What would be a reasonable approach to classroom teaching in the fall?

[the_geneticist]

We finally got some clear information about plans for Fall!  I'm surprised that it happened well in advance, but I think the admin must have realized that if they don't provide answers, then we might lose students.

Do instructors have to wear masks indoors? Yes
Do students have to wear masks indoors? Yes
Can instructors tell students to wear masks?  Yes, but we don't have to.
    ^
     |
This could lead to problems.  On the one hand, I don't want to be personally responsible for student mask compliance in my classes, but I also don't want outbreaks linked to lax mask enforcement. 

I'll try the: "Aren't you happy to be back on campus?  Being in person is great!  If you want to continue to have in person labs, then we all have to do our part and wear our masks".
If that doesn't work: "If you don't wear a mask, then you will leave this class."

[Caracal]

We finally got some clear information about plans for Fall!  I'm surprised that it happened well in advance, but I think the admin must have realized that if they don't provide answers, then we might lose students.

Do instructors have to wear masks indoors? Yes
Do students have to wear masks indoors? Yes
Can instructors tell students to wear masks?  Yes, but we don't have to.
    ^
     |
This could lead to problems.  On the one hand, I don't want to be personally responsible for student mask compliance in my classes, but I also don't want outbreaks linked to lax mask enforcement. 

I'll try the: "Aren't you happy to be back on campus?  Being in person is great!  If you want to continue to have in person labs, then we all have to do our part and wear our masks".
If that doesn't work: "If you don't wear a mask, then you will leave this class."

I really haven't had any problems. This is the second week of class and I noticed a student with his mask down for the first time today. I think he might have just taken a drink of water and forgot to pull it back up, when I asked him to put it back up he did it right away. That's the only time I've needed to say anything, thus far.

[Hibush]

On the one hand, I don't want to be personally responsible for student mask compliance in my classes, but I also don't want outbreaks linked to lax mask enforcement. 

I'll try the: "Aren't you happy to be back on campus?  Being in person is great!  If you want to continue to have in person labs, then we all have to do our part and wear our masks".
If that doesn't work: "If you don't wear a mask, then you will leave this class."

My school is having some success with the message that the in-person classes we all crave is a privilege made possible only by everyone being very careful. Vaccines and masks are a must. The fact that the perspective gets reinforced a lot is clearly helpful--it changes the tone a lot and makes the individual responsibility to the common goal clear.

[the_geneticist]

We just got a rather vague message from upper admin saying "please get vaccinated/submit your proof of vaccination IMMEDIATELY" or else we can't go to "normal operations".

Not sure what "normal" they are referring to since we are STILL IN A PANDEMIC.  But if I had money to spare, I'd bet that we have to go back to all online teaching.  The question is when they will make that decision.

[Caracal]

We just got a rather vague message from upper admin saying "please get vaccinated/submit your proof of vaccination IMMEDIATELY" or else we can't go to "normal operations".

Not sure what "normal" they are referring to since we are STILL IN A PANDEMIC.  But if I had money to spare, I'd bet that we have to go back to all online teaching.  The question is when they will make that decision.

I don't have a crystal ball or any particular desire to place bets, and obviously local situations matter, but I've seen this kind of reasoning a lot and it doesn't really make that much sense to me.

Normal is too much to ask for, but what vaccinations really do is make it very unlikely that people are going to end up in the hospital or dead. If you can get the vast majority of students, faculty and staff vaccinated Covid is mostly just an annoyance. Of course provisions need to be made for people who are immuno-compromised or at high risk for other reasons, but it fundamentally changes things if you can expect to avoid any serious outcomes.

I also don't really understand what the endgame is if we just keep going back to online teaching. Covid will gradually become less of an issue as everyone either gets vaccinated or infected, but when will it completely fade into the background? Next semester? Seems unlikely. Next fall? Maybe, but who knows. Are the costs of constantly switching back to online worth it when we have really good ways to reduce the harms from Covid? What level of risk is acceptable? Just saying we are in a pandemic isn't an answer to these questions.

[the_geneticist]

We just got a rather vague message from upper admin saying "please get vaccinated/submit your proof of vaccination IMMEDIATELY" or else we can't go to "normal operations".

Not sure what "normal" they are referring to since we are STILL IN A PANDEMIC.  But if I had money to spare, I'd bet that we have to go back to all online teaching.  The question is when they will make that decision.

I don't have a crystal ball or any particular desire to place bets, and obviously local situations matter, but I've seen this kind of reasoning a lot and it doesn't really make that much sense to me.

Normal is too much to ask for, but what vaccinations really do is make it very unlikely that people are going to end up in the hospital or dead. If you can get the vast majority of students, faculty and staff vaccinated Covid is mostly just an annoyance. Of course provisions need to be made for people who are immuno-compromised or at high risk for other reasons, but it fundamentally changes things if you can expect to avoid any serious outcomes.

I also don't really understand what the endgame is if we just keep going back to online teaching. Covid will gradually become less of an issue as everyone either gets vaccinated or infected, but when will it completely fade into the background? Next semester? Seems unlikely. Next fall? Maybe, but who knows. Are the costs of constantly switching back to online worth it when we have really good ways to reduce the harms from Covid? What level of risk is acceptable? Just saying we are in a pandemic isn't an answer to these questions.

The highest of higher admin folks set 90% vaccination rate or higher as acceptable to return to mostly in-person teaching.  We are not anywhere near that level, even though the state has an overall very high vaccine compliance rate.  The undergraduate student numbers are really close.  It's the faculty, staff, and other employees that are not nearly high enough. 

[Anon1787]

The highest of higher admin folks set 90% vaccination rate or higher as acceptable to return to mostly in-person teaching.  We are not anywhere near that level, even though the state has an overall very high vaccine compliance rate.  The undergraduate student numbers are really close.  It's the faculty, staff, and other employees that are not nearly high enough. 

That's odd since faculty and staff are presumably older and benefit the most from being vaccinated. Or perhaps they don't want to go back to in-person teaching?

[Caracal]

The highest of higher admin folks set 90% vaccination rate or higher as acceptable to return to mostly in-person teaching.  We are not anywhere near that level, even though the state has an overall very high vaccine compliance rate.  The undergraduate student numbers are really close.  It's the faculty, staff, and other employees that are not nearly high enough. 

That's odd since faculty and staff are presumably older and benefit the most from being vaccinated. Or perhaps they don't want to go back to in-person teaching?

I'd guess it is mostly staff who aren't, which is its own issue with pay, benefits, social class and lots of other things.

[Caracal]

We just got a rather vague message from upper admin saying "please get vaccinated/submit your proof of vaccination IMMEDIATELY" or else we can't go to "normal operations".

Not sure what "normal" they are referring to since we are STILL IN A PANDEMIC.  But if I had money to spare, I'd bet that we have to go back to all online teaching.  The question is when they will make that decision.

I don't have a crystal ball or any particular desire to place bets, and obviously local situations matter, but I've seen this kind of reasoning a lot and it doesn't really make that much sense to me.

Normal is too much to ask for, but what vaccinations really do is make it very unlikely that people are going to end up in the hospital or dead. If you can get the vast majority of students, faculty and staff vaccinated Covid is mostly just an annoyance. Of course provisions need to be made for people who are immuno-compromised or at high risk for other reasons, but it fundamentally changes things if you can expect to avoid any serious outcomes.

I also don't really understand what the endgame is if we just keep going back to online teaching. Covid will gradually become less of an issue as everyone either gets vaccinated or infected, but when will it completely fade into the background? Next semester? Seems unlikely. Next fall? Maybe, but who knows. Are the costs of constantly switching back to online worth it when we have really good ways to reduce the harms from Covid? What level of risk is acceptable? Just saying we are in a pandemic isn't an answer to these questions.

The highest of higher admin folks set 90% vaccination rate or higher as acceptable to return to mostly in-person teaching.  We are not anywhere near that level, even though the state has an overall very high vaccine compliance rate.  The undergraduate student numbers are really close.  It's the faculty, staff, and other employees that are not nearly high enough.

It seems very odd to target that high a number without a vaccine requirement.

[the_geneticist]

We just got a rather vague message from upper admin saying "please get vaccinated/submit your proof of vaccination IMMEDIATELY" or else we can't go to "normal operations".

Not sure what "normal" they are referring to since we are STILL IN A PANDEMIC.  But if I had money to spare, I'd bet that we have to go back to all online teaching.  The question is when they will make that decision.

I don't have a crystal ball or any particular desire to place bets, and obviously local situations matter, but I've seen this kind of reasoning a lot and it doesn't really make that much sense to me.

Normal is too much to ask for, but what vaccinations really do is make it very unlikely that people are going to end up in the hospital or dead. If you can get the vast majority of students, faculty and staff vaccinated Covid is mostly just an annoyance. Of course provisions need to be made for people who are immuno-compromised or at high risk for other reasons, but it fundamentally changes things if you can expect to avoid any serious outcomes.

I also don't really understand what the endgame is if we just keep going back to online teaching. Covid will gradually become less of an issue as everyone either gets vaccinated or infected, but when will it completely fade into the background? Next semester? Seems unlikely. Next fall? Maybe, but who knows. Are the costs of constantly switching back to online worth it when we have really good ways to reduce the harms from Covid? What level of risk is acceptable? Just saying we are in a pandemic isn't an answer to these questions.

The highest of higher admin folks set 90% vaccination rate or higher as acceptable to return to mostly in-person teaching.  We are not anywhere near that level, even though the state has an overall very high vaccine compliance rate.  The undergraduate student numbers are really close.  It's the faculty, staff, and other employees that are not nearly high enough.

It seems very odd to target that high a number without a vaccine requirement.

There is a vaccine requirement.

[Caracal]

We just got a rather vague message from upper admin saying "please get vaccinated/submit your proof of vaccination IMMEDIATELY" or else we can't go to "normal operations".

Not sure what "normal" they are referring to since we are STILL IN A PANDEMIC.  But if I had money to spare, I'd bet that we have to go back to all online teaching.  The question is when they will make that decision.

I don't have a crystal ball or any particular desire to place bets, and obviously local situations matter, but I've seen this kind of reasoning a lot and it doesn't really make that much sense to me.

Normal is too much to ask for, but what vaccinations really do is make it very unlikely that people are going to end up in the hospital or dead. If you can get the vast majority of students, faculty and staff vaccinated Covid is mostly just an annoyance. Of course provisions need to be made for people who are immuno-compromised or at high risk for other reasons, but it fundamentally changes things if you can expect to avoid any serious outcomes.

I also don't really understand what the endgame is if we just keep going back to online teaching. Covid will gradually become less of an issue as everyone either gets vaccinated or infected, but when will it completely fade into the background? Next semester? Seems unlikely. Next fall? Maybe, but who knows. Are the costs of constantly switching back to online worth it when we have really good ways to reduce the harms from Covid? What level of risk is acceptable? Just saying we are in a pandemic isn't an answer to these questions.

The highest of higher admin folks set 90% vaccination rate or higher as acceptable to return to mostly in-person teaching.  We are not anywhere near that level, even though the state has an overall very high vaccine compliance rate.  The undergraduate student numbers are really close.  It's the faculty, staff, and other employees that are not nearly high enough.

It seems very odd to target that high a number without a vaccine requirement.

There is a vaccine requirement.

Then why are they begging people to provide proof? Seems like you should just send out notices that say "we need your proof of vaccination by Friday or we stop paying you/disenroll you from classes."

[the_geneticist]

We just got a rather vague message from upper admin saying "please get vaccinated/submit your proof of vaccination IMMEDIATELY" or else we can't go to "normal operations".

Not sure what "normal" they are referring to since we are STILL IN A PANDEMIC.  But if I had money to spare, I'd bet that we have to go back to all online teaching.  The question is when they will make that decision.

I don't have a crystal ball or any particular desire to place bets, and obviously local situations matter, but I've seen this kind of reasoning a lot and it doesn't really make that much sense to me.

Normal is too much to ask for, but what vaccinations really do is make it very unlikely that people are going to end up in the hospital or dead. If you can get the vast majority of students, faculty and staff vaccinated Covid is mostly just an annoyance. Of course provisions need to be made for people who are immuno-compromised or at high risk for other reasons, but it fundamentally changes things if you can expect to avoid any serious outcomes.

I also don't really understand what the endgame is if we just keep going back to online teaching. Covid will gradually become less of an issue as everyone either gets vaccinated or infected, but when will it completely fade into the background? Next semester? Seems unlikely. Next fall? Maybe, but who knows. Are the costs of constantly switching back to online worth it when we have really good ways to reduce the harms from Covid? What level of risk is acceptable? Just saying we are in a pandemic isn't an answer to these questions.

The highest of higher admin folks set 90% vaccination rate or higher as acceptable to return to mostly in-person teaching.  We are not anywhere near that level, even though the state has an overall very high vaccine compliance rate.  The undergraduate student numbers are really close.  It's the faculty, staff, and other employees that are not nearly high enough.

It seems very odd to target that high a number without a vaccine requirement.

There is a vaccine requirement.

Then why are they begging people to provide proof? Seems like you should just send out notices that say "we need your proof of vaccination by Friday or we stop paying you/disenroll you from classes."

Well, we are well beyond the original "show us your proof or face unspecified consequences" deadline.  Students are threatened with being dropped from their classes.  No specific threats for faculty/staff/others - hold your paycheck? you must get approval to work remotely? no jab no job? 
There is no hard deadline, even though classes start next week.

[Anon1787]

Well, we are well beyond the original "show us your proof or face unspecified consequences" deadline.  Students are threatened with being dropped from their classes.  No specific threats for faculty/staff/others - hold your paycheck? you must get approval to work remotely? no jab no job? 
There is no hard deadline, even though classes start next week.

No specific threats for faculty/staff/others? Like giving students an assignment that has only a vague late penalty like double secret probation? That's an open invitation to procrastination.

[Stockmann]

For comparison, here in Shitty Location, at Unrelenting Toddler's school they've had 0.8% Covid rates (kids + adults), and the claim is that transmission didn't happen in school. This even though none of the kids are vaccinated and toddlers aren't exactly famous for their strict adherence to hygiene and social distancing protocols. Plus, vaccines have been available to adults here for much less longer than in the US (overall vaccination rates here are lower than the overall US rate) and many folks got relatively low efficacy vaccines. The school has managed to keep cases low overall not because Dumbledore cast an anti-Covid spell but with common-sense measures like ventilation, masks, taking everyone's temperature, limiting kids in different groups mingling, etc. If it can be done with toddlers, it could theoretically be done with adults.

[Caracal]

For comparison, here in Shitty Location, at Unrelenting Toddler's school they've had 0.8% Covid rates (kids + adults), and the claim is that transmission didn't happen in school. This even though none of the kids are vaccinated and toddlers aren't exactly famous for their strict adherence to hygiene and social distancing protocols. Plus, vaccines have been available to adults here for much less longer than in the US (overall vaccination rates here are lower than the overall US rate) and many folks got relatively low efficacy vaccines. The school has managed to keep cases low overall not because Dumbledore cast an anti-Covid spell but with common-sense measures like ventilation, masks, taking everyone's temperature, limiting kids in different groups mingling, etc. If it can be done with toddlers, it could theoretically be done with adults.

Toddlers are tougher in some ways, but much easier in others. Keeping toddlers in one group all day at daycare is mostly a logistical and staffing problem. That's because the toddlers don't get a say in it. Adults generally want autonomy. Some small schools did put students in small residence hall pods to limit exposures last year, but that's a pretty drastic measure.