LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:09 am**

Drcthru wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 11:40 pm
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.
https://www.latimes.com/california/stor ... ewsom-says

should i understand why you quoted me to this link?

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:13 am**

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:43 am**

good. then i'm on the right path.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:51 am**

wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.

College aged kids are prime carriers of it. If only universities had to worry about students getting sick. Throw in several hundred to several thousand employees, and college campuses could be death traps for employees. Might not exactly be the best look for colleges.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:58 am**

Agreed it’s not a good look.

Colleges are worried about lawsuits from their students. They may have to worry about lawsuits from their employees, after putting them in dangerous situations.

Had quite a few college professors who were not the “picture of health.”

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:03 am**

Wheels wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:51 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.
College aged kids are prime carriers of it. If only universities had to worry about students getting sick. Throw in several hundred to several thousand employees, and college campuses could be death traps for employees. Might not exactly be the best look for colleges.

there's a lot of known things. and ways to avoid problems as much as possible.
hahvahd just said the students that are on campus will be tested every 3 days. one of the first testing announcements, but looks like there could be "robust" testing contracts.

vulnerable employees could be separated, retrained on something else, putbon paid leave, older professors just do classes virtually, TAs conduct in person classes, don't serve as much food... on and on and on.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:08 am**

wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:03 am
Wheels wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:51 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.
College aged kids are prime carriers of it. If only universities had to worry about students getting sick. Throw in several hundred to several thousand employees, and college campuses could be death traps for employees. Might not exactly be the best look for colleges.
there's a lot of known things. and ways to avoid problems as much as possible.
hahvahd just said the students that are on campus will be tested every 3 days. one of the first testing announcements, but looks like there could be "robust" testing contracts.

vulnerable employees could be separated, retrained on something else, putbon paid leave, older professors just do classes virtually, TAs conduct in person classes, don't serve as much food... on and on and on.

Agreed. A lot of that will happen. Yet there is still the mismatch between what students and parents want (in-person, total college experience) and what the university can do when it has to send employees home because working could lead to infection.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 8:37 am**

wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:03 am
Wheels wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:51 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.
College aged kids are prime carriers of it. If only universities had to worry about students getting sick. Throw in several hundred to several thousand employees, and college campuses could be death traps for employees. Might not exactly be the best look for colleges.
there's a lot of known things. and ways to avoid problems as much as possible.
hahvahd just said the students that are on campus will be tested every 3 days. one of the first testing announcements, but looks like there could be "robust" testing contracts.

vulnerable employees could be separated, retrained on something else, putbon paid leave, older professors just do classes virtually, TAs conduct in person classes, don't serve as much food... on and on and on.

Yes to all this. There are indeed older profs who are at risk but how many of them are routinely within 6 feet of their students? How many of them are otherwise locked in their homes if they aren’t teaching? They are more at risk in the grocery store than at the front of a large lecture hall, even if students in the room have it. Virtually every other business/profession also has older workers at higher risk and is managing to find a way to still function. Yes college kids are highly likely to closely socialize and pass it around but they are also able to be tested more frequently and comprehensively. Have everyone wear a mask. Don’t have older teachers get close to students. For the very few who teach subjects where it can’t be avoided, get TAs. Would that compromise the quality of those few classes? Quite possibly yes. So what? Everyone is having to adjust and make sacrifices. The answer is not just shutting it down. Virtually every college kid who gets it will be fine. More college students die annually of accidents and alcohol poisoning than would from COVID even if schools were all fully open. At my university hospital docs over 70 were kept home during the worst of it. They didn’t like it. The world kept spinning, admitted cases are now down >95%, they are back to work and the world goes on. Bring the students back, open the schools and just frikkin adjust as need be.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:01 am**

pcowlax wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:55 pm Obviously understand why kids would want to defer/take a year off but also see why schools would have policies like those just listed. If a massive number of kids defer this year, there will be no spots to admit ‘21s to (I’m not talking lax here, just in general). Can’t really say the way to be fair to one year is to screw over the next.

What if, instead, this may be the future.

Four years of on campus college is great fun - but if done right, the students who want to learn don't need dorms, fraternities (I was in one and am still active and friends with those guys 30 years later), sports (obviously I support sports too), keggers, etc... are not a needed part of the education system.

Of course there are relationships developed, but there are other contexts in which that can happen. It is hard to replicate the disconnectedness with a professor in high level classes is hard to replicate - but is also a rarity for most students.

In terms of the cost, time, and investment in fixed assets the current model is hard to justify.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:43 am**

wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:03 am
Wheels wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:51 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.
College aged kids are prime carriers of it. If only universities had to worry about students getting sick. Throw in several hundred to several thousand employees, and college campuses could be death traps for employees. Might not exactly be the best look for colleges.
there's a lot of known things. and ways to avoid problems as much as possible.
hahvahd just said the students that are on campus will be tested every 3 days. one of the first testing announcements, but looks like there could be "robust" testing contracts.

vulnerable employees could be separated, retrained on something else, putbon paid leave, older professors just do classes virtually, TAs conduct in person classes, don't serve as much food... on and on and on.
College campuses are designed to use space efficiently. They cram kids into dorms and classrooms in order to admit as many as possible. Staff are packed into small offices in old buildings. Athletics economize on space as much as possible. ATHLETICS ARE ALL VECTORS FOR THE VIRUS. Kids will not follow rules all the time. At the very least sports should be cancelled for the school year. I would advise my own children to stay home until the the virus has infected enough people to create its own starvation and natural death. I watched up close a 25 year old strong athletic woman die in agony trying to fight off the disease. I have seen a lot death, but his one will stay with me forever.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:55 am**

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:01 am
pcowlax wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:55 pm Obviously understand why kids would want to defer/take a year off but also see why schools would have policies like those just listed. If a massive number of kids defer this year, there will be no spots to admit ‘21s to (I’m not talking lax here, just in general). Can’t really say the way to be fair to one year is to screw over the next.
What if, instead, this may be the future.

Four years of on campus college is great fun - but if done right, the students who want to learn don't need dorms, fraternities (I was in one and am still active and friends with those guys 30 years later), sports (obviously I support sports too), keggers, etc... are not a needed part of the education system.

Of course there are relationships developed, but there are other contexts in which that can happen. It is hard to replicate the disconnectedness with a professor in high level classes is hard to replicate - but is also a rarity for most students.

In terms of the cost, time, and investment in fixed assets the current model is hard to justify.

This will depend, in a very large part, on the decisions of collages regarding tuition. College is fun (I know, what an insight). Kids are always going to want to live on campus with peers, attend parties, sports, concerts, just hang in common rooms, etc as opposed to taking classes online from home or from some diaspora of apartments. Social scene aside, one obvious take home from the past few months to anyone with kids, frankly of any age, is that online classes are NOT the educational equivalent of in-person. With kids wanting in-person for the fun and parents preferring it due to the quality of education, there are only two ways I can see that the future involves any significant shift to on-line and the primary one is pricing. Simply lopping off the room and board component of costs isn't going to cut it. Online learning is inferior quality AND involves significantly less costs for the University as it would drastically reduce the physical plant they need to maintain. It therefore should be significantly cheaper. If they do that, if tuition is, say, 30-40% reduced, not 10%, then you might indeed see a significant shift in the paradigm. Alternatively the whole structure of college, 4 years, required survey courses across disciplines, etc could be shelved and you could have online schools letting you take just major courses and graduate in 2 years. Otherwise though no, there is not going to be a groundswell of families looking to pay for four years $30-50,000 annually for 3-4 hours weekly of online classes.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:10 am**

pcowlax wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:55 am Social scene aside, one obvious take home from the past few months to anyone with kids, frankly of any age, is that online classes are NOT the educational equivalent of in-person. With kids wanting in-person for the fun and parents preferring it due to the quality of education, there are only two ways I can see that the future involves any significant shift to on-line and the primary one is pricing. Simply lopping off the room and board component of costs isn't going to cut it. Online learning is inferior quality AND involves significantly less costs for the University as it would drastically reduce the physical plant they need to maintain.

The reality is most of what colleges are selling is a combination of a vetting process and four years of parties. With SOME technical training that could actually be better provided by employers - but employers have outsourced the vetting process. They do it the same way colleges have become the outsourced minor league for football - and it is a great concept for those in power

Colleges also offer the indulgence (and it is a great indulgence) of a chance to study interesting thinkers and ideas. The technical training has been muddled with the "make you more interesting at a cocktail party" missions.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:30 am**

sholokov2 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:43 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:03 am
Wheels wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:51 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.
College aged kids are prime carriers of it. If only universities had to worry about students getting sick. Throw in several hundred to several thousand employees, and college campuses could be death traps for employees. Might not exactly be the best look for colleges.
there's a lot of known things. and ways to avoid problems as much as possible.
hahvahd just said the students that are on campus will be tested every 3 days. one of the first testing announcements, but looks like there could be "robust" testing contracts.

vulnerable employees could be separated, retrained on something else, putbon paid leave, older professors just do classes virtually, TAs conduct in person classes, don't serve as much food... on and on and on.
College campuses are designed to use space efficiently. They cram kids into dorms and classrooms in order to admit as many as possible. Staff are packed into small offices in old buildings. Athletics economize on space as much as possible. ATHLETICS ARE ALL VECTORS FOR THE VIRUS. Kids will not follow rules all the time. At the very least sports should be cancelled for the school year. I would advise my own children to stay home until the the virus has infected enough people to create its own starvation and natural death. I watched up close a 25 year old strong athletic woman die in agony trying to fight off the disease. I have seen a lot death, but his one will stay with me forever.

and i'm pretty sure about every campus would give you and others the option to stay home and do classes virtually, if they prefer. thins out the campus. you could also easily have half of any one class be in person, half virtual, alternate days. large lectures virtual.
everyone has anecdotal stories. my son's school had several people die and a number of others get very sick (including him once) each year in the last couple for viruses.
again, fewer than 200 us have died under age 24 in the country. (over 22,000 all causes)
what do you believe will happen to kids 20 years old over the next year? that they will stay in their rooms for the next 12 months? 6? do you think they're still staying in now?

these schools decided decades ago to let economics drive pricing. so now have a lot of supposedly very valuable people, well paid, and resources to figure it out. it's time to invest that money and that brainpower.

what are you going to do for education for kids k - 12? virtual? have we factored in the damage that would cause for that generation into and through college age?

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:45 am**

pcowlax wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 8:37 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:03 am
Wheels wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:51 am
wgdsr wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:05 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 9:47 pm At this point, there seem to be only two real options. 1. Re-open in full and deal with the consequences. 2. Close the school for a year. There is no way students are receiving real value for these half-a$$ solutions.
#nogoodoptions
fewer than 200 in the usa under 24 have died of covid.
College aged kids are prime carriers of it. If only universities had to worry about students getting sick. Throw in several hundred to several thousand employees, and college campuses could be death traps for employees. Might not exactly be the best look for colleges.
there's a lot of known things. and ways to avoid problems as much as possible.
hahvahd just said the students that are on campus will be tested every 3 days. one of the first testing announcements, but looks like there could be "robust" testing contracts.

vulnerable employees could be separated, retrained on something else, putbon paid leave, older professors just do classes virtually, TAs conduct in person classes, don't serve as much food... on and on and on.
Yes to all this. There are indeed older profs who are at risk but how many of them are routinely within 6 feet of their students? How many of them are otherwise locked in their homes if they aren’t teaching? They are more at risk in the grocery store than at the front of a large lecture hall, even if students in the room have it. Virtually every other business/profession also has older workers at higher risk and is managing to find a way to still function. Yes college kids are highly likely to closely socialize and pass it around but they are also able to be tested more frequently and comprehensively. Have everyone wear a mask. Don’t have older teachers get close to students. For the very few who teach subjects where it can’t be avoided, get TAs. Would that compromise the quality of those few classes? Quite possibly yes. So what? Everyone is having to adjust and make sacrifices. The answer is not just shutting it down. Virtually every college kid who gets it will be fine. More college students die annually of accidents and alcohol poisoning than would from COVID even if schools were all fully open. At my university hospital docs over 70 were kept home during the worst of it. They didn’t like it. The world kept spinning, admitted cases are now down >95%, they are back to work and the world goes on. Bring the students back, open the schools and just frikkin adjust as need be.

Amen.

Approximately 112,000 Americans have died from Covid, 142 of those were age 15-24, and I can only assume that many had pre-existing health issues. During that same time period 51 people age 15-24 died of Influenza. Not to mention car accidents, other accidents, other disease, suicide and on and on. People die, and it's sad, and by discussing the data no one wishes to diminish the value of the lives lost, or the suffering those people endured. But the overall risk to college students from Covid is demonstrably and incontrovertibly tiny.

Moreover, as pointed out, there are workarounds to the risks on college campuses, even in athletics, and every student and professor should have the choice to do whatever they are comfortable doing. If you don't feel comfortable playing lacrosse this season, just don't play. Sit this year out.

It is my belief that the collateral damage to our young people associated with locking them in their homes, preventing them from spending time with friends and participating in athletics, and degrading their college experience is and will be a far, far more serious threat to their well being than Covid.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:46 am**

I do have a question if classes go online again this upcoming year, why do we think tuition should be cheaper? Why does this change the level of education that they are receiving? Shouldn't it cost more? If you want food delivered to your house instead of picking up there's a delivery fee. If you want a product shipped to you house instead of going to the brick and mortar store there is shipping and handling and postage. How is education any different? Do professors purposely leave out facts on Zoom that they don't in person, they're able to show every slide, power point, video that they would in person class on the Zoom screen. Students can interact the same way and ask the same questions. What am I missing? Most sectors of business would charge more for this convenience. If you argument is losing out on the experience, well you are saving the $10000-$15000 in room and board for not getting that experience. Outside of majors in the medical fields very little education needs to be hands on. I'm just not sure how the level of education changes from a student sitting 20 feet from the professor in a class to conveniently watching a professor on a screen where ever they feel like it.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:55 am**

engagement is different on many levels.
and satisfaction.

i have not checked any surveys, etc. (except for a survey of 2) but i would bet anything that if you do, this will be the consensus.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:08 pm**

shaadb-man wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:46 am I do have a question if classes go online again this upcoming year, why do we think tuition should be cheaper? Why does this change the level of education that they are receiving? Shouldn't it cost more? If you want food delivered to your house instead of picking up there's a delivery fee. If you want a product shipped to you house instead of going to the brick and mortar store there is shipping and handling and postage. How is education any different? Do professors purposely leave out facts on Zoom that they don't in person, they're able to show every slide, power point, video that they would in person class on the Zoom screen. Students can interact the same way and ask the same questions. What am I missing? Most sectors of business would charge more for this convenience. If you argument is losing out on the experience, well you are saving the $10000-$15000 in room and board for not getting that experience. Outside of majors in the medical fields very little education needs to be hands on. I'm just not sure how the level of education changes from a student sitting 20 feet from the professor in a class to conveniently watching a professor on a screen where ever they feel like it.

Well, first off, you are charged more for home delivery and for shipping to you because it costs those companies more to deliver their products to you than it would for you to come pick it up. They pay for drivers, gas, shipping fees, etc. Their costs are increased by providing this service and those costs are then passed on to you. Having a significant portion of college be virtual would decrease the cost to the schools significantly. A huge percentage of the exponential rise in tuition over the past few decades is paying for the arms race in facilities and physical plant. No student on campus, no need for that rock climbing wall in the student union (nor the need to heat/air condition/maintain so many huge, ornate buildings and dorms. If their costs drop significantly, that decrease should be (or at least reasonable could be expected to be) passed along in the form of lower tuition. In addition, people usually prefer to have things delivered to them rather than going out to the store. Because they prefer it they will pay more for it. I agree with what Hoodat said about college, for many people, really being about vetting, networking and partying. But, as I said, people like those things! Whether they are a good reason to have college structured as it is is immaterial, kids like it and want to be on campus for it. To induce them to otherwise you need to offer a steep discount.

As to the quality of education, I could not disagree more. If you are talking about the most basic of huge lecture hall powerpoint presentations, sure, it doesn't matter where you are to look at the slides and here the profs voice. The majority of classes though, especially after freshman year, are not like that. I have done a good deal of teaching/lecturing via zoom over the past few months and participated in academic advisory board meetings. It is terrible! Good teachers work the room, it is interactive. Teaching is not showing facts or slides. Zoom ruins it, you don't know when anyone is done talking, you can't get the non-verbal clues when people are following you or when they need something repeated or explained in a different way, the banter between students is stilted, they DO NOT interact in the same way. None of this is to mention that at home kids will have the zoom running while listening to music, texting, etc. Remote learning is inferior learning and would have to be priced accordingly.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:11 pm**

wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:55 am engagement is different on many levels.
and satisfaction.

i have not checked any surveys, etc. (except for a survey of 2) but i would bet anything that if you do, this will be the consensus.

I think you guys are missing the point. Entirely. Its not the kids (student) getting sick they are concerned about. Its the litigation but also the SPREAD. if you are looking at the number of deaths at this age group and making a determination to return to school, you are missing the point. They can spread it between themselves all over campus ( according to your stats) it is what they carry out into those communities that is the concern. ASYMPTOMATIC SPREADING.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:20 pm**

Parputt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:11 pm
wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:55 am engagement is different on many levels.
and satisfaction.

i have not checked any surveys, etc. (except for a survey of 2) but i would bet anything that if you do, this will be the consensus.

I think you guys are missing the point. Entirely. Its not the kids (student) getting sick they are concerned about. Its the litigation but also the SPREAD. if you are looking at the number of deaths at this age group and making a determination to return to school, you are missing the point. ASYMPTOMATIC.

no. don't miss the point at all.

i could add longer posts with more ideas than have already been listed. testing, screening, precautions, etc. just pretend they're inferred.

what is your solution? tell kids 5-23 to stay in their rooms for however long? what is your over/under for how long that should be? unlimited?
do you think that is practical, reasonable, realistic, safe?

the truth is college campuses have the unique ability to control a lot of their environment and protocols. for all they can't control, they have a leg up on many others.

edit: you are right about the litigation, cya. i wonder, is that why our learning institutions should be making decisions here? does that feel right?

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:23 pm**

Parputt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:11 pm
wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:55 am engagement is different on many levels.
and satisfaction.

i have not checked any surveys, etc. (except for a survey of 2) but i would bet anything that if you do, this will be the consensus.

I think you guys are missing the point. Entirely. Its not the kids (student) getting sick they are concerned about. Its the litigation but also the SPREAD. if you are looking at the number of deaths at this age group and making a determination to return to school, you are missing the point. They can spread it between themselves all over campus ( according to your stats) it is what they carry out into those communities that is the concern. ASYMPTOMATIC SPREADING.

They are doing that anyway!!!! If they are home they are just partying with high school friends and likely having MORE interactions with older people then they would if they were on a campus by going to stores. I don't know where you live but look around you this summer. You don't have to speculate about them about carrying it into the community, they are IN the community. Only they won't have structured testing to detect asymptomatic carrying as they would at colleges. It is not possible to stop the spread of a contagious, airborne virus with quarantining and this was never the reason for the measures taken. This has been completely lost sight of in the panic that xyz will lead to spread. It is going to spread! More of those college kids will die drunk driving at home during a year off campus than they would have of COVID on campus and it will not reduce spread to vulnerable populations to keep not-exactly-mandate-minding colleges kids in the community rather than sequestered from the vast majority of the elderly while on campus.

LaxPower Back-Up Stick

School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings

Re: School Closings