[82 Card]

Even if college students have a lower chance of severe illness, that doesn't mean they don't make excellent vectors. I wouldn't assume that there aren't any serious illnesses or deaths because they are not mentioned in news articles. Deaths come later after the reporters have moved on to next shiny object. College administrators have a long record of hiding deaths on campus. Back in my days at Penn, you never heard about suicides. Later, it came out that the suicide rate had been fairly high while I was there.

I'm not the one assuming anything.  I'm just wondering why there aren't reported numbers on hospitalizations, which presumably would include professors, old folks, or other, more at-risk individuals in the college communities where the numbers are up) Why is that never (or seemingly never) reported on? 

And btw, the absent data would also apply to the immunocompromised college students that fullmetal mentions (although I think it's a fair question as to whether those folks - assuming they know they are so compromised - should be attending college in-person right now).  And lastly, no one said anything about "letting the virus run unchecked" through college campuses.  

I'm just looking for data that can help inform risk-benefit and policies for same.

But you all keep reformulating my comments/questions so that they fit whatever agenda you're pursuing.

No reformulation required. Quoting your post: "To be very blunt:  if there are lots of reported cases and ZERO hospitalizations from those 'lots of reported cases' . . . is it really a problem for that locale?"

[82 Card]

Even if college students have a lower chance of severe illness, that doesn't mean they don't make excellent vectors. I wouldn't assume that there aren't any serious illnesses or deaths because they are not mentioned in news articles. Deaths come later after the reporters have moved on to next shiny object. College administrators have a long record of hiding deaths on campus. Back in my days at Penn, you never heard about suicides. Later, it came out that the suicide rate had been fairly high while I was there.

I'm not the one assuming anything.  I'm just wondering why there aren't reported numbers on hospitalizations, which presumably would include professors, old folks, or other, more at-risk individuals in the college communities where the numbers are up) Why is that never (or seemingly never) reported on? 

And btw, the absent data would also apply to the immunocompromised college students that fullmetal mentions (although I think it's a fair question as to whether those folks - assuming they know they are so compromised - should be attending college in-person right now).  And lastly, no one said anything about "letting the virus run unchecked" through college campuses.  

I'm just looking for data that can help inform risk-benefit and policies for same.

But you all keep reformulating my comments/questions so that they fit whatever agenda you're pursuing.

No reformulation required. Quoting your post: "To be very blunt:  if there are lots of reported cases and ZERO hospitalizations from those 'lots of reported cases' . . . is it really a problem for that locale?"

[M T]

I'm sure we'll see lots more stories like these in the coming days.   I don't mean to put these particular schools under a microscope.  I believe this pattern will repeat at almost any school whose students are on campus.

Syracuse University suspends 23 students after 'incredibly reckless' gathering

Bar culture thrives at Alabama colleges despite coronavirus
"In the summer heat, throngs of [Univ of Alabama] students formed crowded lines outside bars near campus, many of them not wearing masks and most not following social distancing guidelines. . . . It was a similar scene in Auburn, where offensive lineman Kameron Stutts tweeted a photo of a large group of students congregating inside a bar without social distancing.  ... It incurred the anger of Greg Byrne, the university [of Alabama]’s athletic director, and Tuscaloosa Mayor Walt Maddox, who both said the students’ behavior at bars showed they were putting in danger the start of SEC football."  [NOTE: In Alabama, the minimum age to buy or drink alcohol is 21.]

[M T]

I'm sure we'll see lots more stories like these in the coming days.   I don't mean to put these particular schools under a microscope.  I believe this pattern will repeat at almost any school whose students are on campus.

Syracuse University suspends 23 students after 'incredibly reckless' gathering

Bar culture thrives at Alabama colleges despite coronavirus
"In the summer heat, throngs of [Univ of Alabama] students formed crowded lines outside bars near campus, many of them not wearing masks and most not following social distancing guidelines. . . . It was a similar scene in Auburn, where offensive lineman Kameron Stutts tweeted a photo of a large group of students congregating inside a bar without social distancing.  ... It incurred the anger of Greg Byrne, the university [of Alabama]’s athletic director, and Tuscaloosa Mayor Walt Maddox, who both said the students’ behavior at bars showed they were putting in danger the start of SEC football."  [NOTE: In Alabama, the minimum age to buy or drink alcohol is 21.]

[82lsju]

I'm sure we'll see lots more stories like these in the coming days.   I don't mean to put these particular schools under a microscope.  I believe this pattern will repeat at almost any school whose students are on campus.

Syracuse University suspends 23 students after 'incredibly reckless' gathering

Bar culture thrives at Alabama colleges despite coronavirus
"In the summer heat, throngs of [Univ of Alabama] students formed crowded lines outside bars near campus, many of them not wearing masks and most not following social distancing guidelines. . . . It was a similar scene in Auburn, where offensive lineman Kameron Stutts tweeted a photo of a large group of students congregating inside a bar without social distancing.  ... It incurred the anger of Greg Byrne, the university [of Alabama]’s athletic director, and Tuscaloosa Mayor Walt Maddox, who both said the students’ behavior at bars showed they were putting in danger the start of SEC football."  [NOTE: In Alabama, the minimum age to buy or drink alcohol is 21.]

of course if the mayors in Alabama were all that concerned they could order the bars closed.......

[82lsju]

I'm sure we'll see lots more stories like these in the coming days.   I don't mean to put these particular schools under a microscope.  I believe this pattern will repeat at almost any school whose students are on campus.

Syracuse University suspends 23 students after 'incredibly reckless' gathering

Bar culture thrives at Alabama colleges despite coronavirus
"In the summer heat, throngs of [Univ of Alabama] students formed crowded lines outside bars near campus, many of them not wearing masks and most not following social distancing guidelines. . . . It was a similar scene in Auburn, where offensive lineman Kameron Stutts tweeted a photo of a large group of students congregating inside a bar without social distancing.  ... It incurred the anger of Greg Byrne, the university [of Alabama]’s athletic director, and Tuscaloosa Mayor Walt Maddox, who both said the students’ behavior at bars showed they were putting in danger the start of SEC football."  [NOTE: In Alabama, the minimum age to buy or drink alcohol is 21.]

of course if the mayors in Alabama were all that concerned they could order the bars closed.......

[Farm93]

3.  Agree with Magnus that all we ever read about is "failings" or setbacks on college campuses.  What I can't tell is if there are successes going on around the country that we're not reading about in MSM.  Maybe not. Maybe that's expecting too much.  I really have no clue.  By way of one example, with the wildfires in Northern CA sending smoke everywhere, one radio report said the smoke was having various impacts, including closing college classes (among list of others).  I was not even aware that any college in NoCal was having in-person classes . . . but maybe I misheard the report, or it was misreported, or my assumption is wrong (i.e., what was canceled was remote instruction .  . . though that seems odd).

Teejers,

#3 wouldn't be news.   The non-story you think should be covered would be at best a human interest story, but more realistically that would be propaganda.  In the USA, that story wouldn't get lots of ratings on ANY media.    

Try taking COVID out of the story, and imagine how boring that network story would be for viewers.

Imagine a world where there are deadly plane crashes from a single airline every week.   And then imagine that CEO complains that the MSM is not covering the hundreds of successful landings each day.   The true motivations of a network that spent a lot of time on the successful landings for some form of balance would be questioned by most citizens (I hope).

The story is the failures.   The ratings will be better covering the failures.   If one wants a society where the media is not focused on finding the most compelling news stories, then there are places in the world independent media.   That's probably where one would need to go to see media focusing on the glory of a factory running normally or a school opening without kids getting sick. 

FWIW - The largest CA schools are closed, but presumably there are a number of smaller colleges and universities in California that will still try to have some form of on-campus instruction.   The state has a set of guidelines for those eager to give opening up a go.

Again though - I would not expect any media to race to schools that are opening unless they open and then something negative happens.   That would not necessarily be a MSM bias against the government or Trump IMO.   Rather any failure would simply be a more compelling story.   Hopefully we will never get to a place where the failures are so common that opening without incident IS the news story.

https://files.covid19.ca.gov/pdf/guidanc...on--en.pdf

[Farm93]

3.  Agree with Magnus that all we ever read about is "failings" or setbacks on college campuses.  What I can't tell is if there are successes going on around the country that we're not reading about in MSM.  Maybe not. Maybe that's expecting too much.  I really have no clue.  By way of one example, with the wildfires in Northern CA sending smoke everywhere, one radio report said the smoke was having various impacts, including closing college classes (among list of others).  I was not even aware that any college in NoCal was having in-person classes . . . but maybe I misheard the report, or it was misreported, or my assumption is wrong (i.e., what was canceled was remote instruction .  . . though that seems odd).

Teejers,

#3 wouldn't be news.   The non-story you think should be covered would be at best a human interest story, but more realistically that would be propaganda.  In the USA, that story wouldn't get lots of ratings on ANY media.    

Try taking COVID out of the story, and imagine how boring that network story would be for viewers.

Imagine a world where there are deadly plane crashes from a single airline every week.   And then imagine that CEO complains that the MSM is not covering the hundreds of successful landings each day.   The true motivations of a network that spent a lot of time on the successful landings for some form of balance would be questioned by most citizens (I hope).

The story is the failures.   The ratings will be better covering the failures.   If one wants a society where the media is not focused on finding the most compelling news stories, then there are places in the world independent media.   That's probably where one would need to go to see media focusing on the glory of a factory running normally or a school opening without kids getting sick. 

FWIW - The largest CA schools are closed, but presumably there are a number of smaller colleges and universities in California that will still try to have some form of on-campus instruction.   The state has a set of guidelines for those eager to give opening up a go.

Again though - I would not expect any media to race to schools that are opening unless they open and then something negative happens.   That would not necessarily be a MSM bias against the government or Trump IMO.   Rather any failure would simply be a more compelling story.   Hopefully we will never get to a place where the failures are so common that opening without incident IS the news story.

https://files.covid19.ca.gov/pdf/guidanc...on--en.pdf

[lex24]

3.  Agree with Magnus that all we ever read about is "failings" or setbacks on college campuses.  What I can't tell is if there are successes going on around the country that we're not reading about in MSM.  Maybe not. Maybe that's expecting too much.  I really have no clue.  By way of one example, with the wildfires in Northern CA sending smoke everywhere, one radio report said the smoke was having various impacts, including closing college classes (among list of others).  I was not even aware that any college in NoCal was having in-person classes . . . but maybe I misheard the report, or it was misreported, or my assumption is wrong (i.e., what was canceled was remote instruction .  . . though that seems odd).

Teejers,

#3 wouldn't be news.   The non-story you think should be covered would be at best a human interest story, but more realistically that would be propaganda.  In the USA, that story wouldn't get lots of ratings on ANY media.    

Try taking COVID out of the story, and imagine how boring that network story would be for viewers.

Imagine a world where there are deadly plane crashes from a single airline every week.   And then imagine that CEO complains that the MSM is not covering the hundreds of successful landings each day.   The true motivations of a network that spent a lot of time on the successful landings for some form of balance would be questioned by most citizens (I hope).

The story is the failures.   The ratings will be better covering the failures.   If one wants a society where the media is not focused on finding the most compelling news stories, then there are places in the world independent media.   That's probably where one would need to go to see media focusing on the glory of a factory running normally or a school opening without kids getting sick. 

FWIW - The largest CA schools are closed, but presumably there are a number of smaller colleges and universities in California that will still try to have some form of on-campus instruction.   The state has a set of guidelines for those eager to give opening up a go.

Again though - I would not expect any media to race to schools that are opening unless they open and then something negative happens.   That would not necessarily be a MSM bias against the government or Trump IMO.   Rather any failure would simply be a more compelling story.   Hopefully we will never get to a place where the failures are so common that opening without incident IS the news story.

https://files.covid19.ca.gov/pdf/guidanc...on--en.pdf

So printing stories on a Univ X having an outbreak due to behavior y is fine and dandy to be reported; but if University Z is having no issue, printing that would be propaganda?

I get your point.  And of course they don’t say “if it bleeds it leads” for nothing. But the Internet 24-7 “news” and social media have changed things. To the extent where – and I’m not talking about Covid here - anything that is remotely negative often gets blown way out of proportion. The result is we often get, in my opinion, a disproportionately negative view of what is going on.  (I’m talking in general here)

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

Lastly, imo,  the plane analogy doesn’t hold water. We don’t have thousands of articles everyday and countless stories talking about the dangers of plane travel. We don’t have scorecards constantly regarding numbers of infected, dead etc. There are those that believe that what they consider the “fear reporting” is “propaganda”.  I’m not in that camp.  But I do think “good news” relating to the pandemic should be reported. And  I certainly think how Universities are faring in general is news - including those that are faring well.

[lex24]

3.  Agree with Magnus that all we ever read about is "failings" or setbacks on college campuses.  What I can't tell is if there are successes going on around the country that we're not reading about in MSM.  Maybe not. Maybe that's expecting too much.  I really have no clue.  By way of one example, with the wildfires in Northern CA sending smoke everywhere, one radio report said the smoke was having various impacts, including closing college classes (among list of others).  I was not even aware that any college in NoCal was having in-person classes . . . but maybe I misheard the report, or it was misreported, or my assumption is wrong (i.e., what was canceled was remote instruction .  . . though that seems odd).

Teejers,

#3 wouldn't be news.   The non-story you think should be covered would be at best a human interest story, but more realistically that would be propaganda.  In the USA, that story wouldn't get lots of ratings on ANY media.    

Try taking COVID out of the story, and imagine how boring that network story would be for viewers.

Imagine a world where there are deadly plane crashes from a single airline every week.   And then imagine that CEO complains that the MSM is not covering the hundreds of successful landings each day.   The true motivations of a network that spent a lot of time on the successful landings for some form of balance would be questioned by most citizens (I hope).

The story is the failures.   The ratings will be better covering the failures.   If one wants a society where the media is not focused on finding the most compelling news stories, then there are places in the world independent media.   That's probably where one would need to go to see media focusing on the glory of a factory running normally or a school opening without kids getting sick. 

FWIW - The largest CA schools are closed, but presumably there are a number of smaller colleges and universities in California that will still try to have some form of on-campus instruction.   The state has a set of guidelines for those eager to give opening up a go.

Again though - I would not expect any media to race to schools that are opening unless they open and then something negative happens.   That would not necessarily be a MSM bias against the government or Trump IMO.   Rather any failure would simply be a more compelling story.   Hopefully we will never get to a place where the failures are so common that opening without incident IS the news story.

https://files.covid19.ca.gov/pdf/guidanc...on--en.pdf

So printing stories on a Univ X having an outbreak due to behavior y is fine and dandy to be reported; but if University Z is having no issue, printing that would be propaganda?

I get your point.  And of course they don’t say “if it bleeds it leads” for nothing. But the Internet 24-7 “news” and social media have changed things. To the extent where – and I’m not talking about Covid here - anything that is remotely negative often gets blown way out of proportion. The result is we often get, in my opinion, a disproportionately negative view of what is going on.  (I’m talking in general here)

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

Lastly, imo,  the plane analogy doesn’t hold water. We don’t have thousands of articles everyday and countless stories talking about the dangers of plane travel. We don’t have scorecards constantly regarding numbers of infected, dead etc. There are those that believe that what they consider the “fear reporting” is “propaganda”.  I’m not in that camp.  But I do think “good news” relating to the pandemic should be reported. And  I certainly think how Universities are faring in general is news - including those that are faring well.

[82lsju]

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

so to me a "success story" would be a university that 

- has been in session 2+ weeks
- with a significant on campus presence of undergrads 
- with not 100% on-line classes 
- that has not had a significant outbreak of infections.  

I'm not sure that many universities have been open long enough to meet those criteria to have "success stories" yet.

I'd also think a university might be reluctant to tout a "success story" just in case things went downhill after the initial "success" and/or because it might be taken by the students that they can be less vigilant in the future

[82lsju]

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

so to me a "success story" would be a university that 

- has been in session 2+ weeks
- with a significant on campus presence of undergrads 
- with not 100% on-line classes 
- that has not had a significant outbreak of infections.  

I'm not sure that many universities have been open long enough to meet those criteria to have "success stories" yet.

I'd also think a university might be reluctant to tout a "success story" just in case things went downhill after the initial "success" and/or because it might be taken by the students that they can be less vigilant in the future

[lex24]

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

so to me a "success story" would be a university that 

- has been in session 2+ weeks
- with a significant on campus presence of undergrads 
- with not 100% on-line classes 
- that has not had a significant outbreak of infections.  

I'm not sure that many universities have been open long enough to meet those criteria to have "success stories" yet.

I'd also think a university might be reluctant to tout a "success story" just in case things went downhill after the initial "success" and/or because it might be taken by the students that they can be less vigilant in the future

Agree.  It would be nice somehow to get the big picture of starting with the number of kids on campus  infection rate as compared and to infection rate of the same age group of those who are not on college campuses. But I doubt that’s possible data wise.   And I suspect there would also be socioeconomic factors that would need to be factored in to get a truly fair assessment

[lex24]

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

so to me a "success story" would be a university that 

- has been in session 2+ weeks
- with a significant on campus presence of undergrads 
- with not 100% on-line classes 
- that has not had a significant outbreak of infections.  

I'm not sure that many universities have been open long enough to meet those criteria to have "success stories" yet.

I'd also think a university might be reluctant to tout a "success story" just in case things went downhill after the initial "success" and/or because it might be taken by the students that they can be less vigilant in the future

Agree.  It would be nice somehow to get the big picture of starting with the number of kids on campus  infection rate as compared and to infection rate of the same age group of those who are not on college campuses. But I doubt that’s possible data wise.   And I suspect there would also be socioeconomic factors that would need to be factored in to get a truly fair assessment

[82lsju]

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

so to me a "success story" would be a university that 

- has been in session 2+ weeks
- with a significant on campus presence of undergrads 
- with not 100% on-line classes 
- that has not had a significant outbreak of infections.  

I'm not sure that many universities have been open long enough to meet those criteria to have "success stories" yet.

I'd also think a university might be reluctant to tout a "success story" just in case things went downhill after the initial "success" and/or because it might be taken by the students that they can be less vigilant in the future

Agree.  It would be nice somehow to get the big picture of starting with the number of kids on campus  infection rate as compared and to infection rate of the same age group of those who are not on college campuses. But I doubt that’s possible data wise.   And I suspect there would also be socioeconomic factors that would need to be factored in to get a truly fair assessment

Clemson has a dashboard up

https://www.clemson.edu/coronavirus/dashboard.html

but they just started classes and are all on-line until at least 21 Sept, no idea how many students are on campus, given the news below that classes will be on line until at least 21 Sept,  they have an undergrad enrollment of 19,000 and last week did 678 student test I would guess many are not on campus.  In total they have reported 3,198 student tests and 3.563 staff tests

[/url]Aug 19, Wed
Classes will be conducted online until September 21, when in-person instruction is scheduled to begin. For more information, see the President's Blog at https://blogs.clemson.edu/president/2020/07/22/presidents-update-fall-2020/.

https://www.clemson.edu/registrar/academic-calendars/calendars.html?year=2020&semester=fall

[url=https://calendar.clemson.edu/event/2020_fall_semester_-_classes_begin]

[82lsju]

In the context of Covid - I think that reporting  on the complete picture relating to Universities, whatever that may be, is what “should” happen. That includes reporting the success stories along with the stories on outbreaks.  It also includes, if possible, big picture. Such as - how many kids nationally are back at College.  What is the overall infection rate for those kids and how does it compare to the age group at-large.  Break it down regionally as well.  

Unfortunately, I don’t think this kind of comprehensive analysis is possible.  Because we don’t have the data. So we are stuck with largely anecdotal stories. 

so to me a "success story" would be a university that 

- has been in session 2+ weeks
- with a significant on campus presence of undergrads 
- with not 100% on-line classes 
- that has not had a significant outbreak of infections.  

I'm not sure that many universities have been open long enough to meet those criteria to have "success stories" yet.

I'd also think a university might be reluctant to tout a "success story" just in case things went downhill after the initial "success" and/or because it might be taken by the students that they can be less vigilant in the future

Agree.  It would be nice somehow to get the big picture of starting with the number of kids on campus  infection rate as compared and to infection rate of the same age group of those who are not on college campuses. But I doubt that’s possible data wise.   And I suspect there would also be socioeconomic factors that would need to be factored in to get a truly fair assessment

Clemson has a dashboard up

https://www.clemson.edu/coronavirus/dashboard.html

but they just started classes and are all on-line until at least 21 Sept, no idea how many students are on campus, given the news below that classes will be on line until at least 21 Sept,  they have an undergrad enrollment of 19,000 and last week did 678 student test I would guess many are not on campus.  In total they have reported 3,198 student tests and 3.563 staff tests

[/url]Aug 19, Wed
Classes will be conducted online until September 21, when in-person instruction is scheduled to begin. For more information, see the President's Blog at https://blogs.clemson.edu/president/2020/07/22/presidents-update-fall-2020/.

https://www.clemson.edu/registrar/academic-calendars/calendars.html?year=2020&semester=fall

[url=https://calendar.clemson.edu/event/2020_fall_semester_-_classes_begin]

[BostonCard]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

[BostonCard]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

[82lsju]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

like this event at Syracuse......

Dear Students:

Last night, a large group of first-year students selfishly jeopardized the very thing that so many of you claim to want from Syracuse University—that is, a chance at a residential college experience. I say this because the students who gathered on the Quad last night may have done damage enough to shut down campus, including residence halls and in-person learning, before the academic semester even begins.

https://news.syr.edu/blog/2020/08/20/las...-behavior/

Based on last night’s events and other related behaviors and actions that were in violation of the Code of Student Conduct and the Stay Safe Pledge, 23 students have received interim suspensions.

https://news.syr.edu/blog/2020/08/20/add...gathering/

[82lsju]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

like this event at Syracuse......

Dear Students:

Last night, a large group of first-year students selfishly jeopardized the very thing that so many of you claim to want from Syracuse University—that is, a chance at a residential college experience. I say this because the students who gathered on the Quad last night may have done damage enough to shut down campus, including residence halls and in-person learning, before the academic semester even begins.

https://news.syr.edu/blog/2020/08/20/las...-behavior/

Based on last night’s events and other related behaviors and actions that were in violation of the Code of Student Conduct and the Stay Safe Pledge, 23 students have received interim suspensions.

https://news.syr.edu/blog/2020/08/20/add...gathering/

[lex24]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

True.  And they’d be out partying at home as well.  Without question a vexing problem. But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

[lex24]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

True.  And they’d be out partying at home as well.  Without question a vexing problem. But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

[82lsju]

But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

exactly......

[82lsju]

But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

exactly......

[Goose]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

True.  And they’d be out partying at home as well.  Without question a vexing problem. But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

I am going to blame them. If you are old enough to drive, and old enough to go away to college, you are old enough to have some modicum of social responsibility. In our society, kids may be expected to do whatever they want. When they become adults, they will do the same. Yes, I am being a crotchety old man, but one of the things we learned when we were kids was when you could bend the rules and when you couldn't. This is in the "couldn't" category. Maybe they should lose their 2S and next stop Vietnam? Oh, wait, we don't do that anymore.

[Goose]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

True.  And they’d be out partying at home as well.  Without question a vexing problem. But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

I am going to blame them. If you are old enough to drive, and old enough to go away to college, you are old enough to have some modicum of social responsibility. In our society, kids may be expected to do whatever they want. When they become adults, they will do the same. Yes, I am being a crotchety old man, but one of the things we learned when we were kids was when you could bend the rules and when you couldn't. This is in the "couldn't" category. Maybe they should lose their 2S and next stop Vietnam? Oh, wait, we don't do that anymore.

[Mick]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

True.  And they’d be out partying at home as well.  Without question a vexing problem. But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

I am going to blame them. If you are old enough to drive, and old enough to go away to college, you are old enough to have some modicum of social responsibility. In our society, kids may be expected to do whatever they want. When they become adults, they will do the same. Yes, I am being a crotchety old man, but one of the things we learned when we were kids was when you could bend the rules and when you couldn't. This is in the "couldn't" category. Maybe they should lose their 2S and next stop Vietnam? Oh, wait, we don't do that anymore.

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

[Mick]

Any strategy that relied on 18 - 22 year olds who have been cooped up in their home for 6 months to not go out and party was delusional.  You almost wonder if large universities set this up to fail, but give themselves an out to blame the students for the failure.  If they had announced from the beginning that they were going online only and school-from-home, a substantial proportion of students would have deferred, costing universities dearly.  So, they announce that they are going to hold in person classes, but then when students invariably due what students are going to do, cancel in person classes and claim that it is the fault of the students for going out partying.

BC

True.  And they’d be out partying at home as well.  Without question a vexing problem. But I ain’t gonna blame the kids. Kids are kids

I am going to blame them. If you are old enough to drive, and old enough to go away to college, you are old enough to have some modicum of social responsibility. In our society, kids may be expected to do whatever they want. When they become adults, they will do the same. Yes, I am being a crotchety old man, but one of the things we learned when we were kids was when you could bend the rules and when you couldn't. This is in the "couldn't" category. Maybe they should lose their 2S and next stop Vietnam? Oh, wait, we don't do that anymore.

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

[Goose]

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

Given what I have seen for many people adolescence extends far beyond the 20s, but that is another story. I agree we have extended adolescence, but we  continue to allow adolescents to assume adult privileges as if they were going to enter the workforce etc. In fact, we lowered the voting age to 18. One argument for that was that if you were old enough to be drafted, you were old enough to vote. Then we quit drafting people.

My point is that adolescents are not incapable of following rules and behaving responsibly. They are probably less able to make tradeoffs based on experience, and may (ok, will) make mistakes due to misreading a situation. However, if it is made clear to them in no uncertain terms that you don't do X, they are capable of not doing X. History shows that is true. Problems emerge when society basically delivers the message that you have a right to do whatever you want without real consequences. You then get adolescents partying during an epidemic. They need to know that they can test the boundaries around the edges. Adolescents always do that. However, they also need to know there are things you just don't do, period. IMHO our society has failed to establish the latter. That has had seriously bad consequences for quite some years.

[Goose]

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

Given what I have seen for many people adolescence extends far beyond the 20s, but that is another story. I agree we have extended adolescence, but we  continue to allow adolescents to assume adult privileges as if they were going to enter the workforce etc. In fact, we lowered the voting age to 18. One argument for that was that if you were old enough to be drafted, you were old enough to vote. Then we quit drafting people.

My point is that adolescents are not incapable of following rules and behaving responsibly. They are probably less able to make tradeoffs based on experience, and may (ok, will) make mistakes due to misreading a situation. However, if it is made clear to them in no uncertain terms that you don't do X, they are capable of not doing X. History shows that is true. Problems emerge when society basically delivers the message that you have a right to do whatever you want without real consequences. You then get adolescents partying during an epidemic. They need to know that they can test the boundaries around the edges. Adolescents always do that. However, they also need to know there are things you just don't do, period. IMHO our society has failed to establish the latter. That has had seriously bad consequences for quite some years.

[Mick]

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

Given what I have seen for many people adolescence extends far beyond the 20s, but that is another story. I agree we have extended adolescence, but we  continue to allow adolescents to assume adult privileges as if they were going to enter the workforce etc. In fact, we lowered the voting age to 18. One argument for that was that if you were old enough to be drafted, you were old enough to vote. Then we quit drafting people.

My point is that adolescents are not incapable of following rules and behaving responsibly. They are probably less able to make tradeoffs based on experience, and may (ok, will) make mistakes due to misreading a situation. However, if it is made clear to them in no uncertain terms that you don't do X, they are capable of not doing X. History shows that is true. Problems emerge when society basically delivers the message that you have a right to do whatever you want without real consequences. You then get adolescents partying during an epidemic. They need to know that they can test the boundaries around the edges. Adolescents always do that. However, they also need to know there are things you just don't do, period. IMHO our society has failed to establish the latter. That has had seriously bad consequences for quite some years.

Great post, I agree completely.  I think it's why Americans have done so poorly, at least in part, during the pandemic.

Curious to know what you think of this.  A 14 year-old, demanding emancipation, citing abuse at the hands of two parents who are at odds politically:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1358184/cla...nts-abuse/

[Mick]

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

Given what I have seen for many people adolescence extends far beyond the 20s, but that is another story. I agree we have extended adolescence, but we  continue to allow adolescents to assume adult privileges as if they were going to enter the workforce etc. In fact, we lowered the voting age to 18. One argument for that was that if you were old enough to be drafted, you were old enough to vote. Then we quit drafting people.

My point is that adolescents are not incapable of following rules and behaving responsibly. They are probably less able to make tradeoffs based on experience, and may (ok, will) make mistakes due to misreading a situation. However, if it is made clear to them in no uncertain terms that you don't do X, they are capable of not doing X. History shows that is true. Problems emerge when society basically delivers the message that you have a right to do whatever you want without real consequences. You then get adolescents partying during an epidemic. They need to know that they can test the boundaries around the edges. Adolescents always do that. However, they also need to know there are things you just don't do, period. IMHO our society has failed to establish the latter. That has had seriously bad consequences for quite some years.

Great post, I agree completely.  I think it's why Americans have done so poorly, at least in part, during the pandemic.

Curious to know what you think of this.  A 14 year-old, demanding emancipation, citing abuse at the hands of two parents who are at odds politically:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1358184/cla...nts-abuse/

[Goose]

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

Given what I have seen for many people adolescence extends far beyond the 20s, but that is another story. I agree we have extended adolescence, but we  continue to allow adolescents to assume adult privileges as if they were going to enter the workforce etc. In fact, we lowered the voting age to 18. One argument for that was that if you were old enough to be drafted, you were old enough to vote. Then we quit drafting people.

My point is that adolescents are not incapable of following rules and behaving responsibly. They are probably less able to make tradeoffs based on experience, and may (ok, will) make mistakes due to misreading a situation. However, if it is made clear to them in no uncertain terms that you don't do X, they are capable of not doing X. History shows that is true. Problems emerge when society basically delivers the message that you have a right to do whatever you want without real consequences. You then get adolescents partying during an epidemic. They need to know that they can test the boundaries around the edges. Adolescents always do that. However, they also need to know there are things you just don't do, period. IMHO our society has failed to establish the latter. That has had seriously bad consequences for quite some years.

Great post, I agree completely.  I think it's why Americans have done so poorly, at least in part, during the pandemic.

Curious to know what you think of this.  A 14 year-old, demanding emancipation, citing abuse at the hands of two parents who are at odds politically:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1358184/cla...nts-abuse/

I am just very glad I am not a member of that family. While I do tend to dismiss the girl's accusation as a 14 year old who thinks she is 30 (and attempts to look like it), I do feel her accusations of physical abuse require verification. Things like that can't be ignored based on what we think is true, unfortunately. The idea that any kid can now go on social media and accuse their parents of God-knows-what regardless of any evidence makes my blood run cold. It is giving a nuke to a child.

[Goose]

We've been extending adolescence for a very long time.  100 years ago, 14 year olds would graduate from 8th grade and were often expected to go out and work.  High school graduation rate in 1920 was just 16.8%.  There was no "out" you had to grow up right away.  Today, adolescence extends well into the 20s.

Given what I have seen for many people adolescence extends far beyond the 20s, but that is another story. I agree we have extended adolescence, but we  continue to allow adolescents to assume adult privileges as if they were going to enter the workforce etc. In fact, we lowered the voting age to 18. One argument for that was that if you were old enough to be drafted, you were old enough to vote. Then we quit drafting people.

My point is that adolescents are not incapable of following rules and behaving responsibly. They are probably less able to make tradeoffs based on experience, and may (ok, will) make mistakes due to misreading a situation. However, if it is made clear to them in no uncertain terms that you don't do X, they are capable of not doing X. History shows that is true. Problems emerge when society basically delivers the message that you have a right to do whatever you want without real consequences. You then get adolescents partying during an epidemic. They need to know that they can test the boundaries around the edges. Adolescents always do that. However, they also need to know there are things you just don't do, period. IMHO our society has failed to establish the latter. That has had seriously bad consequences for quite some years.

Great post, I agree completely.  I think it's why Americans have done so poorly, at least in part, during the pandemic.

Curious to know what you think of this.  A 14 year-old, demanding emancipation, citing abuse at the hands of two parents who are at odds politically:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1358184/cla...nts-abuse/

I am just very glad I am not a member of that family. While I do tend to dismiss the girl's accusation as a 14 year old who thinks she is 30 (and attempts to look like it), I do feel her accusations of physical abuse require verification. Things like that can't be ignored based on what we think is true, unfortunately. The idea that any kid can now go on social media and accuse their parents of God-knows-what regardless of any evidence makes my blood run cold. It is giving a nuke to a child.

[teejers1]

Great post, I agree completely.  I think it's why Americans have done so poorly, at least in part, during the pandemic.

Curious to know what you think of this.  A 14 year-old, demanding emancipation, citing abuse at the hands of two parents who are at odds politically:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1358184/cla...nts-abuse/

I am just very glad I am not a member of that family. While I do tend to dismiss the girl's accusation as a 14 year old who thinks she is 30 (and attempts to look like it), I do feel her accusations of physical abuse require verification. Things like that can't be ignored based on what we think is true, unfortunately. The idea that any kid can now go on social media and accuse their parents of God-knows-what regardless of any evidence makes my blood run cold. It is giving a nuke to a child.

Only read about mom's departure from Trump WH this morning.  Having read the link here, it all makes sense now (as does dad's decision to back away from the Lincoln group bashing Trump).  There is a lot of family work to be attended to.  Of course, the work on that front - even if less grave - is never ending for all of us (just thankful any such work is not in the public eye).  I kind of feel for mom, dad, and daughter (and the other kids - no way they're unaffected).

[teejers1]

Great post, I agree completely.  I think it's why Americans have done so poorly, at least in part, during the pandemic.

Curious to know what you think of this.  A 14 year-old, demanding emancipation, citing abuse at the hands of two parents who are at odds politically:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1358184/cla...nts-abuse/

I am just very glad I am not a member of that family. While I do tend to dismiss the girl's accusation as a 14 year old who thinks she is 30 (and attempts to look like it), I do feel her accusations of physical abuse require verification. Things like that can't be ignored based on what we think is true, unfortunately. The idea that any kid can now go on social media and accuse their parents of God-knows-what regardless of any evidence makes my blood run cold. It is giving a nuke to a child.

Only read about mom's departure from Trump WH this morning.  Having read the link here, it all makes sense now (as does dad's decision to back away from the Lincoln group bashing Trump).  There is a lot of family work to be attended to.  Of course, the work on that front - even if less grave - is never ending for all of us (just thankful any such work is not in the public eye).  I kind of feel for mom, dad, and daughter (and the other kids - no way they're unaffected).

[2006alum]

Don't stray too far from COVID-19, folks. Realize the conventions probably have folks even more primed to think about everything in political terms, but that's not this board. Antibodies, not Antifa, please. Thanks!

[2006alum]

Don't stray too far from COVID-19, folks. Realize the conventions probably have folks even more primed to think about everything in political terms, but that's not this board. Antibodies, not Antifa, please. Thanks!