Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus • Hacker News Board

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#171

Post by steffan » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:04 PM UTC

doorstar wrote: post #155

ceilingcorner wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trades have been more lucrative than many liberal arts-esque jobs for decades. Awareness isn’t the issue. The issue is social acceptability. Until plumbers, electricians, carpenters, etc. stop being a part of the undesirable Other to middle and upper middle class Americans, nothing will change. Paying $100,000 for your kid to study underwater basket weaving at Harvard is still socially superior to running a multi-mil…

College vs. trade school isn't just about money or 'social acceptability', it's also about opportunity. A 18 year old who goes to trade school to become an electrician is going to become an electrician, they are not going to be able to change their minds in two years and become a biologist. That kid who went to college at 18 has a lot more options. They can switch majors, they can take internships, they can get their…

It seems like an easy solution to this is to have a 'trade academy' or a coalition of trade schools that allow / require you to do a rotation in each of the related trade specialties, i.e., if building / construction related, you spend a week / month / quarter learning about plumbing, electrical, framing, mechanical, landscape, etc. This would both promote understanding of related fields and give people an exposure to a variety of potential interests.

This is not unlike the required courses that predominate pre-major studies at a traditional university (in the U.S., at least)

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#172

Post by matwood » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:05 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #105

bob33212 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value offered by colleges is not just an education. It is 4 years of living away from home experiencing whatever floats your boat ( frats, independence, parties, sports, friends, etc... ). There is virtually no demand for online only classes above a 5k/year price point. There is a similar situation with private schools. Some of the demand comes from the fact that it is also a babysitting service, forced social gr…

It is 4 years of living away from home experiencing whatever floats your boat ( frats, independence, parties, sports, friends, etc... ) I’m in university right now. I just finished a term of online classes. I’ve definitely witnessed those benefits being enjoyed by other students but I haven’t had the time to enjoy them myself; my program is simply too difficult for that. The most I’ve enjoyed is going out for drinks…

> The ones joining frats, partying constantly, playing sports and all that must have trivial classes. Either that or they’re already so rich and privileged that they can afford to fail courses and keep going.

You'd be surprised. Unless you're with someone 24/7 you actually don't know what else they are doing. I knew a girl in college who you might think partied all the time. I mean, she was always out and about, so makes sense. Except, the few people who knew her better got to see her literally study for 24 straight hours by sleeping 15-20 minutes here and there, slam a diet mountain dew on the way to class and ace the test. These were non-trivial classes, and she graduated with a 4.0 by the way.

Was this a healthy way to go through college? I don't think so. It certainly was not how I did it. But it did show me a level of effort around studying/working I didn't think was possible, and also that what people do in private will surprise you.

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#173

Post by halfFact » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

Is there a rational reason behind this? The hyper scary emotional reaction is to close everything down, but given the at risk population is well understood- is this a money grab?(less brick and mortar costs)

The 70 year old professors and obese 50 year old professors clearly are able to online teach, why make everyone lose?

Heck if students went to college we'd get closer to herd immunity.

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#174

Post by Townley » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:10 PM UTC

timr wrote: post #168

Townley wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have no reason to believe that their son wants to be there in person. The son may share their parents' safety concerns And claiming that coronavirus poses "no danger" is simply untrue. You can claim that the danger is over-stated, but young adults can and do get COVID-19

"You can claim that the danger is over-stated, but young adults can and do get COVID-19" Yes, they can, and do. And they are overwhelmingly likely to have nothing more than a mild illness. The danger has been drastically exaggerated. In the US, fewer than 300 people under the age of 25 have died from Covid: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm Moreover, when you look at the data, nearly all of th…

True, but while infected with mild (or no) symptoms, they may also unknowingly spread it to university employees, townsfolk, or their parents while visiting for the weekend.

So even assuming that the personal danger is acceptable (which isn't a given; 300 deaths sounds like a horrible and avoidable tragedy to me) death figures among healthy 20-somethings don't capture the full risk of keeping a university open.

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#175

Post by liability » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #96

matz1 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes of course there will be, any diseases could cause long term health conditions in some of population. Flu too can cause long term damage too. But does it justify lockdown ? closing down school ? No. Especially when its still unclear and lacking in stats. >why should we even have bothered eradicating polio? Because it doesn't require locking down significant part of the population...

I remain skeptical of lockdowns, but it was very common to close down schools in areas where polio was spreading.

Polio cripples 25-80% of kids that survived it, and kills 2-5% of them. Polio mainly spreads through kids.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/poliomyelit...

Comparing covid-19 to polio with regard to the danger to kids is absurd.

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#176

Post by jmull » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

jimmar wrote: post #106

I'm a professor at a regional university. Not a big name school, but we have about 5,000 students. We would be bankrupt if we told students we'd only be offering classes online this fall because students, by an overwhelming majority, want the in-person experience. We know we would lose enrollment if we went fully online this fall, and the drop would be significant enough for the university to declare bankruptcy. Harv…

Man, this is very tough. I think the problem is (and I very much hope I am wrong!) that an outbreak will occur and your university will still have the financial problems. And also some more sick and dead people.

(All from a US perspective)

There's been a crazy notion floating around from the start on this, that we can either keep our normal activities/economy (jobs, businesses, schools, etc) or deal with the pandemic.

However, you can't have anything normal unless the pandemic is under control. Because until it is, so many kinds of normal activities will be hit by an outbreak, and then your normal activity will fall apart and stop.

I think we could have had school this fall. But it would have meant much more serious efforts months ago, building up our fast testing capabilities, a commitment to ongoing mask, social distancing, and other mechanisms to control the spread (mandates, really).

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#177

Post by doorstar » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

steffan wrote: post #171

doorstar wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

College vs. trade school isn't just about money or 'social acceptability', it's also about opportunity. A 18 year old who goes to trade school to become an electrician is going to become an electrician, they are not going to be able to change their minds in two years and become a biologist. That kid who went to college at 18 has a lot more options. They can switch majors, they can take internships, they can get their…

It seems like an easy solution to this is to have a 'trade academy' or a coalition of trade schools that allow / require you to do a rotation in each of the related trade specialties, i.e., if building / construction related, you spend a week / month / quarter learning about plumbing, electrical, framing, mechanical, landscape, etc. This would both promote understanding of related fields and give people an exposure t…

I think it's still going to be hard to get 'middle class' parents to embrace this for their kids - and I am a 'middle class' parent.

If my kid wants to become an electrician I'd probably say "Why not major in EE?". A construction worker - why not major in Civil Engineering? If I felt my kid was fundamentally incapable of the level of effort required for those degrees, perhaps my opinion would change.

I'm on HN and I have an engineering degree, so I'm predisposed to think my kid could get one too. I'm not sure how I'd feel otherwise.

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#178

Post by timr » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

acdha wrote: post #149

nimaco wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always hear "much greater percentage" type language when referring to long-term effects of COVID-19. Is there an actual number associated with this? Or is it more so guesswork

We know that there are people who take a long time to recover. This is pretty widely reported but we don’t know how long that will end up taking or what permanent impacts there are since it’s a new disease and treatment options are being rapidly pursued. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/brain-fog-heart-dama... https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/long-term-symp... https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/12/a…

"We know that there are people who take a long time to recover."

There are people who take a long time to recover from rhinovirus. The question is, at what rate? You'll note that this is not covered in the articles you have linked.

We simply don't have the data -- what we have is a small number of anecdotes, and a bunch of news organizations who are willing to write speculative stories before we know anything. But you could write the same kinds of speculative stories about any illness, if you chose to look.

That JAMA article has serious methodological flaws, by the way: their "Covid" cohort has twice the number of smokers as their "risk-factor matched" group, almost twice as many men, more people with COPD, high cholesterol, diabetes and hypertension...and they report their results in terms of absolute numbers of defects observed. The reported differences between those groups is smaller in magnitude than the number of smokers. It's frankly embarrassing that JAMA chose to publish the study.

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#179

Post by jonnycoder » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:21 PM UTC

ceilingcorner wrote: post #67

eric4smith wrote: post #12

I firmly think there is a sea change going on from standard “college” degrees to more practical training that will be a mix of apprenticeship and solid training like air/vac, electricians and online skills, since the vast majority of jobs don’t really need a college degree. This has actually begun already at the high school level. Once again I believe net/net the beer virus will be positive for America in the long ru…

Trades have been more lucrative than many liberal arts-esque jobs for decades. Awareness isn’t the issue. The issue is social acceptability. Until plumbers, electricians, carpenters, etc. stop being a part of the undesirable Other to middle and upper middle class Americans, nothing will change. Paying $100,000 for your kid to study underwater basket weaving at Harvard is still socially superior to running a multi-mil…

I'm not sure if you are implying negative connotation to "culture" because of an identity politics view that blue collar workers are a bunch of uneducated racist white guys, or if bigoted elites in general look down on labor jobs. Either way, both are elitist and bigoted views.

Re: Stanford cancels plans to bring half of undergrads back to campus

#180

Post by timr » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 4:21 PM UTC

Townley wrote: post #174

timr wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You can claim that the danger is over-stated, but young adults can and do get COVID-19" Yes, they can, and do. And they are overwhelmingly likely to have nothing more than a mild illness. The danger has been drastically exaggerated. In the US, fewer than 300 people under the age of 25 have died from Covid: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm Moreover, when you look at the data, nearly all of th…

True, but while infected with mild (or no) symptoms, they may also unknowingly spread it to university employees, townsfolk, or their parents while visiting for the weekend. So even assuming that the personal danger is acceptable (which isn't a given; 300 deaths sounds like a horrible and avoidable tragedy to me) death figures among healthy 20-somethings don't capture the full risk of keeping a university open.

"So even assuming that the personal danger is acceptable (which isn't a given; 300 deaths sounds like a horrible and avoidable tragedy to me) death figures among healthy 20-somethings don't capture the full risk of keeping a university open."

Well now you're shifting the goalposts.

The comment was that the students are at risk. Someone shows you that they're not at risk, and you pivot to danger to "townsfolk".

Here's the thing: those students don't just disappear, and they don't stop interacting with other college-aged students, townsfolk and employees simply because they're not at school. And if you want to protect parents, shipping their kids off to live on their own seems like a better way to do that than to have those kids living at home.

(As far as "avoidable tragedies" go: during the same period that those 300 kids died of covid, literally thousands died of all other causes. More died of accidents than died of Covid. I think it's time to admit that your sense of concern is mis-calibrated.)