I’m imagining the University dusting off an old book from 1665 to help with the plan or maybe they discover some older gentleman with long hair and an even longer beard who went down on the cellar during the cholera pandemic and got lost.
Actually, I am getting regular updates from Oxford about what they did in the plague of 1666. Seriously. They kept records.
It may be the case with a few other universities as well. It’s interesting to those who care about such things. Possibly it’s useful in their planning.
I don’t think that’s an approach US schools are using.
Internet makes a huge difference. There have been other changes in education since the 17th c.
And, of course, Oxford has fewer financial concerns than most places.
Actually, I am surprised the internet did not matter more. Few of the students surveyed this year expressed any degree of satisfaction with their online schooling or agreed it was an effective alternative. Many prefer not to attend rather than to go online.
And yet, knowing at least some of their classes will be online, college students apparently are choosing to return.
Yes, which suggests the non-academic parts of college ( dorms, friends, etc) are at least equal to and likely greater than the academic classes, in importance.
Which is why there needs to be a liability shield.
A liability shield doesn’t shield against a bad reputation. A big outbreak on campus is harmful in itself, aside from potential legal liability.
For those who think it’s so safe that they are agitating for in-person campus return, why in the world would you think anyone needs a liability shield? It’s safe, right?
@fretfulmother It is safe, but that doesn’t protect universities from cash-hungry people who see the opportunity for money in a lawsuit.
@“Cardinal Fang” Maybe for some universities, but I promise you that no matter how much reputational harm is done from COVID-19, elite colleges such as Ivy Leagues and NESCACs will have no problem filling their graduating classes, and would lose much less money from said reputational harm than from staying closed another semester or year.
@roycroftmom That is amazingly accurate, and not an exaggeration in the slightest. According to a survey by the Amherst Student (our newspaper), over 80% of the student body would rather take a leave of absence than continue remote education from home, and although there was some voluntary response bias there, I can personally tell you that me and all of my close friends agreed we would rather take time off than continue remote learning. Not to mention, academic performance at Amherst was significantly lower this semester, on average, than a typical semester. Since the college is informally letting anyone who wishes to do so take a leave of absence, there is a lot of pressure to reopen for the entire student body.
That’s just not a thing. This “frivolous lawsuits” canard has been addressed many times, and is probably off-topic for the thread. Suffice it to say, no one gets into a lawsuit about their child’s death for fun and profit.
@fretfulmother I’m not talking about a lawsuit for a child’s death. I am talking about a lawsuit for the sake of a lawsuit, as the chance of a child dying is highly unlikely.
Then you have nothing to worry about, because such a suit would be dismissed long before it ever needed to rely on tort reform.
https://attorneyatlawmagazine.com/how-media-fuels-frivolous-lawsuit-myth
The Crimson has a survey that said 52% of Harvard students are now considering a gap year. Regardless of how schools spin online learning, many students aren’t interested.
@“Cardinal Fang”
Yes, but reputation is often a relative thing. Who is going to have time to point the finger at one particular college if every one of its peers are experiencing the same sorts of outbreaks? I believe there will be a national debate about when and how and whether it will be necessary to shut down these colleges and universities and it will probably last as many news cycles as it takes to get everyone across the finish line around Thanksgiving. And, that’s assuming the news cycles don’t get hijacked by the National Election (which they probably will.)
Is that a number for 1 day, @tigerle? Because that would be . . . a lot.
My BIL is part of a 30 person practice just to deal with the flow of lawsuits and litigation for one fast food chain of note. The entire firm works for this one client. The stories I could share. Of course there are frivolous lawsuits. The anti tort reform lobby is a powerful machine for a reason.
And they most likely or certainly helped with that article and it’s sourcing. The media in general and the tort bar support the same politicians in a big way.
Plus it may not happen irl life but corporate planners and institutional risk managers certainly are concerned with litigation.
Yes someone could die and the parents would sue. Many times because of misplaced anger and grief. Having limited liability for personal decisions is totally logical.
It would never prevent a gross negligence suit from proceeding. It’s just a higher bar should be in place.
Btw If it’s a non issue why do all states municipalities have caps and maximums for most liability issues for themselves? Good for thee but not for me. Typical.
You keep saying this. And yet it’s not accurate to compare any of these illnesses and university/college realities to Covid in 21st century America.