Not many unis have even started yet but this is where we are. In my view, students should have stayed at home with established friendship groups, with online blended lectures, then gone to campus in small groups for intensive (2-3-week) periods of practical/tutorial teaching.
I know that would not be financially viable for most universities, and it is not what was sold to students, but it would have been pedagogically sound and more Covid-secure.
In this way, you cut hall density to 10-20%. You have capacity to accommodate any students who need to self-isolate during or after their intensive training, before they return home.
This would all have to be combined with readily available on-campus testing. As it is, many unis have not been provided with testing of their own and students must use local city testing facilities - many of which are overwhelmed and accessible only on a drive-through basis.
All of this was predictable, some of it is the result of a sector struggling on its financial knees, and much of it is the result of govt not thinking through (or just not caring about) the issues.
As it is, some students are now getting a very poor experience, while the staff who have to look after them in halls, as well as academic staff in the universities, and members of the local communities they are embedded in, are all at hugely elevated risk.
[I should add that for Year 2 or 3 students, many of whom have transitioned to a more independent life, 'staying at home' could mean living in their house in the university town and sensibly following Covid guidelines]
[And another additional tweet in response to several comments - of course care leavers or those whose home situations are unsafe or unhappy should be accommodated on campus - with lower halls occupancy, that should be straightforward to do]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In 2018, trans rights were broadly accepted - even Theresa May proposed legislation to treat trans people with dignity. In 5 years, Stock, Bindel, Rowling, et al, have created a toxic environment where trans people are demonised and fear for their safety. That's their legacy.
This Pride, all I read, is hateful & degrading rhetoric against trans people. Although gender critical people have the right to believe what they want about sex, that does not give them carte blanche to abuse trans people or discriminate against them in the provision of services.
I urge people to meet real trans and non-binary people, talk to them, understand them as individuals. Phobias feed on 'othering' people - once you count someone as a friend, phobias melt away. We are all human - this Pride can we try and see others as human.
Bempton Cliffs - Seabird City. England's best onshore seabird colony. Didn't get lucky with puffins today, they are mostly egg-sitting in their burrows, but the gannets and razorbills were great. @Bempton_Cliffs
29 scientists write about 'merit' in science and use this figure to 'measure' it. First, I should emphasise we all want great science. Also, merit is not opposed to diversity as the authors suggest - noone wants bad science. The problem is those axes... journalofcontroversialideas.org/article/3/1/236
Who decides importance?
Is it scientists who go to conferences with buddies and set agendas?
Is it editors based on what gets cited?
Is it rich governments deciding national priorities?
Is it disadvantaged citizens in developing world?
All have different views and priorities.
When we get down to individual levels, and recognising scientists, should we consider resources used? Is it more meritorious to develop a new chemical reaction with a team of 60 and huge national funding, or a team of 2 and a little local support? Simple measures ignore context.
Trip to our favourite bluebell woods. North Cliffe Woods are just over 20 miles from York and gorgeous on a warm spring morning - walking through a haze of blue. @YorksWildlife
They were featured in the latest issue of @YorksWildlife magazine, so I don't feel so bad about sharing the 'secret' of where they are!
Followed by lunch 3 miles down the road at North Cave Wetlands from the excellent Butty Box - you can take your artisan coffees and fancy sandwiches, and once in a while swap them for a Bacon & Egg Roll and a good cup of tea (£5.70).
This is Mo. Mo was trafficked to the UK when he was 9 to work in modern slavery. In future, unaccompanied children like Mo, who arrive on boats, will simply be offered accommodation until they are 18, then sent back to their country of origin, or somewhere like Rwanda. #r4today
This is Dominic. Dominic's Jewish father escaped the Czech Republic as a 6-year-old when the Nazis annexed it in 1938. If Dominic's father had ended up on a boat, with the new laws, he would have been sent back to Prague in 1950, once he reached the age of 18 (or sent to Rwanda).
This is Rishi. His parents were economic migrants, coming to the UK to make a better life. In future, without a legal route, people like Rishi's parents who end up on boats would be sent back or deported to Rwanda, in spite of what they could offer with their skills & hard work.
There is real tension here. As educators, we design degrees to be good value for high fees. They require (especially in sciences) ca. 35 h/week in termtime to succeed. Yet because of the costs, our most disadvantaged students can't afford to fully engage. bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-…
I don't think the answer is to cut-back degrees to a 'part-time' undertaking. Instead, we should properly fund disadvantaged students so they can dedicate energies to study. If govt refuse, we must think seriously about making proper, top-quality, part-time degrees available.
However, do we really want to live in a country where the wealthiest can graduate a degree in 3-4 years, while the most disadvantaged need 6-8 years to get the same qualification? Higher education is a right for all, and should be equally accessible to all.