Impact on Universities

[Huntergreed]

OK, so we need someone who knows what students think.

I know, what about the NUS? https://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/covid-19-and-students-survey-report

I'll spare you the trouble of pretending to read it by pointing out the obvious, that this survey was undertaken in April.

Key findings

"62% of students are somewhat or very scared of contracting Covid19
• This increases with age
• Only 23% of students feel prepared for how they would manage their health if they did contract Covid-19
• Almost all (93%) are practicing social distancing • But 40% of students tell us they are not at all, or only somewhat aware of guidance around living in shared accommodation
• 74% are experiencing a negative impact on family life, and 88% are experiencing a negative impact on their social lives
• Almost all are constantly connected to their friends and families on their phones through social media and phone/videocalls"

Second phase being promoted here https://www.nus.org.uk/en/news/coro...survey-phase-ii/?load=5&top=454.5454406738281

To be fair, back in March the virus was portrayed as much more dangerous and deadly, we knew much less about who was most and least vulnerable and we had just locked down, I would say even I would have felt afraid of contracting it and that we shouldn’t have gone back to uni at that point.

Now however, we have a much greater understanding and personally I think if you did that survey again the results would show the opposite, that most students are not scared of the virus, have rationally perceived the low risk it presents, and want to return to as normal a life as possible as quickly as possible.

 

[takno]

I would suggest that only promoting it via those channels is going to have produced some rather biased results. My experience is that those in the NUS and active within Student Unions tend to be a bit more 'woke' and likely to be considerably more along the "oh no, if I leave the house I'll kill my granny" type. And like you say, the fact it was carried out late March to early April (ie peak pandemic) is going to significantly skew the results too. This was about a week on from campuses being closed - a lot more now is understood about the virus, and I suspect a lot of opinions have now changed.

The channel here is email, which pretty much everybody picks up on to some extent, and the totality of student union databases includes all students enrolled at an institution who haven't specifically opted out of union membership, which is virtually everyone. It was arguably better when they had a phone component to their surveys, but who actually answers unknown numbers anymore? There are no really obvious issues with methodology here, just that it's a snapshot of opinion from 6 months ago when everybody felt quite different.

 

[BJames]

The channel here is email, which pretty much everybody picks up on to some extent, and the totality of student union databases includes all students enrolled at an institution who haven't specifically opted out of union membership, which is virtually everyone. It was arguably better when they had a phone component to their surveys, but who actually answers unknown numbers anymore? There are no really obvious issues with methodology here, just that it's a snapshot of opinion from 6 months ago when everybody felt quite different.

You're right that pretty much every student is enrolled into their own Student's Union automatically at most, if not all, institutions. The only difference here though is that this is the National Union of Students (NUS) which, in order to get communication from them, you need to register separately. It's opt-in rather than opt-out. Still certainly better than a phone component but this survey wasn't offered to everyone, only those who had already joined NUS and agreed to receive email communications. FWIW I've just signed up so I can get future communication from them.

I agree though that it's just an old snapshot rather than anything massively incorrect.

 

[Domh245]

The channel here is email, which pretty much everybody picks up on to some extent, and the totality of student union databases includes all students enrolled at an institution who haven't specifically opted out of union membership, which is virtually everyone. It was arguably better when they had a phone component to their surveys, but who actually answers unknown numbers anymore? There are no really obvious issues with methodology here, just that it's a snapshot of opinion from 6 months ago when everybody felt quite different.

This is true, although most/all SU emails I got had the subject line scanned and then went straight into the bin. Having gone back and checked my emails from around this time (whilst I still can), the only communications I had from my SU were about student elections and a short piece saying what services were still available - nothing from them about any sort of COVID survey (though there were other surveys run by my university and department itself)

 

[Jozhua]

9872 students in that survey. Which, following the figure of Universities UK that there are 1.80 million undergraduate students in the UK, this represents 0.548% of the student population. But also, I'd say it represented my views in April while everyone was at their most paranoid, so I'm not exactly surprised at the results from this April survey. It certainly doesn't represent my views now, and I would be surprised if the Phase 2 results came out the same.

Yeah, I feel we collectively understand more and how to reduce the risk to us, and people around us better. Aka - Face Coverings, etc.

Not just because more is understood about the virus, but people have also experienced more of the consequences of closures. After a week or two most people would have felt alright, but after five months of isolation people are really struggling. For the first month or so people were willing to use videocalls and similar, but quickly realised how inferior that was to real social contact, and became markedly less keen as time went on. You can't use a survey from April to make conclusions about now.

Yeah, 5 months in and it really does start to bite.

You do realise you keep quoting evidence to try and work out "what students think" but that a fair few of the people responding on this thread are actually students...

I be a student!

 

[DB]

Yeah, I feel we collectively understand more and how to reduce the risk to us, and people around us better. Aka - Face Coverings, etc.

How many times - there is no clear understanding that face coverings reduce the risk to anyone, and any evidence that they do is very weak. Even more so when they aren't used properly, as is very frequently the cae.

 

[Jozhua]

How many times - there is no clear understanding that face coverings reduce the risk to anyone, and any evidence that they do is very weak. Even more so when they aren't used properly, as is very frequently the cae.

Oxford COVID-19 study: face masks and coverings work – act now | University of Oxford

Cloth face coverings, even homemade masks made of the correct material, are effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19 - for the wearer and those around them - according to a new study from Oxford’s Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science.

www.ox.ac.uk

Cloth face coverings, even homemade masks made of the correct material, are effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19

A comprehensive study, the report investigates the effectiveness of different face mask types and coverings, including an international comparison of policies and behavioural factors underlying usage.

Not true.

There's a reason surgeons wear them in operating theaters.

I'd say the evidence is more lacking for social distancing and the like, rather than face coverings. There is mounting evidence proving it to be airborne, in which case face coverings and ventilation are primary concerns.

Cases are currently fairly stable and deaths are continuing to go down, with shops and restaurants remaining open. So, if this can be done, small groups in seminars and practicals as well as group work activities seem like they should be fine to continue.

 

[jtuk]

I'd say the evidence is more lacking for social distancing and the like, rather than face coverings.

Which is weird seeing how everywhere we've seen masks introduced more or less as a replacement for social distancing, spread has increased

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which is weird seeing how everywhere we've seen masks introduced more or less as a replacement for social distancing, spread has increased

It has, but the cases have been less serious.

I've seen it suggested that what masks have done is reduced initial viral load which has reduced the severity of the cases. If true, that isn't quite the expected effect but it's definitely welcome.

 

[Yew]

It has, but the cases have been less serious.

I've seen it suggested that what masks have done is reduced initial viral load which has reduced the severity of the cases. If true, that isn't quite the expected effect but it's definitely welcome.

I don't think there is any clear evidence of that, particularly given that a higher proportion of infections have been found in lower vulnerability groups.

There's a reason surgeons wear them in operating theaters.

Yes, to stop the transfer of bacteria into the open wounds of their patients, not to stop them getting a respiratory illness.

 

[Huntergreed]

It has, but the cases have been less serious.

I've seen it suggested that what masks have done is reduced initial viral load which has reduced the severity of the cases. If true, that isn't quite the expected effect but it's definitely welcome.

If this is indeed the case that masks reduce viral load and make cases less serious, j do believe there is indeed an argument for mandating them. That being said, there’s no evidence of this and it doesn’t make much sense as the main places the virus seems to spread is the same places where masks are not required, it could also be the case that the virus has mutated into a less dangerous strain which, if true, I would like to think would justify a significant easing of restrictions.

 

[DB]

Oxford COVID-19 study: face masks and coverings work – act now | University of Oxford

Cloth face coverings, even homemade masks made of the correct material, are effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19 - for the wearer and those around them - according to a new study from Oxford’s Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science.

www.ox.ac.uk

Not true.

There's a reason surgeons wear them in operating theaters.

I'd say the evidence is more lacking for social distancing and the like, rather than face coverings. There is mounting evidence proving it to be airborne, in which case face coverings and ventilation are primary concerns.

Cases are currently fairly stable and deaths are continuing to go down, with shops and restaurants remaining open. So, if this can be done, small groups in seminars and practicals as well as group work activities seem like they should be fine to continue.

We've already discussed that particular paper. If you read it, it's one of that common breed of study - one which claims to provide evidence for the use of masks in the general community being beneficial, but when you actually read it the evidence for this is not there. In this case, it's a meta-analysis of four studies which all took place in healthcare settings (details given on page 7 of the full paper). As we've been through many times, healthcare settings and the general community are so completely different that they are not comparable.

As regards operating theatres, it's to reduce the risk of bacteria transmission when in close proximity to people who may be particularly susceptible, for a a prolonged period, and with open wounds. Really not remotely the same as the confectionery aisle in Tesco!

Nobody has yet managed to explain why in some places very strict on masks (parts of Spain springs to mind), there have been instances of rapid increases in cases. There is an argument that masks could actully make things worse, and although there isn't sufficient evidence to say whether or not that's the case, it certainly seems that they aren't preventing the virus from spreading to any measurable degree.

Not sure where you get the bit about 'mounting evidence' for it being airborne - that's been well known from the start, it's not new evidence. The question is to what extent distancing and masks reduce transmission. The evidence is far from conclusive on either, and as regards distancing is only a potentially significant factor where people spend a reasonable amount of time in close proximity (at least 15 minutes was originally stated by the government).

But to take it back to universities, the evidence that severe restrictions are justified are very low, especially given that the majority of students are in one of the lowest risk categories.

 

[Kingspanner]

No one has rushed to put this up https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54040421

A leading epidemiologist has warned the country is at a "critical moment" in the coronavirus pandemic, as students prepare to return to universities.

Dame Anne Johnson, of University College London, told the BBC data showed the highest number of detected infections was in young people.

It comes after government scientific advisors said "significant outbreaks" linked to universities were likely.

I'll get my Coronavirus bingo card out and standby.

BBC Scaremongering....
Young people aren't affected....
They are counting new cases and that's the wrong indicator....
It's nothing to do with me....

 

[takno]

No one has rushed to put this up https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54040421

I'll get my Coronavirus bingo card out and standby.

BBC Scaremongering....
Young people aren't affected....
They are counting new cases and that's the wrong indicator....
It's nothing to do with me....

Apparently somebody has rushed to put it up, and that somebody is you. It's a piece based on an interview with somebody of no particular note which simply repeats a series of things which have been said by more official or well-known sources, and discussed at length further up the thread, so it doesn't really merit any comment at all.

 

[Jozhua]

Apparently somebody has rushed to put it up, and that somebody is you. It's a piece based on an interview with somebody of no particular note which simply repeats a series of things which have been said by more official or well-known sources, and discussed at length further up the thread, so it doesn't really merit any comment at all.

I'm getting used to seeing a version of this article on a daily basis lol.

The focus is on the wrong thing. It's not wether students SHOULD return to education, it's evaluating the risk and how it can be done safely.

However, I did see some good ideas at the bottom of the article:

He said that small group teaching was still happening in person, but would take place inside large lecture theatres to allow for social distancing.

The scientific advisory group Sage has advised universities to consider providing dedicated accommodation facilities to enable students who test positive to quarantine and minimise the risk of an outbreak.

Universities have also been urged to work with local authorities in addition to conducting their own test and trace programmes.

Dedicated accommodation facilities for students who test positive is a fantastic idea.

Using the larger lecture halls to accommodate social distancing and working with local authorities to have a good testing regime is too.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Using the larger lecture halls to accommodate social distancing and working with local authorities to have a good testing regime is too.

Which might be why some lectures (the ones where they talk at you rather than being interactive, typically large with over 100 students) are going online - there is no disadvantage to that as they are not interactive, and the large lecture theatres can as you say be used for smaller classes but distanced.

 

[Jozhua]

Which might be why some lectures (the ones where they talk at you rather than being interactive, typically large with over 100 students) are going online - there is no disadvantage to that as they are not interactive, and the large lecture theatres can as you say be used for smaller classes but distanced.

Exactly!

Larger lectures going online was something that some unis already did, so not much difference there. (Except there is no in person option now)

Smaller classes and practical hands on, is where I see the biggest advantage of university vs online courses. So this is where I think things should remain open, along with equipment stores and libraries.

 

[Kingspanner]

Apparently somebody has rushed to put it up, and that somebody is you. It's a piece based on an interview with somebody of no particular note which simply repeats a series of things which have been said by more official or well-known sources, and discussed at length further up the thread, so it doesn't really merit any comment at all.

"Somebody of no particular note" you say. I suggest you check this profile https://iris.ucl.ac.uk/iris/browse/profile?upi=AMJOH29 and compare that to the qualifications, experience and achievement of anyone you regard as being of particular note.

 

[Adam Williams]

So the sensible thing to do, is set up testing on campus (some kind of tent where you can pick up or drop off kits)

This is definitely happening at some universities. It'll be interesting to see what the take-up is like.

 

[jtuk]

This is definitely happening at some universities. It'll be interesting to see what the take-up is like.

Amazing that they can find enough space to make parking available, when I was there it was an absolute nightmare and they've expanded student numbers and removed parking since

 

[brick60000]

However, I did see some good ideas at the bottom of the article:


Dedicated accommodation facilities for students who test positive is a fantastic idea.

Using the larger lecture halls to accommodate social distancing and working with local authorities to have a good testing regime is too.

I completely disagree with your first point. I cannot even begin to imagine the mental health impacts of sectioning off people who have tested positive into their own accommodation (edit - I mean if this was to be completely separate accommodation, requiring them to move from their allocated rooms/flats).

I can’t speak for others, but as a student myself, if I were to test positive and then be moved away from my (already different) home for two weeks on my own, in the full knowledge that I’d got COVID-19 then I certainly wouldn’t be in a good state, whatsoever!

I agree it’s a great idea in principle, but I think the mental health impacts of this could be catastrophic.

 

[NorthOxonian]

I can’t speak for others, but as a student myself, if I were to test positive and then be moved away from my (already different) home for two weeks on my own, in the full knowledge that I’d got COVID-19 then I certainly wouldn’t be in a good state, whatsoever!

I don't know, there are worse options.

At my university, things are complicated because the vast majority of students live in university accommodation for almost all of their degree (and that includes me). But rather than being moved, the policy is that if one person in a particular part of the college tests positive, then everyone in that particular area must self isolate for two weeks (typically 6-8 people). We're being told we can't socialise with anyone who doesn't live in our immediate vicinity (in practise most university staff know that will be totally unworkable, and are just asking for people to apply common sense and not have huge gatherings).

The catch is that we'll have to pay £350 (this varies depending on college, at least one charges £600) for supplies to be delivered during the two week isolation period. It would be rare for me to spend even half that much on food during an entire term, and I would very rarely spend that in a normal fortnight (maybe if I've got a few big events and have a couple of major trips out as well). The stress of losing that amount of money is making most of us very worried, and I've already heard some people will not get tested, even if they have symptoms, because they can't afford that amount of money (I don't condone that attitude but it does exist).

 

[Huntergreed]

The catch is that we'll have to pay £350 (this varies depending on college, at least one charges £600) for supplies to be delivered during the two week isolation period. It would be rare for me to spend even half that much on food during an entire term, and I would very rarely spend that in a normal fortnight (maybe if I've got a few big events and have a couple of major trips out as well). The stress of losing that amount of money is making most of us very worried, and I've already heard some people will not get tested, even if they have symptoms, because they can't afford that amount of money (I don't condone that attitude but it does exist).

That’s absolutely awful. Does anyone know the legality behind that? It doesn’t sound as if a university can/should be allowed to do that. Is it mandatory or just optional (ie could you get a friend to drop food at the door for cheaper?)

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

The catch is that we'll have to pay £350 (this varies depending on college, at least one charges £600) for supplies to be delivered during the two week isolation period.

That is bloody absurd.

 

[Jozhua]

I don't know, there are worse options.

At my university, things are complicated because the vast majority of students live in university accommodation for almost all of their degree (and that includes me). But rather than being moved, the policy is that if one person in a particular part of the college tests positive, then everyone in that particular area must self isolate for two weeks (typically 6-8 people). We're being told we can't socialise with anyone who doesn't live in our immediate vicinity (in practise most university staff know that will be totally unworkable, and are just asking for people to apply common sense and not have huge gatherings).

The catch is that we'll have to pay £350 (this varies depending on college, at least one charges £600) for supplies to be delivered during the two week isolation period. It would be rare for me to spend even half that much on food during an entire term, and I would very rarely spend that in a normal fortnight (maybe if I've got a few big events and have a couple of major trips out as well). The stress of losing that amount of money is making most of us very worried, and I've already heard some people will not get tested, even if they have symptoms, because they can't afford that amount of money (I don't condone that attitude but it does exist).

Is this Oxford?

I know things vary from college to college, but I'm surprised as I thought they were otherwise level headed.

Frankly, this supplies charge is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I wouldn't get tested if it would risk me and many others to have to spend hundreds of pounds on supplies. If I had symptoms, I'd try and isolate the best I could but avoid anyone finding out.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Is this Oxford?

I know things vary from college to college, but I'm surprised as I thought they were otherwise level headed.

Frankly, this supplies charge is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I wouldn't get tested if it would risk me and many others to have to spend hundreds of pounds on supplies. If I had symptoms, I'd try and isolate the best I could but avoid anyone finding out.

Yes, it is Oxford. There does seem to be huge variations between colleges - some are very level-headed, while others are much less so (this seems to apply to the guidelines too - several colleges are going to entirely ignore university guidance and take a more moderate approach). It's particularly bad for international students, who get hit by this during their quarantine period - I know that some of the SU reps were trying to argue such charges shouldn't apply but I don't know that they've got anywhere.

I can't imagine the charge actually lasting long, because if there are a lot of cases then there's going to be a huge scandal. A lot of people at Oxford can afford that easily, but not all of us are wealthy!

That’s absolutely awful. Does anyone know the legality behind that? It doesn’t sound as if a university can/should be allowed to do that. Is it mandatory or just optional (ie could you get a friend to drop food at the door for cheaper?)

Mandatory. Mostly because a friend wouldn't be able to come to where your door is, "households" are not officially allowed to mix at all (and anyone who lives near you would have to self isolate as well). Any indoor space where different groups could mix has mandatory face coverings (luckily, my college is more outdoors than most).

 

[trebor79]

Which might be why some lectures (the ones where they talk at you rather than being interactive, typically large with over 100 students) are going online - there is no disadvantage to that as they are not interactive, and the large lecture theatres can as you say be used for smaller classes but distanced.

I can certainly recall very interactive lectures with around 100 in the audience. We learned far more in them than the non interactive lectures with the same size audience.
I find it difficult enough at work keeping up with a couple of video conferences a day, I just can't concentrate in the same way as I do in person. There's no way I'd have coped with an engineering degree, which consisted of 8 or 9 solid hours of contact time every day (about 80% lecture and the rest lab and seminar) delivered online.

I really do pity the students having to try and make the best of this nonsensical situation.

 

[brick60000]

I don't know, there are worse options.

At my university, things are complicated because the vast majority of students live in university accommodation for almost all of their degree (and that includes me). But rather than being moved, the policy is that if one person in a particular part of the college tests positive, then everyone in that particular area must self isolate for two weeks (typically 6-8 people). We're being told we can't socialise with anyone who doesn't live in our immediate vicinity (in practise most university staff know that will be totally unworkable, and are just asking for people to apply common sense and not have huge gatherings).

The catch is that we'll have to pay £350 (this varies depending on college, at least one charges £600) for supplies to be delivered during the two week isolation period. It would be rare for me to spend even half that much on food during an entire term, and I would very rarely spend that in a normal fortnight (maybe if I've got a few big events and have a couple of major trips out as well). The stress of losing that amount of money is making most of us very worried, and I've already heard some people will not get tested, even if they have symptoms, because they can't afford that amount of money (I don't condone that attitude but it does exist).

That charge is completely crazy, and is surely legally questionable unless there’s anything in your university contract that permits them to do such a thing!? (No legal background, I’ll leave that one to those that have it!!)

Not being moved sounds like a sensible policy. I find the prospect of isolating students that have potentially no common other than coincidentally sharing accommodation through no choice of their own other than attending the university a very difficult one. I don’t know how things work at Oxford, so not sure if this is something that would happen.

I understand the need for it, but I’m not sure how many would do it in practice, or at least how many would do it “properly”.

The university I attend is very much campus based for first year, and then off campus private halls/housing for year 2/3/4.

 

[NorthOxonian]

That charge is completely crazy, and is surely legally questionable unless there’s anything in your university contract that permits them to do such a thing!? (No legal background, I’ll leave that one to those that have it!!)

Not being moved sounds like a sensible policy. I find the prospect of isolating students that have potentially no common other than coincidentally sharing accommodation through no choice of their own other than attending the university a very difficult one. I don’t know how things work at Oxford, so not sure if this is something that would happen.

I understand the need for it, but I’m not sure how many would do it in practice, or at least how many would do it “properly”.

The university I attend is very much campus based for first year, and then off campus private halls/housing for year 2/3/4.

Because Oxford is a collegiate university (and each college essentially functions as an independent campus of a few hundred), there is a tendency for people to know each other within colleges, so it isn't quite as jarring to have to spend time with them. And the fact off campus housing is generally in the minority also means they have more ability to put self-isolation measures in place. At some of the smaller, more historic colleges it is much more common to live out, and I'm not sure how they will handle things.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I completely disagree with your first point. I cannot even begin to imagine the mental health impacts of sectioning off people who have tested positive into their own accommodation (edit - I mean if this was to be completely separate accommodation, requiring them to move from their allocated rooms/flats).

Depends how they do it. I can't imagine a lot more grim (other than being in prison, which would be very similar) of having to spend 10 days alone isolated in a tiny student individual room with no easy access to kitchen etc. Whereas presumably if people who were infected moved into one flat they wouldn't need to isolate from one another so could use the shared facilities and be sociable and support each other in the way a family might?

Because Oxford is a collegiate university (and each college essentially functions as an independent campus of a few hundred), there is a tendency for people to know each other within colleges, so it isn't quite as jarring to have to spend time with them. And the fact off campus housing is generally in the minority also means they have more ability to put self-isolation measures in place. At some of the smaller, more historic colleges it is much more common to live out, and I'm not sure how they will handle things.

If you live out, I guess you're basically a household like a family so treated the same, i.e. 10 days for the one showing symptoms, 14 for the others?

I can certainly recall very interactive lectures with around 100 in the audience. We learned far more in them than the non interactive lectures with the same size audience.

I'd agree - I was simply referring to the non-interactive ones (which do still exist) being able to be delivered electronically. TBH I always found those ones somewhat pointless, I'd rather get the notes and sit and read them with a coffee.

(The OU equivalent, interestingly, isn't video lectures, but rather the coursebook materials which you read in your own time, mostly online these days rather than books but definitely based on reading text rather than watching video)