risk than me having three people over to my house for dinner. That would be pretty important to know if you were trying to make decisions on what to allow in a month.

Only if you're planning to have 3 people for dinner 5 days a week until a vaccine is found.

Or go into an office and have contact with three people.

[pgher]

Two perspectives: community college and Ivy League. Best guess right now is that Kid 1's classes will go forward, as they are mostly upper-level, smaller classes (as opposed to massive lectures).

[spork]

Two perspectives: community college and Ivy League. Best guess right now is that Kid 1's classes will go forward, as they are mostly upper-level, smaller classes (as opposed to massive lectures).

I've already commented on Paxson's editorial on another thread, but I'll do so again here: it's surprisingly dumb.

A much more astute analysis: https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2020/04/27/some-parents-wont-pay-or-are-unsure-about-children-enrolling-online.

[Caracal]

Two perspectives: community college and Ivy League. Best guess right now is that Kid 1's classes will go forward, as they are mostly upper-level, smaller classes (as opposed to massive lectures).

I've already commented on Paxson's editorial on another thread, but I'll do so again here: it's surprisingly dumb.

A much more astute analysis: https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2020/04/27/some-parents-wont-pay-or-are-unsure-about-children-enrolling-online.

Care to elaborate, or is this just an insult forum at this point? I saw what you wrote on the other thread and it wasn't particularly enlightening either. I think one of the things things that sometimes gets exposed by this crisis is just a lack of imagination. It was obviously hard to imagine what is happening now would happen, but right now I see a lot of people having a hard time imagining modified futures. It is easier to just imagine no future, either for universities or the world in general. The advocates of it imagine themselves as hardened realists, but it strikes me as mostly a form of paralyzation. What kind of long term adaptations are possible? Likely? How effective will they be? I'm not sure, but given the state of flux things are in, these kinds of confident predictions about what is and isn't possible strike me as naive, in a strange sort of way.

[Caracal]

I think it is very unlikely the vast majority of K-12 schools won't be open in the fall. Based on what we know, which isn't enough, it appears that unlike flu, kids probably aren't a big driver of COVID. They can get it, they can transmit it, but adults gathering together seems to be a much greater risk than kids doing the same.

Again, I have to ask what you are reading/watching/discussing because even Fox News is not saying this message as a general rule.

I'm reading the news Poly and I follow epidemiologists and others who have argued this.

Which news?

Which epidemiologists and do they actually know what they're doing or are they just "others who have argued this"?  Arguing something is not the same as actually being a scientist in the relevant area with enough of the detailed knowledge to make good decisions.  One of my "favorite" recent examples was a model that assumed kids don't transmit and then drew conclusions on the probable effect on reopening the schools based on that assumption.

The concern everywhere I've seen that has real scientists involved is indeed that little kids spread everything, even if they themselves aren't all that sick.  It's a lovely thought that somehow people with the worst hygiene habits are somehow not going to be spreading a highly contagious disease, but that's not a science thought based on everything we know about other viruses and kids.

My employer is a science institution that includes real scientists whose bread and butter is exactly disease modeling for spreading and predicting outbreaks along with other scientists who do vaccines and other biological aspects.  Our daily all-hands updates are likely much better sources of scientific information regarding disease-spread models and likely outcomes than whatever filtered-by-filtered-by-filtered headlines you're reading.

Epidemiology isn't my specialty, but my colleagues who are (close enough colleagues that I can call them up and say, "Hey, it's Polly.  What's the real scoop on ...?) are much more trustworthy sources than your interpretation from "news" sources that you didn't even bother to name so we could judge their credibility.

https://twitter.com/mugecevik/status/1257392347010215947

Just putting this update here. I'd sort of like to imagine this could be a reminder that sometimes when you make categorical claims based on the belief that everyone else is dumber and less savvy than you, you can look kind of like a fool, but alas, I assume we'll just get a lot of text.

[Katrina Gulliver]

Are colleges allowing accepted students to all defer if they want? Where I teach they are still not sure if the academic year will have a delayed start.

[marshwiggle]

Are colleges allowing accepted students to all defer if they want? Where I teach they are still not sure if the academic year will have a delayed start.

Unless "delayed" could be for several months, it's kind of pointless. From any estimates I've heard, a vaccine is still a year (at least) away (we won't talk about producing and distributing millions of doses), and herd immunity would take a similar time without following Sweden, so even a few weeks delay would be very disruptive but have no obvious benefit.