social distancing lab fall 2020

[jonathantheseagul]

Hello,
Does anyone have any idea or a proposal to bring lab courses back to in-person while maintaining social distancing for the class size of 25 students total? If you do, why don't we use this thread to exchange our ideas?

Let me go first.
Three groups are created: 7 or 8 students per each group, Group 1/2/3. Each week, one of three group (e.g. Group 1) will be present in person; the other two groups stay online. The pre-recording of an in-person lab is posted for online groups. Following weeks and each week, rotate them so each group have a chance to be with an instructor in-person intimately. This requires a faculty to prepare both an in-person lab instruction and a pre-recording.

Any smart and creative suggestion?

Seagul

[Biologist_]

All of our lectures will be online this fall, but we are hoping to do some in-person labs. Many of our labs run at 24 students/section and the assumption is that modifications will be necessary. The main options that have been suggested:

Split the lab section into two groups of 12 and...

1. One group comes to lab in person on the odd weeks and the other group comes on the even weeks. During the off week, the group that isn't present in lab could do an online lab or assignment.

2. One group comes to lab for the first hour and then leaves. Some cleaning and airing is done and then the second group comes for the last hour. Lab activities could be compressed or some components could be shifted to online pre- or post-lab study.

3. The two groups do the lab simultaneously in separate rooms that are adjacent or nearby. Many of our introductory and non-majors labs will not run in person, so we probably have the physical space to do this if the instructor can figure out the logistics, supplies, equipment, etc. We may be able to hire student assistants to help make it work.

Instructors have been offered the option to propose their own solutions or just default to online-only. We may have the flexibility to mix and match the solutions above on a weekly basis. There are lots of variables in terms of classroom layout, equipment requirements, supplies, etc. Details remain to be discussed and nothing is approved or settled yet.

Of course, it might all be moot if local public health conditions deteriorate.

[onthefringe]

The lab I'm most closely associated with is dividing the semester into 2 or 3 "modules". Each module will have an overarching remote/computer goal, and a short in person data collection module.

For instance, a module about image analysis might have online training modules about how to analyze microscopy data. There would be a 1.5-2 week in-lab module where groups will actually collect microscopy data, and it will be run three times in a row. Each time it is run about 1/3 of the students will be collecting data in person. In the meantime, asynchronously, all students will be learning how to analyze the data. At the end of a module, all the groups will analyze their data and write up a report. Repeating the in class portionl gives students who are quarantined to make up the in person component later.

[marshwiggle]

One issue no-one has raised yet: Since most labs are done with a partner, I can't see any realistic way to keep partners distanced from one another. Labs will probably need to be done individually.

[Aster]

General Complications with bringing students onto campus that are often overlooked.

1. Access to Restrooms and Water Fountains
2. Access to Elevators


My college has laboratories on upper floors. This alone is making face-to-face feasibility very unlikely for us in the Fall.

I don't walk to even talk about restrooms.

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

One issue no-one has raised yet: Since most labs are done with a partner, I can't see any realistic way to keep partners distanced from one another. Labs will probably need to be done individually.

This has been one of the suggestions at my uni.The Department has also purchased masks for students to wear in the lab. Most likely, we'll alternate groups like the OP mentioned.

[eigen]

We're still waiting for some guidance from facilities on airflow, especially in our organic labs with lots of fume hoods.

So far, we've split labs to half-size (we normally run two concurrent sessions, now we're running one at a time with students spaced over both rooms) and planning on approximately halving the number of "wet labs". Alternating students through the wet lab experiences (half each week) with dry-lab activities the other half.

Our discussion right now, given that we're a *highly* hands on discipline is what techniques are absolutely crucial that students physically experience this semester.

We've decided on no in-person partner work, but will likely be moving to "remote" group work/collaboration.

We usually have integrated course+lab, and are looking at severing that so students who cannot be physically on campus can take just the lecture and take the lab in a subsequent semester.

[FishProf]

We usually have integrated course+lab, and are looking at severing that so students who cannot be physically on campus can take just the lecture and take the lab in a subsequent semester.

We have integrated labs as well, but our administration gave a had NO to splitting labs from lectures, and potentially doing half or all the labs in the spring.

Not giving us much to work with here.

[marshwiggle]

We usually have integrated course+lab, and are looking at severing that so students who cannot be physically on campus can take just the lecture and take the lab in a subsequent semester.

We have integrated labs as well, but our administration gave a had NO to splitting labs from lectures, and potentially doing half or all the labs in the spring.

The problem with the split is that there's no guarantee of which "subsequent" semester will allow the labs. If there's no vaccine for another year, that might delay labs beyond when some students are due to graduate.

[FishProf]

We'd run in the Spring regardless.  It won't be worse than the Fall.

[spork]

I don't teach labs, but I'm curious: are any universities, departments, or individual faculty members trying to shift the recipe-driven exercises in a bench lab to the outdoors? E.g., testing for water-borne bacteria or lead contamination, or building siege engines to learn Newtonian mechanics?

[Caracal]

One issue no-one has raised yet: Since most labs are done with a partner, I can't see any realistic way to keep partners distanced from one another. Labs will probably need to be done individually.

There's an all or nothing mentality here that is neither realistic nor helpful in terms of thinking through how to manage risk. Obviously, the only way to avoid all possibility of transmission in a lab setting is to not have labs. But, we have to balance out the importance of labs to lots of STEM disciplines with the risk. That balancing is going to be dependent on all kinds of factors and is probably going to lead to different decisions at different places.

But, the problem is that you have to continue to have those discussions. In general, closer contact is bad. However, that obviously has to be balanced against the larger goals. What's the point of having people do labs with partners? Are there ways that some of that could be replicated without close contact? Can some things not be done individually in a safe way? How important are those things?

There's a tendency to want to just shut off discussions based on the idea of increased risk, but that isn't going to work.

[polly_mer]

There's a tendency to want to just shut off discussions based on the idea of increased risk, but that isn't going to work.

Caracal,  stop repeating the general talking points you've picked up from the mass media as though they were useful information.

You continue to be underinformed because you don't have the relevant background to know what to accept at face value, what needs more detail because of all the factors to be balanced, and what are extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence.

Read what informed people are discussing and become more informed.  People on this thread are discussing risks and trade offs, but you don't know because you don't teach labs.

[marshwiggle]

I don't teach labs, but I'm curious: are any universities, departments, or individual faculty members trying to shift the recipe-driven exercises in a bench lab to the outdoors? E.g., testing for water-borne bacteria or lead contamination, or building siege engines to learn Newtonian mechanics?

While that would be an awesome idea, (and I've thought of using a water balon slignshot on the playing field to study projectile motion), I think there are just way too many potential problems to make it worth doing unless it's some kind of formal credentialling requirement. Some of the issues I see:

• Depending on the size of the engine, building and/or operating it could be virtually impossible by a person working alone, and it's hard to imagine a scenario that would require a partner but not require them to ever be in close proximity.
• Even though transmission by surfaces is less common, disinfecting all of the tools, equipment, etc. bewteen different students would be stressful and time consuming.
• Completely redesigning labs for these conditions, which would be *unlikely to continue after, would be prohibitive. (On the other hand, if developing simulations would allow the course to be offered online in the futue, the amount of work could be a valuable investment.) 

*Adaptations made to enforce distancing, but which effectively require distancing, such as for siege engine safety,  would be too resource intesive normally; i.e. requiring more lab staff and/or space to accomodate the normal number of students.

[Aster]

I don't teach labs, but I'm curious: are any universities, departments, or individual faculty members trying to shift the recipe-driven exercises in a bench lab to the outdoors? E.g., testing for water-borne bacteria or lead contamination, or building siege engines to learn Newtonian mechanics?

Outdoor work is notoriously unreliable and requires specific situations and circumstances for most disciplines, which is why it's so sparingly used.

Among the most common complications would be weather, and time of day.

While it is normal for some types of labs to meet outdoors for certain activities, there are always inclement weather contingencies. Outdoor instruction is commonly canceled or rescheduled, with alternative options set up in case the outdoor work cannot be performed.

Many labs meet in late afternoons or in evenings. Usable daylight (particularly in the winter months) is often unavailable to conduct most types of outdoor lessons.

Outdoor labs also are extremely bad at scaling up beyond a single course section. A morning section might be held without issue, but an afternoon section that same day might just as easily be canceled from a bit of wind or rain.

The greatest users of outdoor laboratories are upper division and graduate-level, single-section-only, specialty courses. And in over 95% of the courses that operate with outdoor components, there is still an assigned indoor classroom where the bulk of the class meets and does its work most of the time.

But yeah, people have been talking more about this of late. I expect there will be a bit more attempts for outdoor-based instruction in the Fall.