U of M proposes a two-week pause on students moving to campus

Donate To GopherHole
A

alltimetwinsfan

Grand Poobah
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
2,130
Reaction score
53
Points
48
The U of M is proposing a two-week delay in move-in dates for students...basically pushing pause on plans for students in Duluth, Rochester, and the Twin Cities. Classes will start on time fully online. Part of an Email from Gabel to staff and students...

A Pivot for Fall 2020
In order to adapt thoughtfully, I’m announcing the following proposal for consideration by the University’s Board of Regents during a special meeting at 10:30 a.m. on Monday, Aug. 24. This proposal is subject to the Board’s review and approval.

For Duluth, Rochester, and the Twin Cities:
  • Move-in dates for University housing on all three campuses are postponed for at least two weeks to provide additional time to evaluate new and emerging federal testing guidance, as well as continued evaluation of techniques used to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. This window helps us avoid moving large numbers of students into on-campus housing and then moving them out again if public health conditions eventually require distance learning for the remainder of the fall semester. Students who plan to live in University residence halls or apartments will soon receive more information from the relevant office on your campus.
 

Just heard. Got a freshman son who is not thrilled.
 


Also NC State, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Cuse make good on their threat to go online only.

And saw in the news about big student parties down in Ames.

Online only for fall is inevitable.
 

I want a leader like Kevin Warren who just makes a decision (right or wrong) so that we can adjust to it. Joan Gabel seems to want to gather too much information instead of just pulling the trigger and moving us all online, and thereby removing the uncertainty for this semester.
 


Why twist them in the wind? We all know how this one is going to end up.

The same could be said for football as well, though that's further out than start of fall classes.
 

If they pause this on Monday, that means that the pause will end the day before classes start. If they're concerned with moving students on campus, it will be much worse if they try to do it all in one day.

Nothing has really changed in the past couple of weeks so why are they changing their approach now? New cases have been pretty flat in the state and have been decreasing across the country. If they don't think it's safe they should have already pulled the bandaid off. If they think it's safe they should go ahead and let students move in.
 

GoGophersUMN said:
If they pause this on Monday, that means that the pause will end the day before classes start. If they're concerned with moving students on campus, it will be much worse if they try to do it all in one day.

Nothing has really changed in the past couple of weeks so why are they changing their approach now? New cases have been pretty flat in the state and have been decreasing across the country. If they don't think it's safe they should have already pulled the bandaid off. If they think it's safe they should go ahead and let students move in.
Click to expand...
The fact that there have been outbreak on multiple campuses that opened has changed.

Not really sure why everyone always jumps to “not much has changed”

Thousands of things change every day.
 

If the B10 all made classes online (which is inevitable everywhere) and announced it a month ago..... They'd be playing football instead of cutting sports and furloughing Athletic Departments.

Saying no to football and yes to in-person classes never made a lick of sense.
 



MN-Moose said:
If the B10 all made classes online (which is inevitable everywhere) and announced it a month ago..... They'd be playing football instead of cutting sports and furloughing Athletic Departments.

Saying no to football and yes to in-person classes never made a lick of sense.
Click to expand...
Bolded: how do you figure that? My understanding was that having in-person class was a prerequisite to having fall sports (or at least fall football), as it wouldn't be logical or justifiable to not have students on campus then to allow just athletes on campus.
 

What are the criteria for cancelling in-person classes and on-campus living?
 

Maybe by delaying, they can set up Covid-19 testing twice a week like Illinois does. Focus first on student athletes, faculty and staff, and then the general student population.

The U can benefit from the Saliva Test develop by the University of Illinois. It was granted a fast track Federal Approval for use including the Yale University version. The University of Illinois version is more simple (and costs about $10.00). It use less material, consequently a lot less supply chain issues. They use considerably a lot less reagents and offer more protection to health care workers.

The point is, one bad apple can spoil the whole bushel of good. If students are careless or don't care about anyone else and throw a huge party, it will negate all the hard work put into controlling the spread.

Purdue where a large party have occurred a full 24 hours after the students where told of the new Covid-19 Health Guidelines against such gatherings have suspended the irresponsible students.
 
Last edited:

The culture of safety-ism has costs. Do schools shut down if 10 cases occur, or a hundred, or five hundred? Do schools adopt the CDC definition of high risk exposure when determining quarantine: 15+ minutes without masks indoors within 6 feet.

The recent shutterings have the feel of reactionism, pie in the sky thinking, or potentially (and much worse) a cynical sleight of hand to gather tuition dollars before kids take a gap year instead. Is there a plan to manage inevitable outbreaks, and a threshold at which a pause or shutdown occurs?

Tuition dollars, associated move costs, non-refundable rental costs should be swallowed by the school that cannot answer these questions preemptively and let the kids make an informed choice. There is probably money to be found within the school budget, if they really want to. It would take hard choices, but be the right thing to do.
 



Some guy said:
The fact that there have been outbreak on multiple campuses that opened has changed.

Not really sure why everyone always jumps to “not much has changed”

Thousands of things change every day.
Click to expand...
Almost all of the outbreaks I know of involved less than 1% of the student population getting coronavirus. Notre Dame was about 2% which is the biggest one I know of.

That isn't really a change. It was inevitable that at least a few colleges would have one to two percent of their student populations get infected and it shouldn't be a surprise at all. If the U thinks that a few percent of students getting infected is too much of a risk, they should have cancelled the entire semester a long time ago. It was always going to happen and if the U goes ahead with the semester it's probably going to happen here too.
 

GoGophersUMN said:
Almost all of the outbreaks I know of involved less than 1% of the student population getting coronavirus. Notre Dame was about 2% which is the biggest one I know of.

That isn't really a change. It was inevitable that at least a few colleges would have one to two percent of their student populations get infected and it shouldn't be a surprise at all. If the U thinks that a few percent of students getting infected is too much of a risk, they should have cancelled the entire semester a long time ago. It was always going to happen and if the U goes ahead with the semester it's probably going to happen here too.
Click to expand...
They couldn’t go all online or all these schools would cease from functioning.

massive layoffs would spillover to other parts of the local economies.

as dishonest as it is, colleges were smart to open and then quickly shutdown during an outbreak. The other options were massive layoffs or pray for a one year bailout
 

Some guy said:
They couldn’t go all online or all these schools would cease from functioning.

massive layoffs would spillover to other parts of the local economies.

as dishonest as it is, colleges were smart to open and then quickly shutdown during an outbreak. The other options were massive layoffs or pray for a one year bailout
Click to expand...
Why would they need massive layoffs if they were online only from the start but not if they start out trying to do in-person classes but quickly go to online only?

I don't think any of their funding is tied to in-person classes. At one point they would have lost tuition income from international students but the rules changed on that a month ago. They also wouldn't lose much in tuition or fees because they are 100% refundable within the first week of classes. Anyone who is only willing to pay for in-person classes either is already skipping this semester or will drop the classes if it is confirmed that the semester will start entirely online.
 

GoGophersUMN said:
Why would they need massive layoffs if they were online only from the start but not if they start out trying to do in-person classes but quickly go to online only?

I don't think any of their funding is tied to in-person classes. At one point they would have lost tuition income from international students but the rules changed on that a month ago. They also wouldn't lose much in tuition or fees because they are 100% refundable within the first week of classes. Anyone who is only willing to pay for in-person classes either is already skipping this semester or will drop the classes if it is confirmed that the semester will start entirely online.
Click to expand...
Your last sentence is exactly why they are starting in person

Every non-community college in the country is really struggling to get kids enrolled right now.
 

No one is shutting down from a one year blip.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom